So why am I happy about it?

Well, it all starts with landing a new client. One of the first things we do with new SEO clients is to check their current link profile. So, after verifying the site in Google Webmaster Tools, I hit the external links section. I was surprised, for being a PR4, they had only a handful of links. So, there must be some good links!

As I clicked through them to verify their quality, my eye was caught by one in particular. It looked exactly the same as my client’s site, just with a different logo! I looked around, and there was no affiliation whatsoever. So this was clearly a disparate organization whose web designer was a very lazy one. It was readily apparent that they had stolen everything, just changed the logo and the navigation bar to suit their website.

So, how were they linked to my client’s site? Well, at first it wasn’t obvious, but as I scrolled to the bottom, there it was: their lazy designer was too lazy to change the footer! Yes, all of the links in the footer navigation were the same as on my client’s site, and in fact, they all still linked back to the site as well!

I will not be contacting this organization regarding the issue  :). I hope they are lazy enough to not change their site for a long time, leaving us that juicy stolen link for some time to come.

Innovation has always been an integral part of Google right from its inception. However, skeptics are viewing this little innovation as a risky move, which they feel will create complications and possibly even some very negative consequences. They feel that if Google uses the user opinions to influence overall ranking, that it’s prone to abuse and manipulation (much like their current algorithm). Or they feel that it’s contrary to the very nature of a search engine - people use Google to find relevant information, and now Google is using people to determine what it most relevant!

The key benefit however, would be the customisation or ranking results for commonly used search terms. The basic idea would be that a searcher, who frequently searches for certain terms, would count on Google to return the same site every time the term is punched in.

Google’s new SearchWiki comes loaded with several new capabilities, including the capability to promote result entries for particular searches, or even the ability to delete the chosen results from the list displayed for any given search. However, the most interesting and perhaps the sketchiest feature which is attracting a lot of attention, is the option of placing comments on the search results.

The SearchWiki users can view the comments associated with search results by other users. Living up to its name, the SearchWiki would act as a Wiki in true sense and enable users to view notes, added or deleted pages by other users. It is being anticipated that most of the search results would soon be laden with comments, some of which could even attract libel suits. Google says that a ‘thumbs down’ mechanism would be in place to flag down inappropriate comments. However, the bigger question as to what is “inappropriate” would still be a bone of contention. But there is also a positive angle to it: well-defined comments can be a valuable aid to the search process.

The ranking changes made on the listing through the SearchWiki would apply only to your own results. The pages edited added or deleted by others would not be a part of your default view. This is a reason that experts are citing as to why that wouldn’t be a very interesting SEO target. If Google automatically incorporates these edits into the default search result rankings, then the prospects of it being an interesting SEO target would be immense!

We could speculate on SearchWiki to no end, but at this point all we can do is wait and watch! The answers to our doubts and questions will come only after the new SearchWiki is rolled out and opened for common users. Whatever the full ramifications are, we can be sure of one thing: Google SearchWiki will undoubtedly lead the world of search in a new direction.

OK, at first I didn’t panic, I just assumed it was Google showing a different personalized result. But after I searched on all of our top keywords and even validated through 3rd party rank checkers, I was aghast to realize that we were no longer #1. In fact, we were no longer in the index at all!

I quickly ran through all possible scenarios in my head. Were we being penalized for paid links? No, we hadn’t purchased a link since the whole debacle with Google’s new stance on the issue. Was Google manually de-indexing us after the exposure in the Financial Post? I don’t see how that’s possible, we only promote Google-approved SEO techniques. Was it sabotage? Could someone have proxied our site or gotten us removed?

I decided to wait a day or two to see if there was a change. But the next day the results were just as bad - the only thing indexed was the blog, and it too was slipping. Even searching for our unique company name “Convurgency” provided poor results, we weren’t even #1 for that, and the link was to the blog. Still, there was no explanation of what happened.

One of the most curious events during this time was that there was a PR update, and we were even bumped up to a PR5. This despite our nonexistence in the index. So I knew something fishy was up. With the help of some connections, we were able to receive some confirmation that we had not been manually penalized. And yet still, we were nowhere to be found.

The answer came about a week later. I was checking Webmaster Tools for the umpteenth time, and finalyl saw an error message on the diagnostics page: “ We can’t currently access your home page because of an unknown problem.” OK, this doesn’t tell me why they can’t see my site, but at least explains why they’ve dumped me!

I did some digging in Google Groups, and found that others who’ve seen that error discovered that their hosting provider was blocking the Googlebot! I contacted support, and sure enough, that’s what happened. I asked them to unblock it immediately, and asked for an explanation. Here’s what they said: “It was likely blocked because it was looping on one of our accounts when crawling and causing the server to function slowly.”

So, I’m left with the following possibilities:

• one of the websites on the server was indeed causing the Googlebot to loop
• one of my competitors was spoofing the Googlebot and hammering my site

Which was it? We’ll probably never know. However, we continue to watch the Webmaster Tools like a hawk, and if it happens again we’ll need to move to a dedicated server.

Thankfully we’re back at #1. But it was a harsh lesson to learn for those couple of weeks of obscurity!

Check out the article in the Financial Post.

I’ve been using my iPhone (yes, in Canada) now for the last couple of months, and of course I love it. Beyond the sheer coolness factor, I have to say that I grow increasingly convinced that it will redefine web browsing, web development and especially local search and advertising for many people.

In the past, if I wanted to take my wife out for sushi, I would search Google Maps for a “sushi restaurant in Toronto”. Then if over dinner my wife expresses that she’d like a new chandelier for the dining room, I’d wait until I got home, and google “lighting store in Toronto”.

All of this changes with the iPhone, and no doubt other similar devices that will soon follow (queue Android). No matter where we are at the time, I can now use the cell triangulation feature in the iPhone maps location to find our current location. Then I look for the closest sushi restaurant (no doubt the reviews feature will soon be integrated, so I can find a decent one as well). And while we’re talking over dinner, I can simply look for the nearest lighting store, and go directly there from the restaurant.

Now this has obvious implications for local search and advertising. Businesses will need to ensure that they’re utilizing all geo-targeting opportunities available to their website, such as location-based SEO, Google Local and geo-specific PPC advertising. However, it also has a major impact on website design for big businesses. How so?

Suppose you’ve met a friend for lunch, and you’re discussing an upcoming home purchase. They’re recommending the mortgage or real estate services they used. Rather than wait until you’re home in front of your computer, you can browse the site on your mobile device, and even fill out a contact request form.

Yes, the iPhone can render full web pages. However, a full-blown web page on a big business website can be quite large, and can mean that you’ll be doing plenty of multi-touch zooming and panning just to find your way to a contact form. This is far from user-friendly, and quite likely to lose visitors with mobile devices. So it’s obviously in the best interest of businesses to have a mobile-device version of their site. This might mean a stripped-down site, but it could also simply mean a more streamlined rendering of the same content.

Now take it beyond the personal recommendations. As iPhones become more prevalent in corporate culture (and Blackberry upgrades their browser to keep pace), there will be far more professionals browsing over business meetings and lunches. A first impression of a company - based on their website - may be presented on a mobile device.

You can now start to see why all businesses will need to plan their mobile device strategy.

This may now be a small concern - one site I’m tracking is only receiving only 1% of its traffic from an iPhone. But in the next 12-18 months, and iPhones become more widespread and Android hits the market, this number will rise dramatically. Companies need to begin planning now how they will meet this growing demand for a proper mobile interface to their site!