keyword competition, "inverted commas" ...

condra

I realize most surfers don't use "inverted commas". However, I'm wondering if people here ever have a look at the competition for their key-phrases within inverted commas, and whether they believe it is an important factor when looking for keywords/phrases.

In other words, do you think Google awards some extra kudos for having a phrase in the exact order it is typed, even when inverted commas are not used?

I'll give you an example: (these are not real world figures)

keyword phrase one (without inverted commas)- 200,000 results
"keyword phrase one" - 88 results

keyword phrase two (without inverted commas) - 50,000 results
"keyword phrase two" - 2200 results

So in the case above, would you be more inclined to target keyword phrase one because the competition is so low when typed within inverted commas, or keyword phrase two, because of the lower competition without inverted commas.

I hope this makes sense.
Thanks for any replies.

apocalypseDG

I think its vital to use quotation marks in some Google searches. It simply wouldn't be the same without them. I also sometimes use -( searches cant contain the word), +(searches must contain the word) and wildcards *, it can be anything e.g.

-wikipedia

means no wikipedia results

+boards

has to include boards in result

*km/h

has return a value in km/h

combos of symbols are also really helpful

smash

condra wrote: »

I realize most surfers don't use "inverted commas". However, I'm wondering if people here ever have a look at the competition for their key-phrases within inverted commas, and whether they believe it is an important factor when looking for keywords/phrases.

Using inverted commas in a google search just means you're looking for that exact phrase, without inverted commas google will search for all words in your search phrase so without them you're guaranteed to get more results.

link8r

I think you've all misread something!

Most users definitely do not use "" when searching.

What happens is that you're looking at AdWords. AdWords specifically treats these as operators for Search Matching.;

"used cars" will only match a search for {used cars} and also {"used cars"}

{used cars} will match anything that Google deems close enough, for example {second hand motors, cheap motors, vehicles for sale} - Broad matching.

The reason you see the search volume drop in AdWords is because you want an absolute match where the user used {used cars} in a search phrase like {used cars Limerick} will match {"used cars"} but {"used cars"} will not match {used motors Limerick}.

[used cars] will only ever match {used cars} and nothing else.

link8r

apocalypseDG wrote: »

I think its vital to use quotation marks in some Google searches. It simply wouldn't be the same without them. I also sometimes use -( searches cant contain the word), +(searches must contain the word) and wildcards *, it can be anything e.g.

-wikipedia

means no wikipedia results

+boards

has to include boards in result

*km/h

has return a value in km/h

combos of symbols are also really helpful

{Site:mydomain.com} returns only results from the domain {mydomain.com} which is handy if you're looking for something from boards.ie but Google is only showing the top 4/5 results.

link8r

condra wrote: »

I realize most surfers don't use "inverted commas". However, I'm wondering if people here ever have a look at the competition for their key-phrases within inverted commas, and whether they believe it is an important factor when looking for keywords/phrases.

No they don't but what you are looking at is AdWords Phrase Matching types, nothing to do with how users search. Yes it is crucial when researching KW and targeting them, as you rarely want broad matching.

condra wrote: »

In other words, do you think Google awards some extra kudos for having a phrase in the exact order it is typed, even when inverted commas are not used?

Extra Kudos to whom?

condra wrote: »

I'll give you an example: (these are not real world figures)

keyword phrase one (without inverted commas)- 200,000 results
"keyword phrase one" - 88 results

keyword phrase two (without inverted commas) - 50,000 results
"keyword phrase two" - 2200 results

smash

link8r wrote: »

I think you've all misread something!

I think you've misread something. Nobody mentioned adwords, he's talking about organic searches. Which is why I said "Using inverted commas in a google search just means you're looking for that exact phrase".

condra

link8r thanks for attempting to answer my question correctly.

I am aware of the Adwords tool, and I use it as part of my very detailed KW research, but Adwords Tool has nothing to do with my question.

My question is about the number of sites on the Google results page for any given phrase, in quotes, and without quotes.

I'll rephrase my question:

Let's say, "buy 3D software" (for example) turns up 3 million page results without quotes, that seems like a lot...
.... but then it only turns up 1000 page results when put in quotes.

My question is, when doing KW research, would the low competition of the quotes result page be a contributing factor for deciding to target that phrase.

In other words, do you think Google awards a certain amount of extra ranking to pages with an exact phrase, (as opposed to the same words in a different order), even when the user does NOT use quotes?

condra

smash wrote: »

I think you've misread something. Nobody mentioned adwords, he's talking about organic searches. Which is why I said "Using inverted commas in a google search just means you're looking for that exact phrase".

Correct, and I'm asking if a low number of competing sites for an exact phrase might be considered a positive thing when weighing up what keywords to target.

I believe the answer is "yes", but I'm interested to hear other peoples thoughts on the matter.

I know that George Brown (Google Sniper), and a number of other so called "gurus" consider the quote results as a significant indicator of "the real competition".

The assumption is not that people will search for your phrase using quotes, but that Google will consider your phrase more relevant than the same words in a different order, even when quotes are not used.

Thanks again for any replies

smash

condra wrote: »

In other words, do you think Google awards a certain amount of extra ranking to pages with an exact phrase, (as opposed to the same words in a different order), even when the user does NOT use quotes?

It awards a higher position to a site that has the exact phrase, with relevant content.

link8r

condra wrote: »

link8r thanks for attempting to answer my question correctly.

I am aware of the Adwords tool, and I use it as part of my very detailed KW research, but Adwords Tool has nothing to do with my question.

My question is about the number of sites on the Google results page for any given phrase, in quotes, and without quotes.

I'll rephrase my question:

Let's say, "buy 3D software" (for example) turns up 3 million page results without quotes, that seems like a lot...
.... but then it only turns up 1000 page results when put in quotes.

My question is, when doing KW research, would the low competition of the quotes result page be a contributing factor for deciding to target that phrase.

In other words, do you think Google awards a certain amount of extra ranking to pages with an exact phrase, (as opposed to the same words in a different order), even when the user does NOT use quotes?

The number returned isn't a count of domains (sites) but of pages. So there could be 1 billion pages over just 5000 sites....

Its definitely not accurate, its a snapshot number based on a calculation in order to keep the time between search button click and results displayed as low as possible

link8r

smash wrote: »

It awards a higher position to a site that has the exact phrase, with relevant content.

No it definitely doesn't !

link8r

condra wrote: »

In other words, do you think Google awards a certain amount of extra ranking to pages with an exact phrase, (as opposed to the same words in a different order), even when the user does NOT use quotes?

Google will read all words on a page as individual words. It also stores the distances and relationships of words on a page. So it builds a very large and spread out matrix of your page of individual words.

If you imagine a split process system:

The first process finds all pages with the keywords from that phrase in order. A second process also finds "related" (broader words) and appends them to the back of the list.

The results are then scored by Relevance (so if the search was "Motorbikes in Ireland"), then pages with close/similar proximity matches will be ranked in "Relevance Order"

Then the results are ranked by Geolocation and then by PageRank.

To test this, do a search for a phrase that returns a high number of pages. Then add in a keyword that matches a low (or 1 or less) number of pages (for example a brand or made up word or type). What you'll see is that the number of pages returned may not be 0 (even if one of you words doesn't exist, even if you use "" to exactly specify it).

Now, run those phrases from a different Google.ccTLD (e.g. UK) and note the rank order/change

Other ways to test this are to see how sites rank for Microsoft products from within local regions.

Relevance is not strong enough to be positioned highly.

condra

I believe, if all other things are even, Google would give the edge to the phrase as it is typed.

It's interesting that you guys disagree with each other on this, but we can probably agree to disagree.

Perhaps the number of competing pages in the search results is less relevant than the quality (page rank) of the top results.
I would rather target a phrase with 3 million results and crappy sites on page 1, than 1 million results but lots of PR-4 and PR-5 sites on page one.

link8r

condra wrote: »

I believe, if all other things are even, Google would give the edge to the phrase as it is typed.

It's interesting that you guys disagree with each other on this, but we can probably agree to disagree.

Perhaps the number of competing pages in the search results is less relevant than the quality (page rank) of the top results.
I would rather target a phrase with 3 million results and crappy sites on page 1, than 1 million results but lots of PR-4 and PR-5 sites on page one.

There's no need to disagree, this is a good theory but it's obviously wrong.

Here's why:

1. A Page can rank without any of the words even on the page
2. It assumes 1990's style SEO where you just stuffed keywords in and the frequency/order = the rank space - this is exactly what Google changed to become the number 1 SE
3. You're assuming that Google trusts you - it's a little more sceptical than that!

All things Equal = the chances of that happening are pretty nill. What you mean is, discounting off site SEO/Authority, we go back to onsite SEO (Library style indexing) - which is a pointless argument.

Onsite SEO makes up 12 definite factors and and quite a few unconfirmed/slightly nebulous ones.

Here's an example (bad but hey, it works)

"Microsoft Office Limerick" - the pages with the exact phrase match order in the page titles don't rank better than the site with higher Authority and actually, less relevance:

https://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=microsoft+office+limerick&oq=microsoft+office+limerick&aq=f&aqi=g-bK2&aql=&gs_l=serp.3..0i8i30l2.18868.20687.0.20810.15.10.0.4.4.0.66.503.10.10.0...0.0.oHchXLTDzlE

smash

link8r wrote: »

smash wrote: »

It awards a higher position to a site that has the exact phrase, with relevant content.

No it definitely doesn't !

All search engines these days read content more than key words. The content is the most important part!

condra

link8r, respectfully, I can't fully subscribe to everything you say.

Google free nuts samples and there are 308 million results.
Google nuts free samples and there are 21 million results.
The top result is the same for both searches, though the other results change dramatically.

If you Google virtual piano software, you get 8 million results but..
..if you Google software piano virtual, you get 52 million results.
Again, page one of the SERP is similar, but not quite the same. Different sites are ranking depending on the order you type your words.

Could this be less about the phrase order, and more about the first word of your search being considered more important? Even if that is the case, it still means phrase order has some significance, even when quotes are not used.

link8r

condra wrote: »

link8r, respectfully, I can't fully subscribe to everything you say.

Google free nuts samples and there are 308 million results.
Google nuts free samples and there are 21 million results.
The top result is the same for both searches, though the other results change dramatically.

If you Google virtual piano software, you get 8 million results but..
..if you Google software piano virtual, you get 52 million results.
Again, page one of the SERP is similar, but not quite the same. Different sites are ranking depending on the order you type your words.

Could this be less about the phrase order, and more about the first word of your search being considered more important? Even if that is the case, it still means phrase order has some significance, even when quotes are not used.

Definitely. The rank order is different too if you use a "z" instead of an "s" or an "S" instead of an "s" or without an "s"

Characters are handled as ASCII numbers by databases/software. An S is never an s even thought Google tries it's best to ignore them where it thinks it doesn't matter. But it still keeps Case and Spelling separate (In other words, it doesn't convert everything to lowercase for example).

When you sort through a list an apply authority and relevance, you will get different rank order. If you change the word order in the phrase, and the ranking calculations are made, there will be differences.

What I mean is that it's not the order of words on your page that affects how you rank but the relationship between your authority and your content.

Depending on the search you're doing, there may be other reasons for the rank order when you change the word order - such as anchor text, CTR history etc. Again, the "all things equal" scenario is almost impossible to create, so one can assume many factors.

For example the SERP's for "Mercedes Benz" and "Benz Mercedes" produced some weird differences!

condra

If Google place more importance on the first word in your search, why wouldn't they place more importance on the first words in page titles, h1s, etc?

I'm playing devils advocate here anyway.

I'm still going to take "quote results competition" into consideration, but the standard result is clearly more important when weighing up the chances of getting on the first page of Google with any given phrase.

link8r

condra wrote: »

If Google place more importance on the first word in your search, why wouldn't they place more importance on the first words in page titles, h1s, etc?.

2 things:

1. They are interested in the overall relevance of the KW to the page. Yes, a KW in a page title, H1, and body text would most likely indicate more relevance than if it was just in the page text.

2. You're assuming still that Google trusts the page on its own. I didn't say that the KW placement wasn't important, I'm pushing you to see that a page with enormous authority can be #1 without it being in the Page Title, H1 etc. There are many sites not built with any SEO in mind and rank well.

The page relevance rank order is pre-built. Google doesn't take your keyword and then find pages with the KW at the top left and order them by how far the word proximity is from the start.

Rather, and on a word by word level, every page is indexed by words it contains that Google cares about. So even if you have it, you may be indexed by one KW and not for another. So if your site has "Cheap" and "holidays" but Google doesn't think that "ryanair" is relevant, then you wont show for a search including all three.

This list of sites matching Keywords is then ordered by PageRank and the GeoLocation. Again, if you're trying to rank for the words above but Google thinks you're not relevant to Ireland then you'll rank very far back.

HTH

Chet Zar

link8r wrote: »

2 things:

1. They are interested in the overall relevance of the KW to the page. Yes, a KW in a page title, H1, and body text would most likely indicate more relevance than if it was just in the page text.

2. You're assuming still that Google trusts the page on its own. I didn't say that the KW placement wasn't important, I'm pushing you to see that a page with enormous authority can be #1 without it being in the Page Title, H1 etc. There are many sites not built with any SEO in mind and rank well.

The page relevance rank order is pre-built. Google doesn't take your keyword and then find pages with the KW at the top left and order them by how far the word proximity is from the start.

Rather, and on a word by word level, every page is indexed by words it contains that Google cares about. So even if you have it, you may be indexed by one KW and not for another. So if your site has "Cheap" and "holidays" but Google doesn't think that "ryanair" is relevant, then you wont show for a search including all three.

This list of sites matching Keywords is then ordered by PageRank and the GeoLocation. Again, if you're trying to rank for the words above but Google thinks you're not relevant to Ireland then you'll rank very far back.

HTH

Mm...not always though...

link8r

Chet Zar wrote: »

Mm...not always though...

Always. There may be a lot of instances (for example, a couple of years ago) where ["Accountants"{Ireland}] was largely made up of sites with 0 authority bar a couple of results. Thus, the only index left to Google was the library style (closest from the first characters in HTML)- just onsite optimisation.

Take the search for Failure. Even though Google, in an act of [American] national pride, modified their algorithm against the so called "Google Bomb".

However, the bio page for the 43rd President still ranks somewhere around 5, even from Ireland (you'd think we'd have enough pages in Ireland with "Failure" on it).

Ah, I hear you say, the wikpedia entry is #1. Yes but

1. Google intentionally modified it to be so
2. The word Failure isn't on the bio's snippet or page
3. There are ~498 million pages BEHIND a page, presumably most actually include it

QED.

Disclaimer: the number of pages reported in an index is a calculation. we had nothing to do with the above Google Bomb. Or George Bush. Or Failure.

Chet Zar

link8r wrote: »

Always. There may be a lot of instances (for example, a couple of years ago) where ["Accountants"{Ireland}] was largely made up of sites with 0 authority bar a couple of results. Thus, the only index left to Google was the library style (closest from the first characters in HTML)- just onsite optimisation.

Take the search for Failure. Even though Google, in an act of [American] national pride, modified their algorithm against the so called "Google Bomb".

However, the bio page for the 43rd President still ranks somewhere around 5, even from Ireland (you'd think we'd have enough pages in Ireland with "Failure" on it).

Ah, I hear you say, the wikpedia entry is #1. Yes but

1. Google intentionally modified it to be so
2. The word Failure isn't on the bio's snippet or page
3. There are ~498 million pages BEHIND a page, presumably most actually include it

QED.

Disclaimer: the number of pages reported in an index is a calculation. we had nothing to do with the above Google Bomb. Or George Bush. Or Failure.

I mean in terms of a site's relevance to location though. So let's say a search on 'tax consultants' from Ireland. You will get a bunch of Irish-based companies, but it doesn't mean you won't see a UK site in the mix with no ties to Ireland whatsoever..

link8r

Chet Zar wrote: »

I mean in terms of a site's relevance to location though. So let's say a search on 'tax consultants' from Ireland. You will get a bunch of Irish-based companies, but it doesn't mean you won't see a UK site in the mix with no ties to Ireland whatsoever..

Again, authority related. And if they happen to get Irish traffic, then they'll continue to be seen as Irish-related. What you think makes them related is another thing. But that's another matter.

Chet Zar

link8r wrote: »

Again, authority related. And if they happen to get Irish traffic, then they'll continue to be seen as Irish-related. What you think makes them related is another thing. But that's another matter.

Ah right...I thought you were saying that it would be impossible for say a .co.uk to not rank in high positions (i.e. far back) in Irish SERPs...

link8r

Chet Zar wrote: »

Ah right...I thought you were saying that it would be impossible for say a .co.uk to not rank in high positions (i.e. far back) in Irish SERPs...

I hadn't but I would say that - in some cases this is exactly the case!

Ireland has the web output of 4.2 million people (or thereabouts). The UK has much more potential, whether it does or not, to the tun of 60+ million. The UK Revenue site quite often outranks the Irish one in {Pages from Ireland} searches, even for words like P45 (which is common to both) - at least it used to - its probably getting better.

Chet Zar

link8r wrote: »

I hadn't but I would say that - in some cases this is exactly the case!

Ireland has the web output of 4.2 million people (or thereabouts). The UK has much more potential, whether it does or not, to the tun of 60+ million. The UK Revenue site quite often outranks the Irish one in {Pages from Ireland} searches, even for words like P45 (which is common to both) - at least it used to - its probably getting better.

Doh! I meant to write 'I thought you were saying that it would be impossible for say a .co.uk to not rank in high positions (i.e. far back) in Irish SERPs...'

As in - of course sites with very little/no reference to Ireland can still rank in Irish search results!

Haven't had my morning coffee yet

link8r

Chet Zar wrote: »

Doh! I meant to write 'I thought you were saying that it would be impossible for say a .co.uk to not rank in high positions (i.e. far back) in Irish SERPs...'

As in - of course sites with very little/no reference to Ireland can still rank in Irish search results!

Haven't had my morning coffee yet

WE all do that - hence why pencils have erasers and keyboards have 2 delete buttons :P