Is Google doing local retailers a favor with Google+ Local? Not Likely

[terrencegordon]

Joe,

Not to sidetrack this post, but aren't all Google Product searches pulling data from feeds submitted through Google Merchant Center (formerly Google Base)?

I BELIEVE the reason there are no relevant vehicle-specific results is because the Merchant Center focuses heavily on products which contain UPCs (Universal Product Codes). Therefore most products in this "universe" have a value that is constant.

Yes, vehicles have a VIN and it would be very easy for Google to simply set aside a new "Automotive" channel that used the VIN as a replacement for the UPC.

Other reasons why this isn't happening is that Google requires the data to be complete. That means vehicles MUST have photos (not placeholders), accurate descriptions, etc. etc. Also dealers are consistently changing pricing on vehicles, which don't necessarily get changed in real-time on the SERPS.

Someone (*wink *wink) would have to normalize that data and send to Google and essentially be hand-picked as that data provider.

 

[terrencegordon]

For Google merchants, Google brings order to each industry by creating standards to the attributes of products in each vertical (pool tables, auto parts, TV's, etc). Once the standards are established and normalized across all products in the space (the responsibility of an outside vendor that contracts with Google), Google (aka the Dark Force) can map this data any where it wants.

For our space, few vendors are as well qualified to produce what Google needs than Chrome.

I read this after my post

 

[ed.brooks]

My thoughts are, data standardization isn't the biggest barrier to entry for Google when it comes to vehicle classifieds - Google is GOOD at data. Dealers (most dealers anyway) require a fair amount of hand holding and a good degree of customer service - Google SUCKS at customer service.

Google announced today that they are moving Product Search into a Pay-To-Play, paid inclusion model called Google Shopping. Google may decide to get more involved in our vertical because they know there is real money in Automotive Advertising, but they would have to gear up strong to provide the sales and service support required in this space.

BTW Does the timing of all this strike anyone else as strange? Get every merchant in the world in an uproar about a free Google product and then the next day, quietly, announce the transition from a formerly free Google product, to a paid one.

 

[terrencegordon]

Ed, I agree about Google's customer service. So don't you think Google would be better of leaving the data normalization to one or two partners

I'm blown away about the news of the Paid Inclusion model. This is going back 12 years to a model that didn't work with other engines (Inktomi, AltaVista). It will be interesting to see how merchants react. Something tells me there are few merchants relying heavily on Google Shopping results to drive the majority of their web traffic / conversions.

I personally would rather pay Amazon.

 

[ed.brooks]

Would you rather limit the amount of reviews, but know that they were left by real people? or have tons of reviews and not know who or what posted them? This will make harder for business to post fake reviews about their own services. This will also stop people from posting or saying anything, knowing that it will be associated to their G+ account.

What I would rather see is a variety of sources that reflect the breadth of the Internet - exactly what was in place before Google set out to become Google-centric. Less than a year ago, you had Yelp, DealerRater, etc, all showing. Dealers that actually had earned a good reputation had the ability to shine. I fear that with a greatly reduced number of reviews, the dealers that want to "game the system" will have an easier time of it.

I hope I'm wrong