Table of Contents
Ahh, the good old days. Online marketing used to be so much simpler.
I have fond memories of clean websites with proper structure. I remember when assigned
keywords on the right pages complemented branding campaigns that could rank effortlessly in the SERPS. Oh how times have changed.
Today, the current state of our industry offers a stark contrast to those straightforward beginnings. Yes, times do change, but some of the latest updates have created a cause for genuine concern amongst my clients who wonder what the future holds. Could recent ‘advancements’ in online marketing potentially have a negative impact on our business?
In the past year, Google has added countless new ‘features’ designed to enhance the user experience. Google decided these features are necessary for the future of its platform, but along the way, managing a website is becoming more complex for SEO’s and more expensive for businesses to implement.
As Google continues to roll out changes through the years, it’s easy to be blinded by expectations. The industry simply follows and quickly implements Google’s suggestions. Meanwhile, we ignore that these “new features” offer a quick pat on the back (like CTR boost or higher rankings) while allowing Google to use our content and branding to help create a “pay to play” model within its search engine and platforms.
Is our inability to see past the Google “Gospel” allowing Google free reign to force its own regulations on us while manually choosing which sites should rank on top of the SERPS?
Digging Deeper in Search of Answers
Prompted by concerns from my own clients in the drug rehab and restaurant vertices (whom I believe to be particularly vulnerable to these changes), I recently dug a little deeper into the current SEO situation and discovered that some “features” in the SERPS are clearly having a negative impact on free organic traffic.
It appears that Google’s promise to provide the best results for its users may, in reality, be providing the best PAID results for its users.
Could it be that Google’s current SEO structure and strategy is creating a money grab?
I believe there is cause for concern. So let’s take a closer look at some findings based on my SEO work with drug rehabilitation centers and restaurants
Example 1 – Drug Rehabilitation Centers
The drug rehab industry is a confusing and a unregulated market. A fluctuation of rehab facilities owned by investor firms is causing a stir with insurance companies — resulting in massive costs for online advertising. Meanwhile, Google’s most recent regulations for paid advertising in this competitive market has weakened many of the “certified facilities”, rendering them unable to make sufficient changes needed to overcome these issues.
After seeing an abundance of deceptive and misleading ads for unregulated drug rehab services, Google and Facebook now require mandatory “certification” for any drug rehab that wishes to participate in any form of paid advertising services within their platforms.
Even though these certifications are approved and vetted by the National Association of Addiction and Treatment Providers and the National Center of Addiction and Substance Abuse, the cost for certification is steep.
Following is a screenshot from LegitScripts, a third party vetting these certifications.
Based on the prices indicated, a drug rehab center with 8 facilities would have to cover $23,920 in certification costs before they can even begin to turn on their Ads for Google/Facebook. Adding salt to the wound are third party ad management services/firms that need to be paid, as well.
Drug Rehab Search Terms & Facility Name Searches
Now, let’s take a closer look at some of my recent search findings:
https://www.SAMHSA.gov/find-help/national-helpline — Position #1 for drug related terms and drug rehab facility names.
Branded Terms
Search 1: “Client’s company name”
Assuming that I had been outranked or made a mistake, I continued to search using different facility names from my local market as well as the Houston market.
Search 2: “Drug rehab name” search in local market
Digging even deeper, I tried looking at drug rehab terms while searching in incognito mode:
Google Ads, Map listings and in the #1 Organic spot: SAMHSA.gov.
As you can see in my screenshot above with Google Ads active, maps and SAMHSA.gov in position #1, all other websites were pushed to the bottom of page 1 – thus rendering the organic searches pointless.
I understand some might say there is an opportunity to rank in maps. I will accept that… but as we know, in many verticals, you can bid for maps placement and remove push the organic searches even more.
With additional searches, I also tried “near me” and multiple other high volume keyword variations. Interestingly enough, whatever I tried, I discovered that all position #1 rankings were for www.SAMHSA.gov/find-help/national-helpline.
I delved deeper into ahrefs and searched within their organic traffic section for some competitor facility names. Yet, as we can see below, all keyword variations for branded terms for my client were also pushed to position 2.
When did this happen?
According to SEO Visibility tool from SearchMetrics, this all began back on Feb. 4, 2018 where we see a huge jump.
Ahrefs shows the first jump on February 1, 2018.
Entering the SAMHSA Funnel
Moving along, I searched for my client’s facility name and clicked on the SAMHA.gov website to follow their funnel:
I started by adding a zip code in their main call to action within the page (which becomes a non-existent text link in mobile) and pressed Go:
Once again, I found my client website pushed to position 2 within the map search results of SMHSA.gov. Despite the branded search, I was guided directly to a map on a government website.
Now, my client is competing with every other facility included in their database for the specified zip code.
The graph below summarizes my concern for drug rehab terms. The circle on the right represents the “number of keywords” the SAMHSA.gov URL ranks for, versus the estimated traffic it receives, while those tiny dots in the left bottom corner are top industry competing pages.
Looking at this data, one can wonder:
- how many branded leads have been lost or given to competitor facilities despite a specific “facility name” search?
- Why, when searching for a specific facility’s phone number or brand would I be placed in a third party funnel?
- How is this helpful to the user?
Now let’s look at another set of data.
Example 2 – Restaurants
As you might expect, for many restaurant owners, marketing comes as a secondary thought. Their main goal is to manage everyday issues like staffing, accounting, ordering, inventory, etc.
The restaurant market is flooded with apps and websites that constantly pump reviews and new products that attempt to integrate with their in house (IT built) POS. Anytime they need to work with a third party company to keep up with the times they end up dealing with microtransactions and additional expenses on top of their SEO and PPC budgets.
Google My Business Updates
Google My Business is the one place where owners can update their info, add images, give answers and post about upcoming menu items, events, etc. With the latest Google updates a number of options became available to enhance listings.
- Menu URL: Restaurants can add an up-to-date menu located on a main commercial website, or if the business doesn’t have a website, provide the preferred third party site which has the menu.
- Order Ahead URL: This is where we can add the URL to the service the restaurant owner is working with to provide a seamless online ordering platform for their business.
- Reservations URL: Here one can add a link to proprietary system or third party system of the restaurant owner’s choice for online table reservations.
- Menu: Enhance your local listing by featuring your menu right on GMB or add your menu and give the users a heads up before they come to your site.
While those are all great options, what happens if your listing is not completed 100% or if you don’t offer online ordering? Let’s take a look…
As you can see, my client was working with a third party company on adding an option for their online ordering. But in the meantime, the Order Ahead URL remains empty on the listing – and it will remain empty until an online system is implemented.
Online Ordering funnel
When I searched for my client’s brand + Location, an Order Online option appeared in the search results even though the client’s online ordering system was not yet live.
By clicking the funnel for “Order Online” (ondemandplatform.google.com) we see that our only option for ordering online is to choose Slice.
According to their partner page, Slice charges $1.95 per order, regardless of the order size. So If a customer orders a standard lunch which costs around $8-$9, It forces the users to bump the cost to a minimum of $10. and adding a fee of $1.95 for the store owner; an additional cost on top of all other expenses and overhead.
Beyond these costs, Google charges an additional $2.50 for delivery within the delivery radius. Adding these fees raises the final price to $12.50, a 25% increase for our users plus tip
With a 25% increase for the user, why is this even an option when a user can just land directly on the client’s site after a branded search and order using the restaurant’s preferred method (i.e. direct call for a mobile optimized site)?
The Questions are Mounting
As with the drug rehab example, the evidence for restaurants is pretty stark – and startling. There are some definite questions mounting regarding the most recent changes to Google My Business and its associated platforms.
These enhancements are being promoted as ‘improvements’ for ‘ease of use’. But, in reality, are they simply serving a hidden purpose? Are these improvements aggressively diverting payment and delivery options to Google’s preferred platforms?
Despite casual reassurances from Google that they would never control or affect search results or be biased, simple experimentation with keywords and branded names in the drug rehab vertical points directly to the contrary.
For a company responsible for more than 90% of worldwide searches, contradictions such as these should always be a reason for concern. As you can see from these two recent examples, the implications could be far reaching and costly.
How do you feel about the recent GMB changes?
- Do you have any other examples of ranking dominance in another vertical?
- How do you see these enhancements potentially impacting your business?