Must you really be Number One on search engines?
Monday, April 28th, 2008In the competitive world of Search Engine Optimisation, optimisers (and I include enotions in this) are forever saying that you must aim to be number one in search engines for related searches. I have always supported this theory, but I have recently started to question whether or not getting to the top spot is actually what you want to do.
Research has started to show that actually users are beginning to distrust top ranked sites and plum for the second or third placed sites first. The reason for this is users are realising that a lot of money is being spent (unnecessarily I hasten to add) to hit the top spot and the sites doing this, won’t usually give the information the user is after.
The reason for this is because, rather than focusing on genuine quality site content and the needs of the user, the sites are often just packed with key words, paid high ‘page rank’ sites for referral links and consultancy to use site tags to optimise effectively.
Those users who do click on the top ranked site usually give it a cursory review only to ‘kick off’ their research and concentrate far more closely on subsequent sites. This is particularly true with users looking for sales. They very rarely will buy from the first site they visit.
Finally, there is usually some form of compromise that must be made with the quality of design for those sites hitting the top spot. Perhaps ugly live text along the top of the screen stamped on an otherwise lovely looking clean site.
It’s always great telling friends and colleagues, and even better rivals, that you’re top for searches. However, don’t be disheartened if you’re not. Second, third or even fourth might be advantageous, in the long run.

