Compete.com’s December US Mobile Subscriber Market Share report has been released. Of particular interest to me is the shifting sands of the Smartphone Platform Market Share. The numbers reflect the December release of the Droid by Verizon (and their heavy advertising) but not the release of the Nexus to T-Mobile which occurred in January.
I have made the point before, and this chart strongly reinforces it, that initially Android is going to take share from RIM, Palm and Microsoft and not so much from Apple. Clearly, RIM has a lot to loose in this battle although Palm perhaps has even more to loose in that their survival is at stake. Apple will soon respond with a new phone and other tactics to increase market share.
Because this is as much a battle of providers as it is phones it seems likely that Apple & Android will continue to be favored alternatives at ATT & Verizon leaving little breathing room for the current alternatives to gain or even retain market share. The Compete.com numbers:
RIM was the leading mobile smartphone operating system in the U.S. in December 2009 with 41.6 percent share of U.S. smartphone devices. Apple ranked second with 25.3 percent share (up 1.2 percentage points), followed by Microsoft with 18.0 percent share, Palm with 6.1 percent share, and Google with 5.2 percent share (up 2.7 percentage points).
|Top Smartphone Platforms
3 Months Ending Dec. 2009 vs. 3 Months Ending Sep. 2009
Total U.S. Age 13+
Source: comScore MobiLens
|Share (%) of Smartphone Devices|
|Total Smartphone Subscribers||100.0%||100.0%||N/A|
Google Maps recently introduced a new feature on the Places Pages called Nearby Places You Might Like. It was rolled out early last Friday and while it generally adds value to the Places Page, there were a number criticisms of the results particularly as it relates to SMBs. The feature was announced on the Lat Long blog later that day noting that the results were still in testing and flux. The feature continued to receive “mixed reviews” particularly as it relates to showing direct competitors in the retail space.
Carter Maslan, VP of Product Development at Google Maps, reached out and offered to answer questions that I might have about the feature. Here are his comments.
MB: Could you give us your vision of the new “Nearby Places You Might Like” feature? Who will find the information valuable? Who is it targeting?
Carter Maslan (CM): The vision is to help you find and discover places you’d like to know about. The feature is designed for everyone searching for places, whether they be stores, transit stops or historic landmarks.
MB: I have seen Places Pages that have no nearby places, ones that have only competitors showing, ones that seem to have wildly unrelated places and ones that seem to have related but not directly competitive services. What are you striving for exactly?
CM: We’re striving to add a new and useful way to find places – a way that may have been difficult to express in a query – that taps insights from relationships among places.
MB: Are there different models that you are testing?
CM: Yes, we’re looking at “relatedness” among places broadly and are experimenting with both the identification and presentation of those places.
MB: Why would there be Places that have no Places Nearby showing?
CM: There may not be sufficient information to identify useful relationships among some places.
MB: Here are some examples that each in somewhat hard to understand results. Could you comment on them:
This Places Page shows only competitors in Places You Might Like: Barbara Oliver Jewelry – Buffalo NY
CM: In looking across places, we try to find the strongest associations that seem useful to people as they’re searching or browsing. Sometimes, but not always, those associations are among businesses in the same category; we’re not imposing any particular restriction in the ways that people associate places.
MB: This result shows Nearby Places that are apparently irrelevant (a beverage redemption center, skin care suggestions & a Chiopracter 10 miles or so away from the best pie’s in the world): Earl’s Drive In Restaurant
Or this apparently irrelevant plumber result showing Pet Grooming almost 10 miles away: Schaefer’s Plumbing
CM: I’m guessing there are two reasons that these results seem irrelevant: either 1) we need to improve our quality, or 2) we need to explain our quality. We’re working on both, but even as we perfect results we’ll sometimes include places with unconventional associations.
MB: This result is not showing any Nearby Places: Blumenthals.com
CM: Sorry to say that this is a case where we don’t have enough info to draw insights. As we mentioned in the blog post announcing this feature, we will continue to refine the way we return these results and there will be fewer unexpected results over time.
MB: How are you picking places nearby to show? How close physically do they need to be? It would seem that some examples are showing that are quite a distance away.
CM: We try to consider as much information as we can from across the Web; the distance calculations vary as we consider different signals of relatedness. The definition of “nearby” varies with the user’s intent and the selection of places.
MB: You have mentioned the analogy to “Similar Products that you might be interested in”. Could you expand on that?
CM: People know that they have options when choosing a place (or product), so showing options helps them confirm a decision or discover a place they’d want to consider. For a business owner, it’s important to remember that there are *inbound* links as well as outbound – so someone may also discover your business through this feature.
MB: The information for “Nearby Places You Might Like” shows very far down a very long page. Do readers make it that far down the page? Will it change position over time? What will determine that?
CM: Yes, they do make it that far down the page at times. But the lower position on the page is a safer place to launch early and iterate on the quality of this new feature. The page is a search result, so the presence and position of this feature will vary over time with quality/usefulness.
MB: Currently, when you select the link for one of Nearby Places, it “spawns” a new Window. It seems very un-google like. Is that a bug or a feature?
CM: That was a browser-specific bug that should now be fixed.
MB: The message from Google to SMB’s about their Places Pages has, with the exception of your inclusion of ads last year, been that it can be used as a landing page. This certainly seems to contradict that. Would you position the Places Pages for SMBs so that they can understand your intentions with the page?
CM: Our intent for Place Pages is to show the most useful search results for any given place. For local businesses that want to engage with the people searching for them, Place Pages are search result pages that help businesses ensure accuracy of core listing information and gain insights into the ways people find them.
MB: If it isn’t a Landing Page over which they have reasonable control, what would incent an SMB to claim and control their listing?
CM: The primary reasons to claim your listing are a) ensure the accuracy of the core listing data, b) get insights into how and when people are finding you even before they arrive at your site/doorstep, and c) engage with the people searching for you by posting updates, photos, videos, etc.
MB: It would seem that the Places Pages have two constituencies, the consumer and the SMB. We know that you always doing user-acceptance testing. Are you doing it with SMBs, as well as consumers?
CM: We want both consumers and businesses to find the results useful in engaging with each other. While the implication is that this feature puts the interests of consumer and business at odds, owners often realize quickly that the Web of connections among places and people is both inbound and outbound.
MB: The Places Pages are becoming more Yellow Page like. Will you be selling placement in the nearby links and if so, for how much?
CM: Places Pages are all about helping users find and discover the most relevant information for any place. We have no plans to monetize the nearby places feature at this time. I’d also like to mention that, as always, any ads on the Place Pages will be clearly labeled as such.
MB: I have in the past, and in this instance, accused you of being somewhat tone deaf to the needs of SMBs. Obviously you are soon to be targeting them for additional ad revenue. How would you respond to my criticism?
CM: We’re listening to the SMB desire for more customers and more business with those customers. In this case, there’s already a connected Web of people, places and information in the real world. Embracing that network with a strong, accurate online presence is a good thing for business owners, and this is a great new tool that offers access to insights that were previously unavailable.
MB: What else would you like to tell us about this new feature that I haven’t asked?
CM: At Google, we launch and iterate. We appreciate hearing feedback from you and from others and will take it into account as we continue to develop this and other features.
We have put on line a simple, searchable interface to the Google Local Business Center (LBC) categories and synonym lists. The idea is to to assist in early planning and judicious picking of the most appropriate categories for your LBC listing. At this point, the categories included are for the US LBC only.
Late last year I published the Google LBC Category list as an HTML page of all the categories but I wanted to make the list more manageable so I have placed it in a database with a simple search interface.
Your feedback and suggestions would be welcomed!
Will Scott of Search Influence has pointed out a new “feature” on a business’s Places Page that is sure to infuriate more than one SMB. Right below the review section of the Places Page, Google has added a new section titled (with no little irony): Nearby Places You Might Like. This screen shot of the Places Page for a jeweler in Buffalo, Barbar Oliver & Co. Jewelry:
Since it was introduced, Google has promoted their Places Page as an alternative landing page for a business and it was highlighted as such during their Local Listing Ad test last year. There isn’t an SMB in the universe that has invested in maintaining and highlighting their Places Page that wants nearby competitors listed on that very same page.
It is an interesting choice of upgrades to the Places page for Google to make. Clearly, from their point of view, they need to make the Places Page a beginning point to a users experience with Google not an ending point. As they have directeded more traffic internally to the Places Page instead of the list view in Maps, I am sure that they have found that users have no obvious place to go from there. The user interface to view more pages within Maps is not very noticable and most of the links on the page lead off site. Obviously, not a great strategy if selling more ads is the goal.
Google could have chosen, in the past, to highlight a business’s Places Page in the main index but choose not to. Now, when a user does arrive at the page for a business there is a choice to visit competitors Place’s Pages as well as other nearby businesses. In a strange interface convention, the link to a Nearby Places You Might (not) Like is selected it opens a new window in a very un-google like fashion.
Clearly, moving forward, Google is hoping to make the Places Page and elements on it more visible. They are also hoping to monetize this by enticing owners of the pages to either advertise or enhance their local listing. It seems to be an incredible bone head move if that is their plan to wave a red flag in these very same owners faces prior to that move.
This move will be perceived as “evil” regardless of their motivations and goals. One can only hope that it is a test of very limited duration and not a new, permanent part of the Places Page
Becky of OnlineTrafficDivas.com has pointed out what appears to be a mistake but could be inidicitive of a wider rollout of the Enhanced Listing test. The billing tab for the Enhanced Listing test is visible in every Local Business Center account.
Go to your list of coupons and select the “link” link:
Select the billing tab:
Becky has put together this “>screen shot video to demonstrate the step that she used to find the billing tab.
Google’s upcoming Jazz interface, which was showing a 5 pack on local searches since it was introduced on a test basis last year is now showing the 7-Pack (Hat tip to PureSheer). Here is the current view:
Here is the view from early January:
Continue reading Google’s Jazz Interface Returns to the 7-Pack
Yesterday, Greg Sterling reported on a Google test to allow for a new paid listing type, the “enhanced listings” for showing on Maps. According to Google, the “enhancement” will show wherever your listing is currently showing but will not affect rank or where the listing is shown. This test is distinct from the test for the Local Listing Ads that was run late last year.
As Greg noted, the program charges a flat $25/mo. fee and allows the merchant to highlight type of enhancement they would like to show with their business listing, including any of the following:
Website for your business.
Photos of your business.
Videos of your business.
Coupons for your listing.
Menu for your restaurant.
Reservations page for your business.
Driving directions to your business.
In the case above, the link goes to a new video page attached to the Places Page for the business:
This test also provides additional enhanced listing activity in the Dashboard:
Clearly, the local market is ripe for a paid product from Google. The reach of the 7-pack is broad and being able to highlight or display in the area will be embraced by SMBs. Google will not leave this significant income source untapped for long and either one or both of the local listing ad or this enhanced listing is likely to find its way onto the 7-pack this year sooner rather than later.
The Google LatLong Blog has announced that they have added personalized suggestions to Google Maps.
Like personalized suggestions on Google.com, personalized suggestions on Google Maps are based on past searches from your Web History. If you see a personalized suggestion that you don’t like, you can get rid of that suggestion and any others by clicking the “Edit” link at the bottom of the suggestions box, which takes you directly to the Web History removals page. You can also sign out of your Google account to stop seeing personalized suggestions.
The question that David Dalka asked me last week though was: If Google offers personalized search (and now personlized suggestions) why can’t they tell that I am searching for the next town over instead of one in England?
I have given Google every clue imaginable about my location. Google knows my searching IP address, they have me located down to the meter with Latitude which I log into every morning, I regularly search for restaurants in Bradford (Pa) and yet when I search for restaurants in the next town over (Bradford), Google and Maps inevitably return Bradford, England results:
I understand that the search is ambiguous and that Bradford, England is a more significant city than my Bradford. But I have given Google possible way to identify my location and my interests and they are still unable to make the distinction on my behalf.
With Martijn Beijk, we are closing out our Loci2009 series reflecting on important events, trends and developments in Local Search last year. It is a dynamic space and one where as many or more changes look to be on the horizon for 2010.
2009 was a year of change. For me personally because I moved back to the Netherlands from Barcelona, Spain to work at the headquarters office of Onetomarket, the Netherlands as an SEO consultant. Specializing on Local Search it has given me the opportunity to start my international speaking career- presenting a local search business case at SMX Stockholm.
Looking back on 2009 I must say that the Local Search game changed. Competition is gaining, spam is raising, guidelines are sharpening, Google is proactively advertising the local business center as a service – probably to grow independent of 3rd party suppliers.
All-in-all it is a great year to look back to and although I had intentions of publishing a lot more than I actually did I do believe that 2010 will be even better.
I have always had a keen interesting in the semantic web and context-awareness and location based services and I trully think that 2009 has set things off with a blast. Services like Layar, Yelp checkins, Gowalla and foursquare are really great examples of how we use the local search space – and how fast we adapt to all these changes.
I have selected a few posts, not all of them local related. In general I think we should really thank David Mihm for his relentless effort in supporting the space. One thing I always enjoy reading are his small is beautiful column’s on Search Engine Land and of course the annual Local Search Ranking Factors
bullet: Further more I wouldn’t have expected at first that my post about tracking local with Google Analytics was received with great enthusiasm and got nominated for a Semmy.
bullet: Although it hasn’t yet received the attention it actually deserves there was the launch of Geositemapgenerator.com. Using the wishes of local business owners with many storefronts and using the building blocks of my article the definitive guide to KML and SEO it has already shown to be a great tool of which we will hear a lot more in the year of 2010! I believe it is a great development that more and more projects are kicking off in Europe, and one of them is this awesome tool of Arjan Snaterse.
bullet: (Self promo) Anyone interested in KML and sitemaps should listen to this radio show on Webmasterradio.fm on SEO 1on1 where I was the invited to discuss the subject.
bullet:Miriam Ellis always amazes me with her perspective on local search stories and I have found this specific post on reputation management regarding reviews very interesting: Edit, Remove and Respond To Reviews – Tools For Conflict Resolution
bullet: Google has been introducing rich snippets based on RDF in the year 2009, these are the first buildstones of the semantic web and I am very happy that Google is finally openly stating they are using them and encourage others to do so.
bullet: Aniceto Lopez who I consider to be my Obi-Wan Kenobi of the SEO space, now living in Vancouver, CA has written an excellent article on his research about how context influences ranking. In this particular article he describes the actions taken for his migration from Barcelona Spain to Vancouver Canada and how this affected ranking positions. This is web citations in true action!
bullet: Mike’s article on Location Prominence, it is a must read if you consider to take Local Search seriously.