Just want to ask why do we allow google to dominate the game and tell us how to do things? All these new updates that jeopardizes new businesses. Do you still make money like you used to?What are your thoughts?
It should just be a question of following expected value for most people. You're not required to do what Google says, but it has a positive EV. Many of the ways that you can violate Google webmaster guidelines also violate FTC regulations. If you live in the US, abiding by FTC regulations is suggested, regardless of whether or not you are likely to suffer consequences.
1. Its Google's website, so they can do what they like on their site; just like you and I can do on our sites (within reason and within the law) 2. The Google organic search results are for searchers looking for an answer to their search query; they are not for businesses to make money. 3. Its is because of businesses trying to artificially manipulate the organic search results that is the reason that Google make the updates that they do (we could argue if they are actually succeeding or not) 4. Google became dominant and still is dominant because searchers are using them; searchers must be finding what they want when searching or they would be using a different search engine --> Google must be getting it right. 5. Webmaster whinging and complaining is not going to change anything; searchers voting with their feet and going elsewhere because of their perception of the quality of the search results will bring about change. 6. No one is under any obligation what-so-ever to do what Google says. I don't. 7. If you are silly enough to have a business model that is based on getting free traffic from a free ranking from a free listing in one search engine, then you deserve to go out of business.
I respect the opinions of you both. I am not sure if any of you remember Corey Rudl, but he mentioned before he died that things like this would happen to the internet and they will crack down on the amount of millionaires produce. Personally it's all a monopoly and control.
I don't think that the # of millionaires or the ability of individuals to create successful companies has really changed much overall. I think that folks have been smart enough to realize that building a direct competitor to Google is not wise unless you are able to differentiate yourself, take a different angle, or fill a specialty niche of the bigger picture. I think that it shows when you look at the acquisitions that Google and FB have made.
@Agent000 obviously no one is smarter than you are and you seem to know more than everyone else. Thanks for your comment . Anyways @Mark Warner i respect your opinion.
@Agent000 http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/20/4751516/ballmer-calls-google-a-monopoly @Agent000 Thanks again for your worthless reply.
You obviously do not know what a monopoly is ? How many competitors does Google have as a search engine? How many competitors does Google have for Adsense? How many competitors.... etc etc ...then go and look up the definition of a monopoly. Confucius once said, when in a hole, its often a good idea to stop digging.
@Agent000 Obviously i am not the only one that think google is a monopoly here is another article from Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-newman/taking-on-googles-monopol_b_3980799.html You must be smarter than they are and it seems instead of stating your comment or just move on you're here to argue and make degrading replies. @Agent000 If i did had any respect for you before now it's gone. Have a nice day @Agent000 "European regulators appear likely to take action soon against Google as a monopolist in the online economy. This is in contrast to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, which took a pass on action against Google this past January." "Posted: 09/24/2013 7:37 am" I know you might not want to read the article so there a briefing
As I said repeatedly, go and look up the definition and then come back and explain why it is a monopoly. Even one of the articles you linked above said that Google has a 67% marketshare. How is that even close to being a monopoly? ... btw, to help you out here, you will find that the definition is a monopoly is 100% marketshare .... do you not notice that 67% is not 100%; do you not notice that Google has a lot of competitors? You have dug yourself into a hole here. ... time to stop digging.
I suggest you actually read what you posting. The EU action is NOT about the organic search results .... you getting deeper into your hole here. BTW, the Huffington Post is not a source of reliable info
"What is a Monopoly? A monopoly arises when one single company controls so much of the market share of a product or service that it significantly affects the terms on which others have access to it. Antitrust laws were intended to promote competition among providers, consumer choice, lower prices, higher quality, and innovation by providing a level playing field in an open, free market. The Sherman Act of 1890 was the first US antitrust law and prohibited contracts and conspiracies that restrain trade; it still contains the most important provisions in this area of law." http://www.legalzoom.com/legal-headlines/corporate-lawsuits/is-google-monopoly http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2012-07-08/is-google-a-monopoly-wrong-question http://blog.hubspot.com/opinion/seo-guru-google-is-abusing-its-monopoly-power http://www.nbcbayarea.com/blogs/pre...r-Monopolizing-Internet-Search-258044601.html @Agent000 Who said anything about organic searches??? I am speaking about Google. They had a lawsuit for Monopolizing and i did not sue them! These are articles from all over the net from mainstream media so i am thinking maybe we are not that smart according to you. I would rather listen to what they are saying instead what you have to say about monopoly. Google have lawsuits regarding Monopoly????? Now you want to talk numbers 67% 100%??? The point is that google is monopolizing! @Agent000 Let me dig myself a little deeper by adding this. "Is Google a Monopolist? A Debate Amit Singhal of Google argues the competition is one click away. Charles Rule, an attorney whose firm represents corporations suing Google, counters that the company commands a share of search advertising in excess of 70%—the threshold for monopoly under the Sherman Act." http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703466704575489582364177978
Which does not describe Google whatsoever. They do not control 100% of the market. There are many alternatives worldwide and in some countries Google is not the most popular (China and Russia, for example). You clearly do not understand the difference between monopoly and popular. Google became popular because it provides the best user-experience. Get over it and move on. Yawn, yawn, yawn. There is choice for the consumer and competition for Google; take this as a starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_search_engines Google does not have any "contracts" or similar to restrict choice or trade of others. No idea why you are quoting this. Bing is quite frankly in a good position to be popular (think about it, should be obvious), but wasted due to (basically) sucking compared to Google. You do not understand the definition of monopoly in relation to The Sherman Act (coercive and innocent monopolies). You need to brush up on your understand of monopolies and anti-trust. Take a look at United States vs Microsoft Corporation as starting point for a real anti-trust case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Microsoft_antitrust_case Microsoft behaviour in relation to OEMs and Linux is very messed up: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/03/19/microsoft_killed_dell_linux_states/ Code (markup): There is no set figure. It is a case by case basis and very much depends on how the market share was attained. Why do you keep posting/quoting crap? What do you feel Google did to you to make you so bitter and desperate?
@ryan_uk bitter and desperate here is another retarded comment. You guys must be in bed with google. If they are being sued by other corporations for monopolizing and getting threats from the feds. These are legal matters regarding Monopolizing!! So i am supposed to listen to you and your friend Agent000 about what is really going on. Well i guess me and the others including the feds, other corporations google staff, lawyers and etc know nothing about monopoly and what is really going on. Furthermore you did not read one article i posted and as far as caps i made a copy and paste and that is the first time my post came out that way so for you to say keep posting is a lie. Now you're here to defend Google and your Buddy Agent000 but the facts still remain. None of you gave any prove of anything. There are countless articles on the net regarding the same.
You are clearly very hurt about something and taking your anger out on Google. Maybe your site got hit by an update and it hurt your feelings? There is a world of difference between your desire that Google is a monopoly and the reality (it's just popular). Unless you are denying the existence of Yahoo!, Bing, Ask, Yandex, Baidu, the growth of DuckDuckGo and so on? All those speak to the fact that Google isn't a monopoly in the search sector. The bits you quoted and your own general ignorance about the Sherman Act and monopolies are a strong recommendation not to read anything you posted. You need to read up on what constitutes a monopoly and about the Sherman Act. Further reading for you: United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. Give you an idea regarding market share and monopolies. You should also check out the actual market share for Google: https://www.comscore.com/Insights/P...leases_March_2014_U.S._Search_Engine_Rankings 67.5% and it has been stagnant, M$ has growth. So much for Google being a monopoly.
Let me help you out by typing this slowly: From the article that you linked above: Google has a 67% search market share. Here are some definitions of monopoly: From Investopedia: From Wikipedia: From reference.com: From Indiatimes.com Perhaps you would care to explain how Google with so many competitors and a 67% marketshare is actually a monopoly? Please answer this question as I have repeatedly asked you to explain and you have so far failed dismally. Just because you post a link to an article in which someone with an axe to grind calls google a monopoly does not mean its one. Now you just coming across as a silly conspiracy nutter and showing how gullible you are. I have never met RyanUK and he or she is no buddy of mine ... take off your tinfoil hat.
Google does not have a MARKET SHARE monopoly over the search engine market, so give a brownie point to those majoring in the technicalities. What Google does have is an INTELLECTUAL monopoly influence over search engine marketing. Regardless of the 67% market share, virtually 100% of SEO marketers write about or structure their sites to conform to Google, and have a framework about the subject that is fixated on or dominated by Google. This intangible, mental, unhealthy, but very real monopoly is the one at issue---and it is the salient issue, technicalities aside.
@Agent000 and @ryan_uk Ok if you did take the time to read some of those articles all over the net those would answer your questions. All those search engine you mentioned who really owns them? Just like EIG that owns Hostgator and many other hosting companies don't you think google does the exact samething to give the illusion of choice? i mean come on now. I made a comment saying google in my opinion is just a monopoly and control. You stated that i do not know what monopoly is but in reality Google was getting sued for the same thing you said i know not about. I have given you several sources saying the exact same thing i said which simply means that those people as well do not know what monopoly is even the feds that threatened to sue GOOGLE. No i do not know of the outcome but it seems like these guys do not know what they are talking about since they create the laws. No i have not gotten penalized by google i mostly use social media and old school method of marketing. I for one love google to a level but the facts still remains. You act as if no one is to talk about google in a negative way! Your the one if i am not mistaken who said Huffington Post is not reliable but here you go posting "Wikipedia" I for one do not follow one source but choose from many source to draw a conclusion. Facts still remains that Google was getting sued for MONOPOLIZING and that is not coming from my mouth. Facts are there, you said monoply have to be 100% which simply means that you do not know what Monopoly is! People can do their own search and that is the reality, facts are there. I kinda love my tinfoil hat Other lawsuits https://gigaom.com/2014/05/01/googl...s-for-illegal-search-monopoly-lawsuit-claims/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/google-sued-in-antitrust-suit/ Why are they getting sued if Google was not trying or is monopolizing???? In case you did not know you have to have evidence to sue someone in court. Obviously these people must have strong evidence to take google to court. We allowed this to happen because some of us are just too damn greedy and will do anything google says to gain a buck. @melprise you articulate that very well i could not have said it better myself and your comment makes absolute sense.