What do People Really Search for at Google?
Snoopy comments:
""Hi Frank,
Your comments before about the number of search [Google] queries for commercial term like "ceiling fans" and adult terms got me thinking. After reading it I got a list of the top 500 search queries from Wordtracker (including the number of searches for each query) and decided to crunch some numbers.
I categorized each of the 500 search terms into one of the follow categories,
-Adult generic terms
-Generic commercial product terms (eg insurance, airline tickets,cars)
-Full url's entered as a search (eg google.com, weather.com)
-Generic non adult terms (but not commercial products) (eg people, puppies, online games)
-Celebrity and band names (eg Madonna, Paris Hilton)
-Well known trademarks
-Other (lesser known site names etc)
Anyway here are the results,
Of the 500 terms:
141 (28.2%) were in the “Adult generic term” category
91 (18.2%) were “Well known trademarks”
90 (18.0%) were “Generic terms” (but not commercial product)
87 (17.4%) were “Celebrity and band names”
27 (5.4%) were full url's
42 (8.4%) were in the “Other” category
15 (3.0%) were “Generic commercial product terms”
I then crunched the number based on the search query volume for each term, to look at the volume of searches in each category.
32.2% of searches were for “Adult generic” terms
22.0% of searches were for “Well known trademarks”
15.5% of searches were for “Generic terms (but not commercial product)”
14.3% of searches were for “Celebrity and band names”
6.7% of searches were for terms in the “Other” category
6.3% of searches were for “Full url's”
2.9% of searches were for “Commercial product terms”
A few disclaimers:
A lot of categories aren’t absolute eg “thongs” I’ve put in the commercial product category whilst other might argue this is really an adult search term. The same applies that other way, some might argue "puppies" should be in the commercial product category.
The “other” category would likely contain some terms which should be in other categories, eg there may be some terms which I haven’t realized is actually the name of a band. Well known trademark is pretty subjective, I’ve been fairly strict and included terms such as “playstation2 game cheats”, which in reality might be defendable as domains depending on usage. 95% were more clear cut though.""
***FS*** That's excellent data (and hasn't changed much over the years).. The thing few discuss openly is that Google's search results are no different than the average search engine. People are people and they search for similar things. I am waiting for the day that a smart analyst says: "What do people really search for at Google?" and .. "Show me the unfiltered results". I doubt Google would. It's pretty hairy.
The nice thing about domainers and domain names is you can control your inventory based on the names you buy.. If you own enough keyword style domain names for products and services you can actually be bigger than Google, who as you pointed out only gets 2.9% of their traffic for non-trademarked products.. Most folks are just scratching the surface on this stuff. Many larger domainers (who have been buying search engine data) have known it for years.
Again, great data and thanks for taking the time to post.
STARTQUOTE: I am waiting for the day that a smart analyst says: "What do people really search for at Google?" and .. "Show me the unfiltered results". I doubt Google would. It's pretty hairy.ENDQUOTE
The raw data itself is in fact hairy and scary. The AOL search data offers a good qualitative look at how people use search engines.
Here is some background:
http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/08/06/aol-proudly-releases-massive-amounts-of-user-search-data/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal
The Wikipedia link actually has some links to places where you can search raw data from 500,000 searches. The search engine is not only product/porn finder and navigation tool, it is the all-knowing agony aunt.
***FS*** But is it worth its stock price.
Posted by: Geoff | July 12, 2007 at 01:21 AM
GOOGLE...
I can not "get" that no one wants to change the "playing field"
Google...stats, seo, relevancy algorithms, banklinks, page rank etc..,??
Quote from FS:
""It doesn't really matter what Google wants.. It matters what their users want.""
NOT Googles "users"....OUR USER's...they are not GOOGLES.
MY POINT(s)
They do not want google... They want US...only we can make them see this...but FIRST you have to see it.
The users of Goggle are OUR users(all of us)...not Googles.
But WHY...
Domain/website owners...are the "playing field"... NOT GOOGLE...and all of you (me) are sitting on asses on the bench....thinking...this is just the way it is... Google rules and always will.
BS...
"Forward Thinking"
Most people that read Franks blog (including Frank) are a thousand times smarter than me.
But when you post "stats" about Google...you have already become google's "bitch".
Not something I want to be...
Please use some brain cell's in the coming months and years.
Peace,
Dan
***FS*** We're trying Danno.. but we all have different paths (our own ideas) how to get there.
Posted by: IPTV | July 12, 2007 at 06:13 AM
Hi Fank and members,
My apologies for the post I made above ...
Just a little fustration coming out of me.
It was b-day wed...and I went out until 2:00 drinking with "the boys".
Its 12;36 pm here and I just got up about 20 mins ago...feeling like crap.
Had not done this "activity" for a couple years, and I was "looped" and "puzzled all at the same time when I made that post. It should not happen again for another couple years (I hope) I am too old now to "hangout"...LOL
Peace,
Dan
***FS*** It's okay homey.
Posted by: IPTV | July 12, 2007 at 03:44 PM