I have been reading Google’s Location Prominence Patent of late in search of a better understanding of the web related factors that affect Local ranking in Maps. This presentation augments the one made at SMXLocal in July. If time allows I will do a series on the underlying patent and its implications. Here is my presentation from SMXEast:
There is a lot of background information and notes that accompany this presentation. The patent is a trove of incredible information and very interesting background. I hope to be able to write a more thorough review of the patent but in the mean time, please, please ask away and I respond as best as I am able.
Besides the above and the SMX East presentation there are two other posts worth reading on the factors affecting ranking:
- 10 Likely Elements of Google’s Local Search Algorithm
- David Mihm’s excellent survey of local search ranking factors.
Oh, it looks like this presentation has taken on a whole new life since your original version of it, Mike. Nice graphics, great information.
Congratulations on your speaking engagement!
Miriam
Comment by MiriamEllis (640 comments) — October 6, 2008 @ 5:32 pm
We were charged with providing “new” information. While the patent is old, reading it in light of our study showed me ways that can influence rank that we can quantify going forward.
In reading the patent, it became clear that PR is not a very accurate view of the authoritative website. Location Prominence is an expansion/enhancement of PR which is why we saw weak correlations using it as a variable.
Mike
Comment by Mike (2500 comments) — October 7, 2008 @ 7:01 am
[...] Comments Mike on SMXEast Presentation: A patent review of Maps Ranking FactorsMiriamEllis on SMXEast Presentation: A patent review of Maps Ranking FactorsUnderstanding Google [...]
Pingback by Understanding Google Maps & Yahoo Local Search » Maps IYP Market Share | Developing Knowledge about Local Search — October 7, 2008 @ 8:20 am
Mike,
So if Location Prominence is equivalent to PR, what other equivalents are there?
Traditional SEO can basically be broken down into 4 main components, in my humble opinion:
Age of document
Inbound Links
Contents of Document
User Behavior
What are the correlations for these things in Local? Has anything occurred to you, in reading the patent? I would appreciate hearing any further insights you can provide, based on your review of the patent and our work on the project.
Miriam
Comment by MiriamEllis (640 comments) — October 8, 2008 @ 1:59 am
[...] to Rule Them All | Developing Knowledge about Local Search on Maps IYP Market ShareMiriamEllis on SMXEast Presentation: A patent review of Maps Ranking FactorsMozilla be launching Geode – Browsers get Local : Local Search Optimization on Will Ubiquity change [...]
Pingback by Understanding Google Maps & Yahoo Local Search » Google Maps: One (data) Ring to Rule Them All | Developing Knowledge about Local Search — October 8, 2008 @ 7:01 am
This is what I’ve been saying for months.
The more competitive the market the more the local rankings are influenced by inbound links (quality, quantity, etc.). Of course they’ve added several nuances to the algorithm, including # or reviews, and geo factors.
I don’t see the big differences. I see it more as similarities. Basic “onpage” factors have to be right, then assuming you’ve done those correctly then “offpage” factors dominate.
Comment by TymB (1 comments) — October 8, 2008 @ 8:13 am
@Tym
The interesting tidbit in the patent was the “Highest Score of the documents” linking in addition to the number of linking documents. The implication was that a single hi scoring LP document + total # on the explicit link text was the calculation. We have yet to ascertain the relative weight of this vs other factors but it appears to account for about 30% of the variability in ranking.
@Miriam
I hope to write more thoroughly on the patent and our research but there are a number of equivalents:
Business Title= Page Title/Desc Tag
Category= Page Title/Desc Tag
Content of Business Listing + Web site content= on page content
Citations + Geo References + Reviews + In bound Links= In Bound Links
Etc etc
An interesting note in the patent was discussing a possible add on ranking factor of user logs. They would assess which business had their directions looked up more frequently and use that log information in the calculation.
I found no reference to age in the patent. Doesn’t mean they don’t use it.
Mike
Comment by Mike (2500 comments) — October 8, 2008 @ 10:10 am
Oh, good, Mike. I’m glad you’re planning to write more thoroughly on the patent. Thanks for responding, and I figured user behavior has to be in there somewhere.
Miriam
Comment by MiriamEllis (640 comments) — October 8, 2008 @ 7:11 pm
[...] kind enough to post his presentation from the recently-completed SMX East where he reviewed the Google Maps patent in great detail. Check it out for a less-frequently-discussed topic called Location Prominence, which merits [...]
Pingback by Mihmorandum | Links of Local Interest, Vol. Three B | Local SEO — October 10, 2008 @ 9:08 am
[...] you are looking for information on Ranking in Google Maps you might want to view these: •SMXEast Presentation: A patent review of Maps Ranking Factors •Ranking Factors in Google Maps – Cracking the Code SMX Local •10 Likely Ranking Factors of [...]
Pingback by Google Maps: KML for authority and ranking? » Understanding Google Maps & Yahoo Local Search — December 21, 2008 @ 9:58 pm
[...] factors interact with each other based on availability of data and competitiveness of market. SMXEast Presentation: A patent review of Maps Ranking Factors Mike takes things one step further here and dives into Google Maps’ patent on ranking. Pay [...]
Pingback by Loci 2008: David Mihm’s Significant Local Posts of 2008 » Understanding Google Maps & Yahoo Local Search — December 31, 2008 @ 9:31 am
[...] Mike Blumenthal’s local ranking factors presentation [...]
Pingback by Google Local Research Data Released For Free | Distilled blog — December 1, 2009 @ 6:44 am
[...] local search algo is a complex multivariate, bi-modal algorithm that is continually evolving. Thus predicting the [...]
Pingback by Will Citations Stop Being Effective for Local Optimization in the Future? | Understanding Google Places & Local Search — September 18, 2012 @ 5:01 am