<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Insight &#187; Google</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/tag/google/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog</link>
	<description>Thoughts, Opinions and General Musings from the Brilliant Folks at Key Web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 22:07:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Do we REALLY need a website?</title>
		<link>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2011/08/do-we-really-need-a-website/</link>
		<comments>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2011/08/do-we-really-need-a-website/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 13:16:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jim Thomas</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine optimization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web design]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/?p=1067</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As technology continues to infuse itself into every aspect of our daily lives, the need to keep up with the way people are using this technology is becoming more and more important.   10 years ago, only 34 million people in the U.S. had a cell phone.  Today, a cell phone is a MUST with [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-1068" title="iStock_000012639594XSmall" src="http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/iStock_000012639594XSmall.jpg" alt="" width="377" height="318" /></p>
<p>As technology continues to infuse itself into every aspect of our daily lives, the need to keep up with the way people are using this technology is becoming more and more important.   10 years ago, only 34 million people in the U.S. had a cell phone.  Today, a cell phone is a MUST with over 310 Million people depending on these devices to keep in contact  with loved ones and business associates.  <em> My 12 year old assures me that he must be the only middle school student that does not have a phone!</em></p>
<p>In the same respect, while websites were not uncommon 7-10 years ago, it was rare to see  many Mom &amp; Pop businesses jumping at the opportunity to get their business online.   The Yellow Pages was still the best way to reach their target market.</p>
<p><em><strong>Fast forward to 2011</strong></em>.  The Yellow Pages is dying.  Direct Mail is on the decline.  Smart Phones &amp; iPads are commonplace in business as well as the residential market.  People no longer ask you to &#8220;mail a brochure.&#8221;  They ask for your web address.</p>
<p>While a large percentage of business owners still don&#8217;t know how it all works&#8230; they know that their target market has changed the way they search for products and services.  A comment we hear quite often is:  &#8221; I don&#8217;t know what it involves&#8230; I just know I need to get my business on the internet!&#8221;</p>
<p>As many have learned, getting on the internet is only the first step.  It&#8217;s not as easy as just grabbing a domain and throwing up a few pages through a free site-builder.  There often is a false impression that thousands of people will start flooding to their website just because it exists.  Without proper design and good search engine optimization, people quickly realize the old adage &#8220;You get what you pay for&#8221; rings true in website design as well.</p>
<p>Your website is your new storefront to the world!  Finding someone that can help build one that will inspire confidence and be easily found on search engines is critical.</p>
<p>Give us a call and schedule a free consultation so we can better educate you on &#8220;how it all works.&#8221;   Let us help you do it RIGHT.. the first time!</p>
<p>Jim Thomas<br />
President<br />
Key Web Concepts, Inc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2011/08/do-we-really-need-a-website/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Can&#8217;t You Guarantee My Site Will Be #1 in Search Results?</title>
		<link>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2010/10/why-cant-you-guarantee-my-site-will-be-1-in-search-results/</link>
		<comments>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2010/10/why-cant-you-guarantee-my-site-will-be-1-in-search-results/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 21:03:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shannon Sullivan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SEO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ranking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine optimization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/?p=759</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As an SEO [search engine optimizer], how can I explain to clients that #1 rankings can’t be guaranteed? 

Here are 4 things to tell clients to help them better understand search engine optimization and why rankings can't be guaranteed. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/a6zGjcf6Snw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&amp;color1=0x2b405b&amp;color2=0x6b8ab6"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/a6zGjcf6Snw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&amp;color1=0x2b405b&amp;color2=0x6b8ab6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object></p>
<p>In this <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6zGjcf6Snw" target="_blank">Webmaster Video</a> from October 19th, <a href="http://twitter.com/mattcutts" target="_blank">Matt Cutts</a> from Google&#8217;s Web Spam team addresses a burning question: </p>
<h3>As an SEO [search engine optimizer], how can I explain to clients that #1 rankings can&#8217;t be guaranteed?</h3>
<p>This is an issue that SEO firms and consultants routinely face. A client wants to land a great position for his or her website&#8230;but how do you tell that person you can&#8217;t promise them a certain result? Or that being #1 may not be the best course of action? You don&#8217;t want people to think you can&#8217;t do your job, but you don&#8217;t want them to leave with false hope or unrealistic expectations. </p>
<p>Matt offers some great insights that you can share with your clients to help them better understand search engine optimization and why rankings can&#8217;t be guaranteed. </p>
<h2>1. Google Says No Way, No How</h2>
<p>Google has an <a href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35291" target="_blank">SEO help article</a> in Webmaster Tools that gives it to you straight: </p>
<p><strong>&#8220;No one can guarantee a #1 ranking on Google.&#8221;</strong></p>
<p>The article goes on, stating: &#8220;Beware of SEOs that claim to guarantee rankings, allege a &#8216;special relationship&#8217; with Google or advertise a &#8216;priority submit&#8217; to Google.&#8221;</p>
<p>In short: if an SEO promises you&#8217;ll be #1 or claims to be Google&#8217;s best friend, he or she is lying, and your best bet would be to run for the hills. (But not before you call them out on their shameless fibs!) </p>
<h2>2. Being #1 May Not Be The Best Thing For You</h2>
<p><strong>Ranking #1 for a search phrase or keyword might not bring you the web traffic or customers you truly need.</strong></p>
<p>Matt&#8217;s example is a plumber. Showing up #1 on Google for &#8220;plumber&#8221; wouldn&#8217;t be very helpful because you&#8217;d end up fielding calls from people all over the U.S. and across the globe, people who are not in your service area. You&#8217;d be much better served by having your website show up if someone searches &#8220;plumber in Sunnyvale California.&#8221; <strong>You want to make sure that you target a relevant audience</strong>. </p>
<h2>3. Promises Lead to Deceptive Tactics</h2>
<p><strong>Sometimes, SEOs will deliver on their promise. They&#8217;ll make you #1 alright . . . but for something totally bogus and completely irrelevant. </strong></p>
<p>Matt points out that it would be very easy to rank a website for a really long phrase like &#8220;change my default printer on Firefox using Linux Ubuntu.&#8221; Very few people (if any!) would use that phrase, so there&#8217;s not a lot of competition. You&#8217;re capitalizing on phrases that the everyday person isn&#8217;t very familiar with. </p>
<p>When an SEO firm promises that you&#8217;ll be #1, what that usually means is you&#8217;ll show up #1 for obscure terms and strange phrases that no one really uses.</p>
<h2>4. Relevance + Quality > Being #1</h2>
<p>A lot of times, people get caught up in the glow of being #1. They don&#8217;t stop to think, &#8220;Are these the words I want to rank for?&#8221; </p>
<p>Matt explains that ranking #3, #4 or #5 far outweighs ranking #1 if your website is showing up for a phrase that: </p>
<ul>
<li>converts well; </li>
<li>gets a reasonable amount of traffic; and</li>
<li>is relatively targeted to what you&#8217;re interested in.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Moral of the story: Don&#8217;t obsess about ranking #1</strong> . . . especially if it&#8217;s for a phrase that isn&#8217;t very useful and doesn&#8217;t help you achieve your goals. Instead, go after results that &#8220;stand the test of time.&#8221;  In the long run, being #3 could benefit you in more ways than #1 ever could. </p>
<p><strong>Ultimately, quality traffic for relevant terms is what your focus should be.</strong></p>
<p>Shannon<br />
Director of Internet Marketing </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2010/10/why-cant-you-guarantee-my-site-will-be-1-in-search-results/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#039;Tis the Season to &#8230; Shorten URLs</title>
		<link>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/tis-the-season-to-shorten-urls/</link>
		<comments>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/tis-the-season-to-shorten-urls/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shannon Sullivan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LinkedIn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[url shortener]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[youtube]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keywebconcepts.com/blog/?p=203</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[December turned out to be a big month in the world of URL shortening services. With the rise in the use of Tweets and status updates came the popularity of URL shorteners. With the message length limits in place on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and the like, every character matters. As their name implies, URL shorteners [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>December turned out to be a big month in the world of URL shortening services.  With the rise in the use of Tweets and status updates came the popularity of URL shorteners.  With the message length limits in place on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and the like, every character matters.  As their name implies, URL shorteners take a long link that you supply and generate a shorter URL for you to share in its place. The link still takes you to the original source, while leaving you more room to talk about what you’ve found and want to share.</p>
<p>Some of the services that were already around include <a href="http://bit.ly " target="_blank">bit.ly</a>, <a href="http://tinyurl.com" target="_blank">tinyurl.com</a>, <a href="http://ow.ly " target="_blank">ow.ly</a> and <a href="http://is.gd" target="_blank">is.gd</a>.</p>
<p>Now, other recognizable names are getting in on the act too.  Facebook and Google both announced this month that they have their own URL shortening services (<a href="http://mashable.com/2009/12/14/fb-me/ " target="_blank">fb.me </a>and<a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/making-urls-shorter-for-google-toolbar.html " target="_blank"> goo.gl</a>, respectively).  YouTube also has added the service for sharing shorter video links (they start with <a href="http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/091221-234852?utm_source=twitterfeed&amp;utm_medium=twitter&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sewblog+%28Search+Engine+Watch+Blog%29&amp;utm_content=Twitter " target="_blank">youtu.be</a>).</p>
<p>Who do you think will be the next one to add their URL shortening service to the mix? Or is this all a passing fad?</p>
<p>Shannon<br />
New Media &amp; SEO Specialist, Copywriter<br />
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts</a><br />
<a href="http://twitter.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/keywebconcepts</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/tis-the-season-to-shorten-urls/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nielsen: Bing Increases Search Share in November</title>
		<link>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/nielsen-bing-increases-search-share-in-november/</link>
		<comments>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/nielsen-bing-increases-search-share-in-november/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:49:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shannon Sullivan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SEO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[usage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keywebconcepts.com/blog/?p=183</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nielsen Wire has also releases its figures for search share for November 2009. While Experian showed that Google had a slight increase in its share from October to November, Nielsen shows that Google dropped, and that it was Bing that increased its search share. Below are some highlights of the data from Nielsen Wire&#8217;s November [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nielsen Wire has also releases its figures for search share for November 2009.  While <a href="http://keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/18/search-engine-stats-search-share-november-2009/" target="_blank">Experian </a>showed that Google had a slight increase in its share from October to November, Nielsen shows that Google dropped, and that it was Bing that increased its search share.</p>
<p>Below are some highlights of the data from Nielsen Wire&#8217;s November article, as well as a comparison of October&#8217;s and November&#8217;s numbers.<br />
<center><br />
<table border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>Search Engine</strong></td>
<td><strong>Share of Searches<br />
</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Google</td>
<td>65.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Yahoo</td>
<td>15.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Bing</td>
<td>10.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Source: <a href="http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/top-u-s-online-search-providers-november-2009/" target="_blank">Nielsen Wire</a></em></center><br />
<center><br />
<table border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>Search Engine</strong></td>
<td><strong>October 2009</strong></td>
<td><strong>November 2009</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Google</td>
<td>66.1%</td>
<td>65.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Yahoo</td>
<td>15.4%</td>
<td>15.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Bing</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
<td>10.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Source: Nielsen Wire</em> &#8211; <a href="http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/top-u-s-online-search-providers-october-2009" target="_blank">October 2009</a>, <a href="http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/top-u-s-online-search-providers-november-2009/" target="_blank">November 2009</a></center><br />
Shannon<br />
New Media &#038; SEO Specialist, Copywriter<br />
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts</a><br />
<a href="http://twitter.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/keywebconcepts</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/nielsen-bing-increases-search-share-in-november/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Search Engine Stats &#8211; Search Share November 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/search-engine-stats-search-share-november-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/search-engine-stats-search-share-november-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:05:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shannon Sullivan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SEO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[usage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keywebconcepts.com/blog/?p=173</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Experian Hitwise released its stats on search share for November 2009 earlier this month. According to their article, Google&#8217;s search share increased from October to November, but Bing and Yahoo each decreased. Ask.com also saw an increase. Search Engine Share of Searches Google 71.57% Yahoo 15.39% Bing 9.34% Ask 2.65% Source: Experian Hitwise Search Engine [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Experian Hitwise released its stats on search share for November 2009 earlier this month.  According to their article, Google&#8217;s search share increased from October to November, but Bing and Yahoo each decreased.  Ask.com also saw an increase.<br />
<center><br />
<table border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>Search Engine</strong></td>
<td><strong>Share of Searches<br />
</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Google</td>
<td>71.57%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Yahoo</td>
<td>15.39%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Bing</td>
<td>9.34%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ask</td>
<td>2.65%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Source: <a href="http://www.hitwise.com/us/press-center/press-releases/google-searches-nov-09/" target="_blank">Experian Hitwise</a></em></center><br />
<center><br />
<table border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>Search Engine</strong></td>
<td><strong>October 2009</strong></td>
<td><strong>November 2009</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Google</td>
<td>70.60%</td>
<td>71.57%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Yahoo</td>
<td>16.14%</td>
<td>15.39%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Bing</td>
<td>9.57%</td>
<td>9.34%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ask</td>
<td>2.62%</td>
<td>2.65%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Source: <a href="http://www.hitwise.com/us/press-center/press-releases/google-searches-nov-09/" target="_blank">Experian Hitwise</a></em></center><br />
Shannon<br />
New Media &#038; SEO Specialist, Copywriter<br />
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts</a><br />
<a href="http://twitter.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/keywebconcepts</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/12/search-engine-stats-search-share-november-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MORE Search Share Stats for October 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/11/more-search-share-stats-for-october-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/11/more-search-share-stats-for-october-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shannon Sullivan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SEO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[usage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keywebconcepts.com/blog/?p=132</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week, I shared some statistics about search share for October from Experian Hitwise. Nielsen Wire also has stats to share, with a new blog post about online search providers.  They too put Google at the top, with the biggest percentage of searches, while Yahoo and Bing still fall second and third, respectively. Search Engine [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last week, I shared some statistics about <a href="http://keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/11/13/search-share-stats-for-october-2009/" target="_blank">search share</a> for October from Experian Hitwise. <a href="http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/top-u-s-online-search-providers-october-2009" target="_blank">Nielsen Wire</a> also has stats to share, with a new blog post about online search providers.  They too put Google at the top, with the biggest percentage of searches, while Yahoo and Bing still fall second and third, respectively.<br />
<center><br />
<table border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>Search Engine</strong></td>
<td><strong>Share of Searches<br />
</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Google</td>
<td>66.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Yahoo</td>
<td>15.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Bing</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ask</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Excerpts from Nielsen Wire</em></center></p>
<p>But while Experian Hitwise reported that Google&#8217;s and Yahoo&#8217;s percentages fell, and Bing&#8217;s search share increased, <a href="http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/091112-143241?utm_medium=twitter&amp;utm_source=twitterfeed" target="_blank">Nielsen</a> tells a story that&#8217;s a bit different. Google gained 2% , and it was Yahoo and Bing that each lost a point.</p>
<p>Shannon<br />
New Media &amp; SEO Specialist, Copywriter<br />
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts</a><br />
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/keywebconcepts</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/11/more-search-share-stats-for-october-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Search Share Stats for October 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/11/search-share-stats-for-october-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/11/search-share-stats-for-october-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:37:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shannon Sullivan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SEO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keywebconcepts.com/blog/?p=111</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent press release, Experian Hitwise outlined how the major search engines stack up as far as searches in the U.S. go. In the month of October, Google was the clear winner, accounting for close to 71% of all searches in the States.  Yahoo was next at 16.14%, and Bing received 9.57% of searches. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a recent press release, <a href="http://www.hitwise.com/us/press-center/press-releases/google-searches-oct-09/" target="_blank">Experian Hitwise</a> outlined how the major search engines stack up as far as searches in the U.S. go.</p>
<p>In the month of October, Google was the clear winner, accounting for close to 71% of all searches in the States.  Yahoo was next at 16.14%, and Bing received 9.57% of searches.<br />
<center><br />
<table border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>Search Engine</strong></td>
<td><strong>Share of Searches</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Google</td>
<td>70.60%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Yahoo</td>
<td>16.14%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Bing</td>
<td>9.57%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ask</td>
<td>2.62%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Data from Experian Hitwise</em></center></p>
<p>Also according to the article, Google&#8217;s and Yahoo&#8217;s search share dropped slightly from September to October, each losing about 1%.  Bing&#8217;s searches, however, grew about 7%.</p>
<p>What do you think &#8211; will Google&#8217;s dominance in search ever end? Will Bing ever pose a bigger threat to Google?</p>
<p>Shannon<br />
New Media &amp; SEO Specialist, Copywriter<br />
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts</a><br />
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/keywebconcepts" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/keywebconcepts</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.keywebconcepts.com/blog/2009/11/search-share-stats-for-october-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

