Google has in the past conflated two records but this is the first I have seen a record being confused with its own older version. I sympathized with Nivek’s lament in the Google Maps for Business Group:
TOPIC: Hours duplicated, can’t remove the incorrect set
= 1 of 1 =
Date: Sat, May 3 2008 12:13 pm
The hours for my business are listed twice and I can’t remove the incorrect set or hours. The set of hours at the top are incorrect:
Google Maps: Dog Daze Puyallup Wa
When I update our hours, it only updates the bottom set, which is the correct set of hours.
I don’t know how to fix this.
Any assistance is appreciated.
Nivek, Dog Daze Natural Pet Market – Puyallup, Wa.
I would respond:
Dear Dazed in Puyallup:
Do not let this set back affect your self image. You have done nothing wrong here. You will not be able to fix this yourself, you will need the help of the others involved in this unfortunate situation. Things happen to data, what it is though just isn’t clear.
I would go back to Google and explain your plight but remember you are not to blame in this situation. If after 7 or 8 pleas they have not yet responded be assured that sooner or later the record will probably straighten itself out. Remember you are but one record among 13 million or so and keeping all of that data straight is a difficult job.
Jen Chin, aka Maps Guide Jen, in a recent comment to my article Google Maps Fixes missing record bug, has noted:
Youâ€™ve seen me posting as â€œMaps Guide Jenâ€ on our Maps Help Group, but
Iâ€™m hoping to get out in the blogosphere and comment on blogs more
…. Weâ€™re currently talking about a better system for posting when issues
are resolved, but in the meantime, weâ€™ll appreciate your patience as we
work to make our Maps product better. Thanks for the feedbackâ€“even
when it may not be apparent that Google is paying attention, we are
working to do better.
Dealing with the vagaries of Maps has been, at best, a frustrating experience. Between the bugs, the unknowns and the lack of communication from Google, solutions have been hard to come by. I certainly welcome a more open Google. I can only hope that they perceive the need to respond in internet time, not Google time and that they respond in a forthright fashion.
To our Maps Guide Jen, I say: Welcome to the party!
Today in the Google Maps for Business Group, Maps Guide Tom reconfirmed that Google had in fact fixed the missing record bug. He was writing in response to the numerous posts that records seemed to be still missing. Most records aren’t in fact missing rather they just don’t show in the Local 10-Pack, the users don’t know how to find them or they are in new record delay hell.
But it appears that some have been delisted by Google for using one of the address lines in the record for descriptive info instead of real address information:
TOPIC: Business Listing Disappearances
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, May 2 2008 9:56 am
From: Maps Guide Tom
I’ve noticed many of you are reporting that your active business
listings are disappearing from display on Google Maps. In regards to
the post I wrote back in February, that issue has been resolved, and
listings are no longer disappearing from Maps!
……Also, I’ve noticed that many of the issues you guys are reporting have
a common theme.
Please remember to include ONLY address information in
“Address Line 1” and “Address Line 2” when you’re creating or editing
your listing from within the Local Business Center. If you put a
business description, or name, or anything that’s not an address in
either of the address fields, your listing may not display on Google
Maps. (my bold)
Update: Sometime around 8:00 EDT Saturday evening it appears that Google has removed these listings. It was reported below by Cavan Moon of eClickPerformance.
Stephen Peron of ImNotaDoctor.com reports a case of Mapspam that he discovered while researching the phrase “San Diego internet consulting” (graphic courtesy of Imnotadoctor.com):
He noted that the listing shows up for every major city as well. The spammer appears to have posted his listing 4,176 times:
It is of interest that the spammer does so well on such a broad range of terms over so many cities. For example on the search: “Local Internet Marketing NY NY” :
And on the phrase: “local internet consulting Chicago il“:
This spam raises several interesting questions for me.
1)This was clearly a bulk upload that I was under the impression were now reviewed by Google. Big Local even notes in their listing: “Not a Physical Location.”
2)It ranks well for terms that there are few if any indicators it should rank well for. Their site has a low page rank and not much optimized content. Their local listings are sparse and have no reviews, few if any web page references and few keywords in their listings.
Fortune (via LocalMobileSearch) reports that Apple will be reducing the price of the iPhone by $200. As Greg points out at Local Mobile: Price Matters!
The new price will drive adoption of this fully functional mobile computing device masquerading as a smart phone at a faster rate. Apple’s mobile computing strategy became very clear this past month while visiting a childhood friend who had up to the moment of our visit had steadfastly maintained his Luddite approach to computing.
His wife had purchased him an iPod Touch for an upcoming 20 hour vacation flight to Bali. Upon our arrival he proudly showed me his new toy (remember this is a guy that like me, buys a new car every 15 years whether he needs to or not) and told me how he was going to listen to Dylan and the E Street Band on his long trip.
I started tapping away and noted that it would be a simple thing to hook it the internet via his wife’s laptop which he agreed to. From that point on, each morning and evening he had me implement and train on an ever increasing number of internet capabilities….he started downloading podcasts by Amy Goodman, buying a few videos for the trip on iTunes, discovering the joys of Google Maps (you mean I can look up restaurants? show me!) and incredulous that he could now read his email anywhere.
Last I heard from him was an email from the Tokyo airport about a sock that my son had left buried in the den couch.
Apple, in focusing on the killer app (either music or phone calling + music) has developed a very seductive and appealing way to bring not just the technorati but the ludderati as well into the age of mobile computing. These new users may just leapfrog the desktop that they were so resistant to and in doing so make computing (and local search) a much more integrated part of our every day life.
In February, Google Mapâ€™s Guide Tom announced a bug where certain business records from the Local Business Center had gone missing in Maps. Records, once edited in the Local Business Center, randomly disappeared from both the Maps listing and the Google Local OneBox. The only fix was to delete the record and reenter it in the LBC however that often resulted in loss of rank and associated reviews. At the time I lauded Googleâ€™s new openeness and responsiveness.
Today (after 2 months of silence), Tom (and Google) announced that the bug has been fixed. The rescue came too late for my record as I had deleted and reentered it about 2 weeks ago thinking that the original had been left for dead in some dark corner. Hopefully though the fix will retrieve some other missing records from the dark recesses of Googleâ€™s storage closet (is that where they go? Iâ€™ve been wondering).
In March, this bug struck one of my records and I had posted the following at the Google Maps for Business Group that had gone unanswered until today:
Continue reading Google Maps Fixes missing record bug
The City of San Buenaventura, Ca is usually referred to as Ventura. Google Maps correctly substitutes the name of Ventura for San Buenaventura but Yahoo Local seems a tad confused by the use of the name San Buenaventura in a local search query.
For example if you search on Florist+San Buenaventura Ca, it maps the location to just west of the Congo, smack dab in the South Atlantic Ocean about 750 to the west of the African coast, some 6000 or so miles away.
Equally interesting is that the search Florist+San Buenaventura Ca apparently returns every florist in the United States, all 61,035 of them.
Until this bug is fixed the search can provide approximate numbers of total Yahoo listings for any industry. On the search Restaurants + San Buenaventura, CA, Yahoo Local returns 747,782 listings and the number one restaurant is Giordanos Pizzeria in Chicago. I wonder how the pizza is.
Don’t you just love local?
In the past local searches (product + locale) would occasionally return an “inventory” onebox if Google felt that it was more relevant than a Local 10 Pack. An example is the search “Real Estate + Locale” which provides a Google Base search box to explore available inventory.
Recently on the searches for “used cars + locale” Google has started including both the Local 10 Pack AND the Inventory Search Box.
Over time, Google has been increasing the granularity of their results as they have adequate data to provide meaningful results. Providing a list of currently available used autos in an area is certainly part of this trend.
A number of posters (here , here and here) at the Google Maps for Business owners over the past several months have noted that their listing in the Local 10Pack had been missing the phone number. This bug was fairly widespread and had befallen three of my listings including my infamous medical listing.
All instances that I was experiencing of missing phone numbers as well as a number that I checked at the Google Maps for Business Group has shown up.
As an aside my medical record has been totally repaired and all remaining issues of gender confusion has been fixed as well.
Google has not indicated in the Group whether they would look at these records or not, but it appears either that the bug responsible has been quashed in most cases or enough time has passed that the records caught up with themselves.
I am currently traveling with my family from Northern California to Oregon. We needed to book a hotel near the San Francsico airport the other night. My wife ended up booking us into the Best Western Grosvenor in South San Francisco.
As we checked in, there was an obviously placed notice that that if we reviewed the hotel on TripAdvisor.com we would be entered in a drawing to receive a full credit towards our room expense.
We went to the room, set up our laptop and proceeded to struggle with a very flaky wifi connection, calling the front desk who alerted maintenance. We finally logged on through the connection for the Holiday Inn across the street.
The next morning I got serious about attempting to win my free stay and proceeded to create an account with TripAdvisor.com and to locate their record to provide a review. About 15 minutes into the sign up/review process, the WiFi connection started slowing down and finally went bad before ever being able to actually write the review. After another 10 minutes of struggling with the flakey connection I finally gave up.
I was an extremely motivated user and between the time it took to get into Tripadvisor and navigate a buggy wifi connection, I could not make it to the end line. While checking out, we were forced to fill in the hand feedback form to enter the electronic review drawing.
The impact of the hotels efforts are interesting. The Top 10 Hotels in Google all have more than 45 reviews to their credit on the search: Hotels South San Francisco. Our hotel showed up on page 3 of Google Maps with no reviews. Its Google Maps record is unclaimed and has its name mispelled.
At Tripadvsior.com the hotel has received 126 reviews and is accumulating reviews at a run rate of about 1 per week.
It is fascinating to me that reviews have become an integral part of some hotel’s customer relations management. It is also fascinating that it could be so poorly executed as to cause my rating to go down. The lengthy process to get signed up with TripAdvisor speaks to the need for a product like LeaveFeedback.org. The poorly managed WiFi setup speaks to the importance of good execution across all of an establishment’s offered services.
It is also of note that the review process focused so heavily on TripAdvisor while ignoring their Google Maps record reinforcing the poorly thought out nature of the exercise.