<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Maps LBC: How to make % Complete = 100%</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/</link>
	<description>Developing Knowledge about Local Search</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 08:37:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim B</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-2/#comment-564491</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 22:55:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-564491</guid>
		<description>Thanks for this post. Good to know what goes into getting that % and a big help!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for this post. Good to know what goes into getting that % and a big help!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-2/#comment-551717</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 23:22:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-551717</guid>
		<description>Great article.  My Google Places page was floating between 92 - 94%.  Your article allowed me to simply get to 100%.  I had loaded 4 pictures and 1 video, loading the 5th picture tipped me to 100% (as you can see http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/place?hl=en&amp;rlz=1R2GGHP_en&amp;prmd=ivnsc&amp;resnum=7&amp;bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&amp;biw=1024&amp;bih=465&amp;wrapid=tlif131068526357810&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;q=web+design+in+colchester&amp;fb=1&amp;gl=uk&amp;hq=web+design&amp;hnear=0x47d8e24e12f62f05:0x175d5f1c455091de,Colchester&amp;cid=2239787205692390660&amp;ei=ZXgfTvLVO8ar8QPb1JW3Aw&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=local_result&amp;ct=placepage-link&amp;resnum=8&amp;ved=0CHMQ4gkwBw

Thanks

Simon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article.  My Google Places page was floating between 92 &#8211; 94%.  Your article allowed me to simply get to 100%.  I had loaded 4 pictures and 1 video, loading the 5th picture tipped me to 100% (as you can see <a href="http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/place?hl=en&#038;rlz=1R2GGHP_en&#038;prmd=ivnsc&#038;resnum=7&#038;bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&#038;biw=1024&#038;bih=465&#038;wrapid=tlif131068526357810&#038;um=1&#038;ie=UTF-8&#038;q=web+design+in+colchester&#038;fb=1&#038;gl=uk&#038;hq=web+design&#038;hnear=0x47d8e24e12f62f05:0x175d5f1c455091de,Colchester&#038;cid=2239787205692390660&#038;ei=ZXgfTvLVO8ar8QPb1JW3Aw&#038;sa=X&#038;oi=local_result&#038;ct=placepage-link&#038;resnum=8&#038;ved=0CHMQ4gkwBw" rel="nofollow">http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/place?hl=en&#038;rlz=1R2GGHP_en&#038;prmd=ivnsc&#038;resnum=7&#038;bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&#038;biw=1024&#038;bih=465&#038;wrapid=tlif131068526357810&#038;um=1&#038;ie=UTF-8&#038;q=web+design+in+colchester&#038;fb=1&#038;gl=uk&#038;hq=web+design&#038;hnear=0x47d8e24e12f62f05:0x175d5f1c455091de,Colchester&#038;cid=2239787205692390660&#038;ei=ZXgfTvLVO8ar8QPb1JW3Aw&#038;sa=X&#038;oi=local_result&#038;ct=placepage-link&#038;resnum=8&#038;ved=0CHMQ4gkwBw</a></p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>Simon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-2/#comment-548602</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 22:49:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-548602</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the pie chart.

I had 100% then changed something in the address line and went to 94%, even though I had everything listed. 

I already had 2 additional comments listed but when I saw the only 6% listing was &#039;additional info&#039; I added another and BAM, I&#039;m back to 100%

Thanks

Rob</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the pie chart.</p>
<p>I had 100% then changed something in the address line and went to 94%, even though I had everything listed. </p>
<p>I already had 2 additional comments listed but when I saw the only 6% listing was &#8216;additional info&#8217; I added another and BAM, I&#8217;m back to 100%</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>Rob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-2/#comment-546532</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:41:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-546532</guid>
		<description>@Dave and Ray
Google does tailor all search results based on presumed location of the searcher. I think that the reason that Chrome would provide different results is that Google has more control over the geo location capability baked into the the browser and is thus better able (in their mind) to provide more accurate results. This geo local &quot;personalization&quot; as it were, affects both standard and blended results with or without the use of local modifiers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Dave and Ray<br />
Google does tailor all search results based on presumed location of the searcher. I think that the reason that Chrome would provide different results is that Google has more control over the geo location capability baked into the the browser and is thus better able (in their mind) to provide more accurate results. This geo local &#8220;personalization&#8221; as it were, affects both standard and blended results with or without the use of local modifiers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Jenkins</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-1/#comment-546523</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Jenkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-546523</guid>
		<description>@Ray, 
I primarily use Firefox so I haven&#039;t noticed any differences in local search between different browsers - I&#039;ll definitely try some things out though. 

I guess the problem with the search results defaulting to North Tyneside is because its Geo IP data is wrong. I&#039;ve had a few problems in the past where the location it displays in the left hand navigation bar of the results is wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Ray,<br />
I primarily use Firefox so I haven&#8217;t noticed any differences in local search between different browsers &#8211; I&#8217;ll definitely try some things out though. </p>
<p>I guess the problem with the search results defaulting to North Tyneside is because its Geo IP data is wrong. I&#8217;ve had a few problems in the past where the location it displays in the left hand navigation bar of the results is wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ray Cassidy</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-1/#comment-546516</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray Cassidy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 23:44:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-546516</guid>
		<description>There are some real contrasts in the way results are served up depending on which browser you are using.  For my own part I live and work around Carlisle in the UK.  The most often noticed  difference is between Firefox&#039; and Chrome&#039;s displayed results. I have an (untested) notion that you seem to get a map result more often for a search in Chrome than in Firefox.  Has anybody noticed anything similar?

A second oddity (in response to Dave Jenkins) is that the search results are tailored to the IP address of your ISP&#039;s nodes.  I live in Carlisle but the google account search results are always defaulting to North Tyneside - on the opposite side of the country.  Very peculoiar results sometimes!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are some real contrasts in the way results are served up depending on which browser you are using.  For my own part I live and work around Carlisle in the UK.  The most often noticed  difference is between Firefox&#8217; and Chrome&#8217;s displayed results. I have an (untested) notion that you seem to get a map result more often for a search in Chrome than in Firefox.  Has anybody noticed anything similar?</p>
<p>A second oddity (in response to Dave Jenkins) is that the search results are tailored to the IP address of your ISP&#8217;s nodes.  I live in Carlisle but the google account search results are always defaulting to North Tyneside &#8211; on the opposite side of the country.  Very peculoiar results sometimes!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Jenkins</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-1/#comment-546498</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Jenkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 07:37:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-546498</guid>
		<description>I just wanted to add three things after reading the great post and some of the comments. I know Google are frequently changing the rules but as it stands at the moment.

1. You do not need to add more than 2 photos to get a 100% listing. One of my businesses has just 2 photos and I have 100%.
2. You do not need to add a video to get a 100% listing.
3. In response to comment 51 by TSU, local search is rapidly changing. Entering a non location specific search for a service such as plumber, electrician, jeweller, computer repairs will bring back local results. So based upon the location of the computer you are using, you will get tailored results. So if you are using a computer in London, you will get local search results for London etc ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just wanted to add three things after reading the great post and some of the comments. I know Google are frequently changing the rules but as it stands at the moment.</p>
<p>1. You do not need to add more than 2 photos to get a 100% listing. One of my businesses has just 2 photos and I have 100%.<br />
2. You do not need to add a video to get a 100% listing.<br />
3. In response to comment 51 by TSU, local search is rapidly changing. Entering a non location specific search for a service such as plumber, electrician, jeweller, computer repairs will bring back local results. So based upon the location of the computer you are using, you will get tailored results. So if you are using a computer in London, you will get local search results for London etc &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ray Cassidy</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-1/#comment-546027</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray Cassidy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:20:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-546027</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s an interesting diagram.  I wonder if - 18 months down the line and following the latest Google algorithm tweaks, it still holds true.

Though it&#039;s good to know what you need for the 100% mark, my personal feeling after ploughing through the comments, is the concensus is to not sweat it too much once you&#039;ve got the listing up to the 80% plus mark.  The way Google spends such a lot of time and effort in keeping several steps ahead of us guys, means the hard slog of 100% today could easily be gone tomorrow.
Thanks for the helpful insights people.
Ray</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s an interesting diagram.  I wonder if &#8211; 18 months down the line and following the latest Google algorithm tweaks, it still holds true.</p>
<p>Though it&#8217;s good to know what you need for the 100% mark, my personal feeling after ploughing through the comments, is the concensus is to not sweat it too much once you&#8217;ve got the listing up to the 80% plus mark.  The way Google spends such a lot of time and effort in keeping several steps ahead of us guys, means the hard slog of 100% today could easily be gone tomorrow.<br />
Thanks for the helpful insights people.<br />
Ray</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TSU</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-1/#comment-544034</link>
		<dc:creator>TSU</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:29:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-544034</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m all for places page and we have all of our place pages optimised, but I do not think that having a 100% finished page impacts your standing whatsoever.

The &#039;new place search&#039; is great, I&#039;m all for that, but from what I have seen here in the UK Google still has some work to do. 

Place results seem to be coming up randomly for generic search terms with no location attached to them, and as we are in the UK it defaults to London. This can be completely random depending on the search term, but it negates work done to achieve high organic rankings for competitive generic search terms when you are knocked off by place rankings that have no meaningful right to show in the first place.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m all for places page and we have all of our place pages optimised, but I do not think that having a 100% finished page impacts your standing whatsoever.</p>
<p>The &#8216;new place search&#8217; is great, I&#8217;m all for that, but from what I have seen here in the UK Google still has some work to do. </p>
<p>Place results seem to be coming up randomly for generic search terms with no location attached to them, and as we are in the UK it defaults to London. This can be completely random depending on the search term, but it negates work done to achieve high organic rankings for competitive generic search terms when you are knocked off by place rankings that have no meaningful right to show in the first place.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Places Dashboard: How to Make % Complete = 100% &#124; Understanding Google Maps &#38; Local Search</title>
		<link>http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/04/google-maps-lbc-how-to-make-complete-100/comment-page-1/#comment-543574</link>
		<dc:creator>Google Places Dashboard: How to Make % Complete = 100% &#124; Understanding Google Maps &#38; Local Search</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:02:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blumenthals.com/blog/?p=4130#comment-543574</guid>
		<description>[...] you compare this chart to a similar % complete chart that was done last year, you will see that the value of basic information has increased somewhat. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] you compare this chart to a similar % complete chart that was done last year, you will see that the value of basic information has increased somewhat. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 503/504 objects using disk: basic

Served from: blumenthals.com @ 2012-02-09 06:47:10 -->
