Google’s Big Brand Bump Bailout
Welcome back! Good to see you. If you haven't seen it, here's the archive of my best writing. Thanks for visiting!
I microblog now more than I blog at Twitter.com/stuntdubl
Feel free to drop me a line sometime or subscribe in case I ever post again.
Recent logic suggests if banks aren’t good at managing money, but they’re big, we should give them more money. If a car company, doesn’t make very good cars (but they’re big), they should get more money. It looks like Google is following suit on the big brand bailout, by offering up better results to those bigger brands.
Now we’ve always known that big brands get treated a bit differently, and can embrace a bit more aggressive strategy, but now they get a “branding bump bailout”? Hardly seems fair. It seems like adwords wasn’t enough though - that big brands are now able to rank easily for their generic terms. Big brands seem to suck at search engine optimization. I guess it follows the current American way that we should give them more search traffic.
More on the Big Brand Bump Bailout:
- Sphinn discussion
- Is google giving more brand authority in the serps? - WMW
- Aaron on Google’s branding changes
- Lisa’s outspoken about brands
I think the most important questions were asked by Michael Gray (of Wolf-Howl SEO) and Marty Weintraub (Aimclear Marketing) - What are the signals associated with determining brand dominance over a generic keyword? (IE - How can *I* get a big brand bump bailout too?:)
