

News Archive
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
Are Big Brands Stealing (Buying) the SERPS?
June 20, 2007, 8:14 amFor a long time, search engine marketers wondered why the big brands were so slow to adopt, why they seemed to be ignoring Google. They may be wishing for the old days, when smaller players with smaller budgets had a better shot at the SERPs.
![]() |
| Are Big Brands Stealing (Buying) the SERPS? |
But notice the domains listed in the organic results for "Pontiac":
1. Pontiac.com
2. Pontiac.com/solstice/index.jsp
7. Pontiacunderground.autos.yahoo.com
9. GmcCanada.com/English/vehicles/Pontiac/index.jsp
You're saying "so what?" right? It's reasonable that Pontiac or General Motors-owned sites show up in the top ten. That's relevance.
But what makes the Yahoo forum greater than ClassicalPontiac.com, or GMC Canada, or any of the other 35 million results?
SEObook's Aaron Wall would argue that Google is "over-representing site authority in their relevancy algorithms." This isn't to say that Yahoo's Pontiac forum isn't a great authority, only to note that some links are worth more than others in Google's eyes.
Wall says big brands with big budgets "have begun abusing the hole with the use of infinite subdomains." They have a tremendous amount of authority, and can set subdomains to leverage that authority, linking to the sites they want to rank higher.
What may be more ethically questionable than that is that these big brands are buying up the other sites they want to rank higher. The end result of that is they are manipulating the search results so that only sites they own with positive messages about their brands show up.
Add that budget leverage to an innate ability to outbid smaller competitors on highly competitive keywords, and you have SERPs literally owned by big business.
"While small businesses are worried about the risks of buying or renting a few links," writes Wall, "some large corporations are launching shadow brands or buying out competing domains en mass."
He uses eBay (which just pulled its ads from Google), Monster.com, Bankrate, and Yahoo as examples. Yahoo has at least nine verticals with Nintendo Wii coverage, Bankrate nails the rankings for "mortgage calculator" and Monster.com has a bag full of educational subdomains.
This type of manipulation isn't much different than Black SEO Google frowns on, nor is it all that different from buying links, which Google also isn't crazy about. This will be Google's next relevancy challenge, then, to find a way to prevent the dollar from overriding the relevance.





