And it’s refreshing to finally see at least one of the online media players in oz keeping their ego in check. The Sydney Morning Herald states it as Sensis admitting defeat to Google, since Whereis.com.au (part of Sensis) directly competes with Google Maps in Australia. Maybe to a certain extent, but the deal will drive more relevant traffic to Yellow Online, benefiting the businesses listed on the site. This contributes to the brand of Yellow Pages, and put more money in Sensis’ pocket. That’s surely a win for them.

A ‘truly local’ business listing

The move made by Sensis may not be so crash hot for competitor True Local though, who also runs business listings through Google Maps. True Local (owned by News Digital Media) may have the advantage of time, with some of its listings already rich with reviews and user content on Google Maps. One example is its listing for Tetsuya’s Restaurant, which turns up as the most relevant listing when you search for ‘restaurant in Sydney’:

But with a more extensive list of businesses in its ammunition, Yellow Pages Online will cover the bases where True Local doesn’t. While it’s still early days, it won’t be hard for Sensis to dominate space on Google Maps if they get the strategy right. Suit up, True Local; play time is over!

Implications for local companies, online business directories, & SEO firms

Greater competition in the online space for listing directories is good news for local businesses. It means an extra outlet of exposure for companies listed on Yellow Online. It will also mean better product offerings and innovation from other online commercial directories.

This also has implications on the SEO front. Optimising local business listings for Google Maps will now require more effort, more expertise, and more opportunities for respectable SEO firms.

Happy Melbourne Cup day!

When I first became aware of the scam on August 2, I noticed the website, www.bejingticketing.com was ranked 4th for the term “olympics tickets” on Google.

After all of the free PR and the buzz created from the scam becoming public and more importantly the hundred of new links from media sites published around the world, the website jumped to the #2 spot a few days later. Thankfully the site has been taken down, but not before the damage was already done.

From the first moment I saw the website it was clear very that SEO had been utilised to gain traction in search engines such as Google. The combination of highly targeted content and a professional design was a clear giveaway why it ranked so well and milked hundreds of people around the world out of their hard earned dollars.

By using and repeating keywords focused around tickets for the various sports and Olympic ceremonies throughout the content, Meta Title and navigation, it’s easy to see that SEO formed the base of their marketing strategy from the beginning. These guys knew what they were doing and utilised SEO and links from other websites to drive traffic to their website.

So who’s to blame? The scammers, the consumers for their lack of homework, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the Beijing Olympics Committee (BOC) for not policing their own brands or Google for sending their customers to the site?

Of course the real culprits are the criminals who took people’s money without providing the product. But I also believe, The IOC and BOC have to take some responsibility for not policing their own brands and trademarks. In an age where tools exist to keep track of where a brand is being used online the IOC and BOC could have identified the website sooner and dealt with it accordingly.

While it’s easy to calculate the consumer loss, the damage done to the IOC’s and BOC’s brand is another story and ultimately very difficult to determine. Of course the IOC has overcome worse situations such as drug cheats, vote buying and corrupt officials so weathering this latest fiasco should be a breeze.

However, if the same situation was applied to a well know business brand, the consequences could be devastating for the business if not dealt with appropriately. Today, tools such as Adgooroo’s Trademark Insight and services such as Online Reputation Management can be used to keep a close eye on a brand or trademark and companies can learn firsthand what consumers or scammers are saying immediately rather than waiting until it gets out of control.

Blaming the consumer for not purchasing tickets from an official ticketing source is no longer the answer.

• Nothing can be done’ for Olympic ticket scam victims - ABC Online
• British fraud ran Beijing ticket scam - The Age
• Beijing Games hit by Internet ticket scam - Reuters

And then there’s this demo of what your Wii Remote can do for you (complements of Johnny Chung Lee). Enjoy!

A usable CMS will:

• minimise the number of options
• be robust and error-proof
• provide task-based interfaces
• hide implementation details
• meet core usability guidelines
• match authors’ mental models
• support both frequent and infrequent users
• provide efficient user interfaces
• provide help and instructions
• minimise training required
• support self-sufficiency

While reading through his article I found myself nodding in agreement and more surprisingly thinking that we’ve come pretty close in meeting these principles with our own CMS. While we didn’t start out with these exact principles in mind prior to development, it’s clear our own frustrations dealing with a combination of usability and technical issues across a number of CMS platforms led us to develop a CMS that is closely aligned with these same principles. In many respects it’s a little scary how close we’ve come.

Now, as the owner of a CMS, it’s easy to start believing your own sales hype and get carried away. However, our own research and more importantly, feedback from users support many of these principles.

I hope to meet James from Step Two Designs soon and get his feedback on our CMS to see if he agrees. I’ll report on his findings here in the near future.

Here’s a favourite Splash Page of mine - Ginko Gardens

Splash Pages – Counter to ‘Usability’ and SEO best practice?

Much like hard copy brochure covers, splash pages typically contain very little content. Instead what you find is Flash animation, a striking image, a fancy tag line or a brief intro spiel advertising what the site is about. Throw in a logo, a keyword optimised footer and you’re done!

From a user’s perspective, splash pages are just one more click to make to get to the content they’re after. So they’re a big waste of time.

Splash Pages = Low Exit Rates

For website designers and online marketers, splash pages aren’t necessarily all bad news. For one thing, they can load pretty quickly (which given Google’s recent pronouncements is good news) and they usually offer a low exit rate.

Assuming few users leave the splash page and pursue their journey further into a website, that could have some SEO benefit. Search engines are known to value positively websites with low exit rates on their top web pages…

Is Google encouraging the return of the Splash Page?

So could Google’s latest pronouncement in favour of fast load times further encourage the use of splash pages? And doesn’t that run counter to usability best practice?

Imagine the web populated by useless splash pages. They would no longer contain Flash (as Flash increases load times), but they would be extremely content light to upload fast and would likely require users to click on to get to the content they’re after.

With savvy web marketers around… That scenario is not so hard to imagine.

Your thoughts?