Comments on: How search volume data may be used to determine brand authority

By: Mike

Mike — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 10:26:41 +0000

This was a very interesting and thought provoking analysis. It certainly makes sense to some extent, but the real question is if the brand related search volume triggers the visibility for general searches in that niche, or the brand authority related to the niche is what triggers the brand searches to be flagged as related in Google Insights. http://www.woodburningstoves.co.uk I think either could be the case.

By: Steven

Steven — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:03:30 +0000

That also depends on the competitiveness on each keyword people are searching. It not only just keywords but also your content relevancy.

By: Albert

Albert — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:19:31 +0000

I guess it is one of the way Google give ranking to. If many people search for the same keyword all the time, it means something to Google.

By: aimClear’s 2009 Daily Training Link Library » aimClear Search Marketing Blog

Fri, 01 Jan 2010 22:23:41 +0000

[...] How search volume data may be used to determine brand authority, BlogStorm [...]

By: Wie Google das Nutzerverhalten vielleicht fÃ¼rs Ranking nutzt « SuchmaschinenTricks.de

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:05:08 +0000

[...] Marke zu diesem generischen Begriff gehÃ¶rt und somit eine erhebliche Bedeutung dafÃ¼r haben kann. Spekulationen sagen, dass auf diese Weise das Nutzerverhalten ausgenutzt wird, um den bekannten Brand-Boost zu [...]

By: Paid Survey Sites

Paid Survey Sites — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:19:52 +0000

If Google is giving more authority to top brands, then this could really change the way people name their domains. Deciding whether using keywords would help their sites authority. This also shows that SEO can be based more on opinion than fact.

By: Rob Abdul

Rob Abdul — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:56:50 +0000

I agree with Matthew “SEO is nearly always about opinion.”

@Mike, my friend my comment regarding “Keywords in a domain name, does not actually have any SEO value”, was not intended as a fact but merely my opinion.

I should have said it more clearly.

I thank Mr SEO Doctor for his evidence to support his opinion.

I feel better now Doc!

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:08:05 +0000

@richard, You hit the nail on the head and made me laugh at the same time.

By: Richard

Richard — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:29:09 +0000

@Mike LOL I’ve never thought of SEO like the joke about the two men seeing a tiger running towards them, one putting on a pair of running shoes, and the other saying ‘but you’ll never outrun a tiger!’ and the first replying ‘i don’t need to outrun a tiger, I need to outrun YOU!’. Interesting thoughts, & thanks for the algorithmic insights….

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:43:37 +0000

@Richard,
I agree that a lot of the data& relationships there is no data that they act on that has not at some point been gathered from the outside world. The actions themselves and the relationships that they build on that data is hidden I agree but that doesn’t mean we can’t deduce it.

Lexical relationships, a form of advanced thesaurus score-carding is in all sorts of areas of the index and is a prime example. We do apply this in our algorithm but we have to build our own lexical relationship cube / model first, because as you say Google keeps it hidden.

So I agree in part, some is hidden but I still say it can be done. In fact I think if Google can do it we can do it. We haven’t 1/1000th of the capacity to do this for the whole of the web like Google but we can do it for specialist areas which apply to our clients. Which is all we need.

At the end of the day SE ranking is just a race isn’t it? We don’t have to be perfect we just have to be better than the our competition. (Of course SE ranking is only part of the visitor to client process but it’s what we are discussing here, today.)