Tag Archives: research

Startups Solving Founders’ Problems are Failing

Here’s a problem that you might address as a startup founder: other startup founders struggle to find problems to take on, to come up with ideas to address, and to expose issues in industries, so that they might launch a successful venture presenting a solution to that problem.

How do I know this is a problem in need of a solution? Entrepreneur groups, startup social networks, and founder Q&A, are littered with questions about how to find and validate a problem to solve.

As I hope you’re aware, countless founders and companies are taking on the problems facing entrepreneurs themselves, and in a meta sort of self-referential way, it’s an incredibly interesting sector of the economy because if we’re going to enable greater success from entrepreneurs, we should tackle the problems they face.

In startup communities, we often talk about “dogfooding,” derived from “eating your own dog food,” which refers to when a company uses its own products or services to demonstrate confidence in them, which startup founders often do to test or validate their ideas. Solid advice, no?

What’s meta (and amusing) here is that this sector of entrepreneurship is like a film is about filmmaking or a book about writing books. The product or solution being created in this case is inherently tied to the founders’ own experiences as a founder, making it meta in a business context.

The problem I’m seeing with troubling regularity is that the work these founders is doing, is disappointing.

Startups solving founders’ problems are failing, and such founders, of all people, can’t be founding so poorly

I was asked the other week, “I built a website to expose pain points across industries, helping entrepreneurs save time by gathering problems for they can solve. Why is no one using the site?”

Now, I constantly remind founders to take advice with a huge grain of salt, and question everything they hear, but in this case, I replied so confident that I told them, “I am 100% certain in my answer, without even looking at your website nor giving a damn about your problem/solution statement or value proposition, because I can tell in your asking this that you didn’t do what matters, don’t respect what matters, or (and?) have advisors and a community of peers that are worthless to the point of harmful.”

And then it happened AGAIN, a different founder asked for advice of their solution for a problem they perceive founders face, a startup FOR startups, “Wouldn’t it be valuable to have real-time communication tools that connect startups, mentors, and investors seamlessly?” The answer is unequivocally no, but the fact that the question was asked prompted both my explanation (which you can read here) and the more thought here; how and why founders trying to solve perceived problems in entrepreneurship are clearly and completely missing the mark. Let me ask you to stick around a bit so we can explore what founders are failing, and why founders for founders (if you will) even more seriously need to take this to heart…

Decades of research based in the reality of what works for startups, is that Marketing is the most important thing you do.  Doing it well will drastically increase your chance of success whereas doing it poorly will contribute to your fail; while neglecting it entirely, is just ignorant, stupid, and harmful.

Yes, I intend to be that harsh. Society continues to doubt, question, or argue about *marketing* because it doesn’t understand what it actually is, and dumbasses, who pretend to be Venture Capitalists or advisors, want to keep proclaiming that Sales is most important, that Marketing doesn’t work, or that you shouldn’t risk investing in either, until you are ready to sell your service.

Such people are morons to the point that they are harming founders.

Marketing is NOT promotions, advertising, content marketing, social media, SEO, Google Ads, or TikTok Videos. Anyone saying such a thing is marketing needs to be called out on their stupidity.

Marketing is the work of the market so as to create customers.

All of the work of the market.

Meaning, before you do ANYTHING, you should be marketing to determine if you should, how, why, and where.

These founders clearly did not.

How do I know they didn’t? Let’s look at the first question for what it is – why is no one using a website created to help founders find problems to solve within industries:

  1. I design and run incubators that help cities develop successful startup ecosystems. I’ve never heard of this website, nor the solution developed – is there not a more target customer or advisor than me? Asking the question suggests the founder just decided to make the website because they have experienced or observed entrepreneurs having trouble identifying problems. They’re not wrong, as I alluded previously, questions seeking an idea to address are prolific online.
  2. They built a website and expected people to just use it? Did you ever watch Field of Dreams? The movie. In my experience, only academics, engineers, and product people, drank the cool-aid that “if you build it, they will come” is true. A fiction film based in fantasy, building a solution NEVER means people will use it.
  3. They’re asking why people aren’t using the website, which tells us the founder knows nothing of content creation, social media, search, or other forms of freely available exposure. It’s not remotely hard to get people to use a service/website IF the service is worthwhile
  4. So… either they aren’t doing or don’t know how to do marketing, so that people would use the site, OR they didn’t do marketing to know how to create a valuable service. One of these things must be true.

Now, what I’m not advising is that you go pay for advertising! We’re uncovering how a founder can avert having such issues and questions from the start, because finding success with a startup is not about playing the long odds of trying to win, it’s addressing everything known to result in failure – so that you don’t.

Marketing is explicitly that work and it’s work you must prioritize above ALL ELSE. If you didn’t, can’t, or won’t, you will fail.  Which means that we also have a #5 in my list above, that I can tell this founder with a website didn’t do marketing because if they had prioritized it properly the first thing they would done is find a cofounder experienced with it. Incapable or inexperienced yourself, you’d put first ensuring you have that partner, get them on the team since it isn’t you, and allocating as much equity as necessary to help ensure the startup has a shot at success; having done that, the founder wouldn’t be asking this question… because a marketer would have told them from the get-go.

Let me temper my harshness…

None of what I’m saying means the idea(s) here are poor. In fact, they’re reasonable and easy to appreciate even from only the question(s) asked of me and no more digging into what they’re doing necessary. I work with dozens of cities every year, and hundreds of founders, and generally speaking it is clearly evident that two major issues in innovation are market research and communication – both issues these founders are trying to tackle. So, what’s wrong?

These problems persist because people don’t know and aren’t prioritizing marketing.

This exemplifies the Problem Within the Problem

When you’re trying to solve a problem as a startup, only the misinformed who proclaim they’re following Lean Startup, create an MVP to test a hypothesis.

Any modestly experienced and intelligent founder KNOWS there is a problem; they likely know a potential solution to that problem. Why on earth would you need to test the solution to prove it there is a problem and potential solution?

The answer to that, is because other people are ignorant, don’t believe it, don’t understand, or don’t agree. That, because investors, advisors, and potential customers in the market, are ignorant of what should work, they’ll ask you for proof (validation) that it does. Ignore them. That ignorance misleads you and encourages you to focus on customers, because *they* don’t know what else to advise (after all, getting revenue sounds like reasonable advice). They cause you to fail because that’s just misleading, dumbass advice.

The issue as a founder isn’t that there is a problem. The question to address is WHY there is still a problem.

Why has this not yet been solved? The Problem Within the Problem

When you create and launch a solution so uninformed by not doing marketing, you are conveying that you didn’t do marketing BECAUSE you clearly didn’t investigate why it remains a problem. Or do you seriously want me to believe that the brilliant people in research companies, agencies, search engines, AI, economic development, venture capital, and accelerators, have no idea that these are problems worth solving?? That, they’re all good at their jobs but oblivious to this possibility that maybe we need a website to uncover problems in industries because entrepreneurs can’t find problems to take on??

b.s.

MAYBE this is a problem because people don’t do marketing and MAYBE the reason 90% of all startups fail is because they don’t do marketing and MAYBE if they did marketing, this solution, such as it is, is irrelevant… or maybe it is helpful, but marketers know what they’re doing so they don’t need it, while other founders who don’t prioritize marketing aren’t seeking this because they think they know better.

A ha!

This is why no one is using a website that uncovers problems for would-be founders.

Marketers explicitly uncover pain points across industries so the very nature of proposing a solution as a founder, when it’s obvious why it remains a problem or it’s obvious (to marketers) why no one is using it, is the evidence inherent that the venture is going to fail.

This is the foundation of marketing taught in Marketing 101 in college.

But founders, you saw that people are struggling with a problem, in this case, with identifying pain points across industries… so you built a thing that solves the problem – for whom?? For people that don’t know how to do that? GREAT (seriously, great!) but then how and where are you going to find the people that are incapable of this core requirement of startup success?

If you fail to first address that people actually need the solution or fail to address how to capably acquire them, but have already built a solution, you should shut down now because you’re predetermined to fail.

Let’s get back to this focus on the website for entrepreneurs to uncover pain points in industries… I’ve never heard of the given startup – and I deal with this problem specifically, in cities, in countries, with VCs, and with founders… yet the founder didn’t even get my attention to talk to me, ask me, or engage me. Let’s not make this about me, have you not come across a startup pertinent to your industry and thought, “how the heck could you be at the point you’re at and I’ve never heard of this?!” Arguably, someone like me (like you in your case) is the most important person in the ecosystem, and the founder failed to connect with us.

This startup is hoping to go “direct” to entrepreneurs who can’t even figure out what problem to solve. Frankly, that’s a terrible target market. If they can’t figure out what pain point they might address in a sector, obviously they *aren’t* using search engines or social media to figure it out – in the process finding this website… negating the question to begin with because the website would have traffic or the founder of this website isn’t familiar with search engines and social media properly to be found.

Which is it? Probably both. Can you see how they’re certainly going to fail and never should have built a website without first addressing these fundamental challenges?

Marketing is all of the work of the market. Founders, what does that mean so that you can identify the problem within the problem and create a solution that might work?

  • Who are the competitors? Why do they fail?
  • Who would pay for this? Why? Where are they?
  • Do investors agree?
  • Do companies, potential partners, and competitors, agree with your solution or will they work against you?
  • What kind of team do you need in place to be successful? Why those skills? Where will you find them?
  • What channels will efficiently scale awareness, influence, and demand for what you’re doing?
  • Marketing is the work that *informs* the business if it needs to and/or should do advertising, hire sales, or run promotions. If you’re having to do that because nothing works, it’s because you’re not marketing to figure out what would work.
  • Why a website? Why not an app? Why not consulting? If a website, should that be AI or a search engine? Maybe it should be crowdsourced feedback or a database or 3rd party research… I don’t know, the work of marketing is figuring it out.

Noted economists have pointed out notions such as, ‘if you have to do advertising, it’s because your marketing is failing,’ and ‘the purpose of marketing is to make salespeople extraneous.’

If you have questions about growth or finding customers, you certainly should not yet have a solution.

That list of bullet points is a brief list among many more things that define “marketing,” and anyone who tells you otherwise is harming your potential as a founder. Marketing is the most important thing you do, hands down, unequivocally, and I GUARANTEE you everyone who disagrees with my definition or my assertion is wrong.

Which is a roundabout way of saying that if you need to be doing those things, it’s because you aren’t doing what matters. And founders often come to me frustrated that investors won’t take their startup seriously… this is why.

Explaining the Importance of Information to a Company

A bit of what concerns me about society, our economy, is that this topic isn’t FAR more discussed.

HOW you explain the importance of information to a company is actually really simple, in my experience. You SHOW how information will impact the business.

I simply do this…

And then I ask…

What caused what happened at the first arrow?

What happened where the second arrow is pointing?

Overwhelmingly most of the time, companies have no answers.

I get dumbfounded looks.

And in turn, I can be a bit of a jerk… talking to the founder or executives of startups and companies, “what do you mean you don’t know?? How can you make any ethical or informed decisions about the business when all you can say to that is you don’t know?!?”

Too many consultants, articles, advisors, and even employees, get bogged down in trying to explain to a company the value of research, customer discovery, competitive analysis, interviews, surveys, etc. What you’re understandably asking is how we make companies appreciate why all that stuff matters.

The problem with focusing on things to do or investments that would have to be made to get the information, is that people naturally think, “what is the ROI of this budget you’re asking for to do that stuff?” Rather, you explain it by challenging the ignorance that already exists, in a way that hits the bottom line for the business.

See it?

“So… whatever happened at the first arrow, more than doubled attention on what we’re doing and an opportunity to capitalize on it. But you don’t know why, or care why, how, or how to repeat it?!?”

“And whatever happened to cause everything to fall through the floor, doesn’t matter to know.”

“Damn…. okay… good luck!”

My work is mostly with startups and investors so I don’t have a quick take on how to easily do that for Companies, but the approach is the same: Google Analytics for Startups —- Should take you about an hour to put all that in place. And there should be no excuse not to. If only so you can take the data to the company and ask, “what happened?”

Rand Announces Advanced SEO Analytics Engine Linkscape at SMX East

I’ve just seen the future of link analytics and it is SEOmoz. Perhaps the most engrossing and entertaining presentation at SMX East was Rand Fishkin’s introduction of Linkscape, an advanced link intelligence engine delivering rich data to website owners and SEOs regarding inlinks, related anchor text, trust, and rank.

SEOmoz has indexed over 200M domains to deliver extensive insight on who is linking to you and how. Can’t figure out how your competitors are ranking so well? Linkscape will report for you who is linking to THEM and the value each link provides to your competitors through innovative scores reporting, among other things, page rank (mozRank), trust (mozTrust), and aggregate domain strength (Domain Juice). More, they identify links that are nofollowed, embedded in images, or 301d.

Watching the presentation, I stood in awe of the work they’d done. Believe it or not though, I was even more overwhelmed when dawned on me, while watching Rand introduce Linkscape, that Zvents’ founder Tyler Kovaks must be an unknown Rand Fishkin relative.

*screeeeeech* What!?? What does that possibly have to do with such exciting news?
It is too hard to ignore!

Consider the most significant coincidences: Both are search entrepreneurs and leaders in their respective fields – One, local search, and the other, SEO. How could two guys so successfully involved with search and so follicly gifted not be related?!? I just can’t wrap my head around the possibility of anything but their being long lost brothers.

The resemblance is uncanny and certainly, a far less disturbing revelation than the SponsoredReviews.com, clearly failed, attempt to mate Rand with Todd Malicoat.

I have to ponder though (and we’re back to SEOmoz), indexing the web is a monumental task requiring countless servers and a high-end, scalable database to manage the ever changing index of results; let alone the complex, dynamic, meta data affecting the result set. Are they really investing so heavily in advanced search technology just to usher in a new era of SEO transparency? Sure, Linkscape users have to pay for the premium features but I’m not sure the revenue stream from a few SEOs will cover the investment. With such a comprehensive index, and with the brilliant minds behind SEOmoz developing complex algorithms to report things like mozTrust, could there not be a new search engine in our future? I for one say, ‘hmmmm.’

The Definitive Search Engine Result Comparison – An Investigative Report

I’ve received enough praise and criticism of my perspective on Ask’s new campaign that I felt compelled to do investigate the quality of each engine in more detail. As you can imagine, these results are completely biased, being scored alone by my opinion; nonetheless, I felt the experience worth sharing.

Within five groups of terms, selecting from a mix of themes to ensure as broad a comparison as possible (brand names, store names, product categories, services, and things to do), I have, by way of a highly scientific, proprietary research methodology, selected 2 keywords.   One that I consider popular online and the other less so to give a balance to the theme under investigation.

The top 3 results from each engine and a general review of the first page (SERP) are given a score on a scale of 1-10.  This score, of course, is also the result of highly confidential analytics.

The evaluation includes Google, Yahoo!, Ask, MSN (Live Search), and my usual favorite, del.icio.us, but only considers natural listings and engine features and benefits.  Paid results are not influencing the outcome.

Click here to skip the details and go to my results

  1. Brand Searches (Honda and Bubble Yum)
    • Honda
      • Google: (6) Prominently promotes Honda.com ignoring dealers, comparison options, reviews, or company information (i.e. history). In fact, almost the first page is really Honda.com.  Sublinks promote Autos, Motorcycles, ATVs, and Honda’s Jet (I’m sure that’s popular).  Second and third results repeat the sublinks with Honda’s Auto and Motorcycle sites prominently promoted.
      • Yahoo: (4) While I’m seeing more variety further down the page, the first three results are the same. Honda’s homepage (without the sublinks) while second, third (and forth) promote Autos.  Civic consumers are covered!
      • Ask: (5) A little selection with Honda.com, Autos, and Motorcycles.  No sublinks so not as much variety as Google but at least they don’t repeat the Autos content.  Forth is Toyota…. then Honda UK, Germany and their global website.  Then the well known Phoenix GWRRA.  Bonus points though for Ask’s binoculars which I haven’t given much consideration yet, the unique Ask feature is a nice way to quickly breeze through the SERP.
      • Live: (6) A leg up for variety throughout the page.  The first three are the same as the rest but following that are the variety of Honda product one gets from Google’s sublinks.  Unfortunate that they too seem to only promote Honda.com.
      • del.icio.us: (3) So much for my favorite.  I get the link to my favorite Honda commercial, Honda UK, another great commercial, and a cool but annoying site with popups and cleavage ads.
    • Bubble Yum
      • Google: (6) A good start stunted by over promotion of buying options (who buys gum online?).  The ever present Wikipedia link and an urban legends site make the top cut.  We get some history and
        lots of commerce.
      • Yahoo: (7) heh. Almost a mirror image of Google (perhaps I should ding them both for copying).  Wait… more variety down the page to keep me interested
      • Ask: (4) The history of bubble gum! Followed by a site that shouldn’t even break the top page and a bulk candy store.  Urban legends again (go snopes!) and our friends at Wiki.  Then the corporate links.
      • Live: (7) Some nice variety with the corporate page, online games featuring the gum, urban legends, and history.  Go Live.
      • del.icio.us: (4) Come on guys!  Bubble productivity software, online games, Bubble Tea, Chocolate Bubble Wrap
        (cool!). A link to the del.icio.us and slashdot homepages?!

Round 1 goes to Live with the greatest variety throughout the page.  Ask won some points for the binoculars while Google fared well for relevant links though suffered without variety.  Del.icio.us will make a come back with products, I’m sure!

  1. Stores (eBay and Ikea)
    • eBay
      • Google: (8) Could only get better with some eBay schemes and 3rd party tools.  Links to the most popular categories and Wiki as well as their developer platform and philanthropic work.
      • Yahoo: (5) They have the variety concept figured out but need some work with links to Italy, Australia, UK, France, Singapore…  A few interesting resources mixed in.
      • Ask: (6) The security center, community site, official eBay time (that’s helpful), Italian and UK sites.  The refinement features on the right get them a bonus point but the first SERP needs work.
      • Live: (7) Promotion of the site, motors, corporate information, affiliate programs, and finances are nice but we’re missing the variety of products.
      • del.icio.us: (6) Ebay.com, UK, Germany, and Australia (how can Search be considered relevant when they serve results from different countries?).  Some links about eBay, making money, and shopping services help.
    • Ikea
      • Google: (7) Not so nice this time Google but at least you kept the variety going.  Links to Ikea include countries and corporate services.  A game, blogs, and Wiki add to the mix.
      • Yahoo: (6) Yahoo must be pushing their international footprint, Malaysia, Perth (Australia), Spain, and Hong Kong make the cut.  News from 2004 and YouTube links contribute to the mix.
      • Ask: (8) Popular links are great with a store locator, new products, and decorators.  The rest of the content is attractive with the Wiki, entertaining blogs, and Fan sites that certainly appeal to Ikea shoppers
      • Live: (6) The results seem stunted with what feels like fewer on this first page (not the case just my impression).  The homepage, corporate site, and franchising information are nice variety specific to the company but that’s it.
      • del.icio.us: (6) Ikea hacker! (cool), ikea.com, 2 Swedish sites and one from Asia.  Links to an office and kitchen planner are nice.

My international shopping needs are well taken care of with Yahoo!  Google takes this one with variety and relevance (go Base!) though Live and Ask are right behind them.  Come on D!

  1. Products (digital cameras and tires)
    • digital cameras
      • Google: (5) A review site, a review site…. a review site… a shopping comparison site… hey! How Stuff Works, they’re always fun!
      • Yahoo: (9) This is how its done.  Links to brands, well known stores, comparison sites, review sites, and insights about digital cameras.
      • Ask: (7) Brownie points for ancillary benefits such as product reviews, news, and refinement links but the results themselves need help as they include information sites, a brand, second tier review sites, and small businesses.
      • Live: (6) Decent promotion of stores but we’re missing the brands.   I’m just not feeling it.  Sorry Microsoft.
      • del.icio.us: (7) Renewed my faith a little with the usual mix of strange links, this time adding value.  Some store and review sites as we need but also some innovative products, how to guides, and a professional blog
    • tires
      • Google: (7) First thought, who shops Tires online, right?  Discount Tire, Goodyear, TireRack, BFGoodrich, Dunlop, Yokohama, even the Wiki and How Stuff Works.  Probably the best results can get.
      • Yahoo: (9) Nope, Google wasn’t the best.  A couple tire stores, comparison sites (I went back up and dinged Google for not having these), different types of tires (I hadn’t thought of that, another ding to Google), and a nice Local feature at the top promoting stores in my vicinity.
      • Ask: (8) The results themselves remind me of Google but the refinement links on the right give them an edge
      • Live: (6) Local results are a nice touch but the results are deficient in the variety of tire brands and well known stores. Nothing informative except Wiki.
      • del.icio.us: (6) Its a score.  We’re on the board with some unique links including Tire Sandals, a YouTube video, a Tire size calculator, and links for Bike and ATV tires.  Of real value?  Only Tire Rack and Michelin.

Yahoo! does product search right (good thing too since I used to work in that group) but Ask is a great alternative.  Honorable mention to del.icio.us this time for having some interesting alternatives.

  1. Services (web design and house cleaning)
    • web design
      • Google: (6) A nice list that includes descriptive information, usability insights, templates, business directories, a few business listings, and coding resources.  Missing how to guides.
      • Yahoo: (7) Strikingly similar to Google but a longer list including a few more businesses.
      • Ask: (8) These are the best results for a DIY (do it yourself).  Tools, guides, resources, directories, and examples of good and bad design.
      • Live: (5) The top 2 links are helpful but value falls off after that.  Includes a link to Google UK (??)
      • del.icio.us: (7) Now we’re at talking.  Design examples, advanced and basic code support, style guides, courses, tools and resources.  Clearly caters to the DIY designer though as we’re missing businesses and directories.  
    • house cleaning
      • Google: (6) A nice list of well known house cleaning businesses and advice websites but house cleaning, unless I’m doing it myself, is an "offline," local business need and these results don’t support that. 
      • Yahoo: (7) Same quality as Google but more of them so a bonus point for volume.
      • Ask: (5) Short list of similar results, some actually for specific states so those are worthless.
      • Live: (4) The most unique results so far but a greater proportion of localized results with Atlanta, Massachusetts, Boulder taking up space.
      • del.icio.us: (6) The best results but specific to those that want to clean themselves.  No support for businesses or local services.

Ask and Yahoo! strike me as the best resources for services.  Perhaps a result of their capability with product search. del.icio.us made a strong showing here though for those that want to learn or do these things themselves; hands down winner for DIY-ers.

  1. Things to do (CES and Cats)
    • CES: Consumer Electronics Show
      • Google: (7) Good coverage of the show with sublinks to support different aspects of the conference.  A 404 error costs a point but they make up with it with CES news, information, and what appear to me to be other relevant "CES" results.
      • Yahoo: (8) Better coverage of the show and more prominent promotion of other "CES" choices.  Conference related links are a better selection of third party providers.
      • Ask: (4) The conference is here and otherwise I’m introduced to the North Carolina Coop and repeated promotion of Bill Gates.
      • Live: (5) Again the conference appears prominently followed by Microsoft self promotion of MSNBC and Microsoft.com.
      • del.icio.us: (5)  Specific to the Consumer Electronics Show with a number of links to 2006 content.
    • Cats: Musical
      • Google: (4) Felines.  The musical appears through a Wikipedia listing and Catsmusical.com but I’m not interested in house pets.  Ever heard of Citizens for an Alternative Tax System? Apparently, it is more popular than the Broadway musical.
      • Yahoo: (5) Tremendous variety of feline results (though not what I want, good score on that basis).  One for the musical coming in at 17th on the page.
      • Ask: (6) Wow. Didn’t expect that.  Some cat lovers at Ask.  Prominent promotion of cats with a photo, description, genome, taxonomy, etc.  All links are for feline enthusiasts save the last for the same Wiki link we’ve seen elsewhere.  
      • Live: (4) Our musical Wiki link makes it to the top otherwise we have images, videos, and a poor selection of cat sites.
      • del.icio.us: (10) Warning, Not where cat lovers should turn but I’ve had enough of the animals from the other engines that the highly popular cat humor found prominently here is a welcome change.

del.icio.us cat humor aside, it looks like Yahoo! wins; however, it is clear the general engines really only support significant, internationally marketed events while local shows and events are barely supported.  We’ll score del.icio.us a 4 on that last round as there really isn’t anything of value.

Natural Search Engine Result Quality

Sorted by theme:

  • Brands – MSN Live, Google, Yahoo, Ask, del.icio.us
  • Stores – Google, Ask, Live, del.icio.us, Yahoo
  • Products – Yahoo, Ask, del.icio.us, Tie: Google & Live
  • Services – Yahoo, Tie: Ask & del.icio.us, Google, Live
  • Things to do – Yahoo, Google, Tie: Ask & del.icio.us, Live

Rank ordered: Yahoo, Google, Ask, Live, del.icio.us

Other insights?

  1. Wikipedia shows up time and again (pay attention SEOs)
  2. Local needs will drive demand for vertical search as the big engines simply don’t support local business needs.  I’ll continue to turn to Yahoo! Local as a directory and for things to do,  local
    search
    with a company like Zvents.
  3. I imagine, to much surprise, that most flip-flopping between engines, when searchers can’t find what they want, likely occurs between Yahoo! and Google.  Save yourself time and headaches of digging through very similar results and
    alternate between Yahoo! or Google and one of the others.  Ask
    makes a strong choice.
  4. Engines are not the same. Which one is right for your particular search? Which is right for you as a marketer?
  5. All the fun links to share are at del.icio.us

Search Behavior and a Proxy Site (yes, its a full day!)

The holidays sure keep us busy don’t they!? I confess my recent intermittent posts are not a result of the busy season but attention to new research and my support of a couple remarkable blogs.

I anxiously await the results of a comprehensive study of online searcher behavior correlated with online activity and time spent, all categorized by product type. That’s a complicated way of saying I’ve asked comScore to study what people search for and when, and what websites they consult and when, by product. Too many studies today are generalized to address the needs and questions of as many people as possible; in the process those studies fail to answer any real questions. Consider the Biggest E-Retail Day in History (is anyone surprised?), the Growth in Holiday E-Commerce Spending Driven by More Online Buyers Who Spend More, and Cyber Santa Shopping Stats Sky High, so what? This research and insight sensationalizes the season with big numbers and record setting performance but fails to deliver anything of real value for your business. Your brand and products’ strengths are unique to your catalog such that what you do and where you advertise must be unique to your experience. I want to know how my customers search and where they spend their time before making a purchase so I can market to them in the right place with the right message at the right time.
Consider going even further with such questions when you ask them yourself. How are those behaviors different for customers who buy direct (from a manufacturer or publisher) or indirect (retailer) and online vs. offline. I assure you, someone who buys online uses search differently than their neighbor who intends to buy in a store.

While managing that study, I’ve also spent more time with ComparisonEngines.com, Loveyourfeed.com, and NaturalSearchBlog. As you may have caught on, I endeavor to consider myself well rounded with experience in various types of online marketing; though my blog name suggests a focus on SEO (rather, it is more accurately a play on Search Engine O’Brien not Search Engine Optimization O’Brien), you have found my waxing and waning through various topics. These 3 sites are best in class for their respective fields and I’ve been honored with contributing my thoughts so, from time to time, you will find me there discussing Comparison Shopping, datafeeds, and natural search in more detail as a guest writer or contributor.

NaturalSearchBlog is a walk through Search Marketing and Optimization started by Stephan Spencer and Brian Klais of Netconcepts (a web design and consulting company specializing in search optimization of web sites and applications) and later joined by Chris Smith of SuperPages.com. I’ve always found their content refreshing and of tremendous value in stretching your perspective of search. While the blog is valuable I do intend to take this opportunity to share something of real value to you, a product available from NetConcepts called GravityStream.

Consider that a good website is a tug of war between user experience, conversion, and PR with SEO while being dependent on your company’s resources. Sure you can accomplish both user experience and SEO but doing so with limited resources is much more difficult. The new Nike site is a great example of tremendous success in developing for the user experience and PR though it fails to support natural search engines. GravityStream replicates your website giving you a canvas with which to design (redesign) and write exclusively for search by creating a version of the site to be seen only by search engines. You can change URLs (normalize them), remove scripted navigation, and rewrite content and titles. It effectively takes the management of that content out of IT and web design resources (unless you want to keep it there) and puts it in your hands, marketing’s hands, the SEO. Check it out.