As more and more companies strive for a top ten ranking in Google, it is increasingly difficult to achieve. This is especially true for small businesses that simply do not have the budget for a link popularity campaign. But hope may be just around the corner. If the top ten ranking keywords principal has been to dodge, read on!

Google manipulates the results

Google is testing an "improvement" in the way that shows their results. Instead of showing the top ten results of the exact words you enter in the trial Google suggests three related results that you may want to see. Where do you display these suggestions? It shunts (or replaces) results 6, 7 and 8!

In this article, I refer to these results as "intruders."

To see some 'intruder' results in action, search for "piggy bank". Results 6, 7 and 8 are actually 'intruder' results, are the three best results for more specific, less popular search, "piggy bank bills." Google assumes that people looking for "piggy bank" will probably be interested in the results of a search for "piggy bank bills."

On first impression, it is tempting to think that this makes it harder to enter the top ten (because now is really the first seven, and the last two results can be easily overlooked). But what really can make it easier - especially for small businesses. Let me explain why ...

The advantage for small businesses

It comes down to who can qualify in the top ten most popular searches - like "computers", "Cars", "doctor", "pets", etc. For any of these industries, a top ten ranking for these keywords is the holy grail. Unfortunately, these types of searches are currently dominated by large corporations with strong search budgets. Most smaller companies do not even try to compete. Instead of focusing on these hotly contested keywords, small businesses tend to focus on keyword phrases more specific - like "Boston teams," "cars in Ohio," "woman doctor in New England" "discount pets for children", etc.

But the trial of Google can change that. Remember, it's replacing results 6, 7 and 8 of a popular search, wide, with outcomes 1, 2 and 3 of the least popular search more specific. If the test becomes a standard feature, a search for "computers" could include the results of three 'intruder' from a search like "computers in Boston." As mentioned above, the results of 6, 7 and 8 is likely to belong to large companies, whereas results 1, 2 and 3 of the search more specific is more likely to belong to smaller companies. Therefore, when the switch occurs, it is with the great and the small!

In principle, the improvement seems to work for small businesses:

1. Big business dominates popular / general search results
2. Smaller companies have a greater chance of dominating the search results less popular / more specific
3. General search results are replaced by specific search results
4. Large companies deviate from the top ten of the smaller firms

Now I understand what you are saying: "Why not just big companies start to optimize your searches more specific" Of course, this is a possibility, but for most large companies, would be a monumental task. Large companies tend to service a large geographic region, and usually offer numerous products and services. Even with a strong budget search was extended to the limit if necessary to support the optimization of every product, every service, and each location. And this is what it takes to master all the more specific results, which can retrieve the number 6, 7 or 8 positions. It is much more likely to simply going to work harder for a place in the top 5 most popular search / general. This approach would be less complex and probably more rewarding.

The small print

Of course, where Google is involved, nothing is that simple. I've simplified things above to make the test a little easier to understand. In fact, the situation is somewhat more complex due to the way Google decides that the search results of the three 'intruder' home. Take the "piggy bank" search, for example. Google assumes that most users looking for "piggy bank" will also be interested in the results of a search for "piggy bank bills." This assumption is based on the fact that thousands of people are looking specifically for "piggy bank bills" - in fact, is one of the most popular searches containing the original term "piggy bank". And that is why we get the nod.

In other words, the results from intrusion of most popular searches (less popular than the original but still very popular). This means that you already have to first put on a very popular search before it had become an outsider. So, in fact, over the "computer" example is a bit simplistic, the results of intruders to "team" is more likely that a search for something like "IBM computers". In fact, the top three results for "computer peripherals boston" is more likely to appear as intruders in a "computer peripherals" search.

Conclusion

The important thing to remember is that if this trial becomes a standard feature, which will take place in all searches. The more specific the original search, the easier it would become an intruder in that search. In theory, it has great potential to help small businesses reach the next rung on the ladder of search engines.