<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>SearchRank Blog &#187; Google</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.searchrank.com/blog/tag/Google/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog</link>
	<description>Featuring news, opinion and commentary related to the industry of search engines and marketing.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:33:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://www.searchrank.com/blog/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>How Google Killed the Longtail [Infographic]</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2011/12/how-google-killed-the-longtail-infographic.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2011/12/how-google-killed-the-longtail-infographic.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:53:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Infographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[long tail keywords]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchrank.com/blog/?p=4277</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Infographic put out by SEOBook.com demonstrates that by the innovations of Google Search over the years, they have essentially killed long-tail search.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2011/12/how-google-killed-the-longtail-infographic.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Possible Google Acquisitions in 2010 and Beyond?</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2010/01/possible-google-acquisitions-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2010/01/possible-google-acquisitions-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:30:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fun Stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[acquisitions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchrank.com/blog/?p=3386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is becoming more evident everyday that we are living in a Google world. What began as a search engine has quickly evolved into many additional things. Just this month, Google entered the cell phone business with the release of the Nexus One. They are also working their way into the real estate business. What's next? This post takes a somewhat humorous look at possible Google acquisitions for 2010 and beyond.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2010/01/possible-google-acquisitions-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SEOs Breathe Sigh of Relief As Google Decides To Sell Performics</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/04/seos-breathe-sigh-of-relief.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/04/seos-breathe-sigh-of-relief.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Performics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://174.133.136.242/blog/?p=525</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When Google decided to acquire DoubleClick nearly a year ago, many in the search marketing industry were very concerned that Google now owned a SEO company - Performics. It would be a huge conflict of interest to have a organic search index and yet at the same time be making money providing a service that helps companies to improve their positioning in that index. When the acquisition was finally approved last month, Danny Sullivan wrote an open letter asking Google to do the right thing.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/04/seos-breathe-sigh-of-relief.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Open Letter Asking Google To Do the Right Thing Regarding Performics</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/03/google-performics.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/03/google-performics.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:43:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Performics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://174.133.136.242/blog/?p=500</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Now that Google officially owns DoubleClick, there is another dilemma at hand and that is they also own a SEO company. Is this a conflict of interest? Absolutely! Let's face it - Google is now in the SEO business - selling services through DoubleClick's Performics to people who want to rank well on search engines, including Google. This also places Google in the paid inclusion business, something it called evil back in 2004, when it went public.

Danny Sullivan has written an open letter to Google asking them to do the right thing - namely to spin off Performics as they should not own such a company. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/03/google-performics.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google: I&#8217;m Going To Disneyland! 10 Signs Google Has Visited the Disneyland Resort</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/02/10-signs-google-is-at-disneyland.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/02/10-signs-google-is-at-disneyland.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:39:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fun Stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disneyland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://174.133.136.242/blog/?p=479</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While Eli Manning could not make the trip to Disneyland in the traditional "I'm going to Disneyland" fashion proceeding Superbowl wins, Google did. The search engine giant invited its California-based employees to attend a corporate event at the Disneyland Resort last week.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/02/10-signs-google-is-at-disneyland.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Can&#8217;t Google Be More Like Ask.com?</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/01/why-cant-google-be-more-like-ask.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/01/why-cant-google-be-more-like-ask.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Link Building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ask]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://174.133.136.242/blog/?p=460</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anyone who is into link building knows that Google has declared a war of sorts on paid links, looking to punish both those who buy and sell them. Vanessa Fox has put together an excellent review of the "paid links war" as it unfolded in 2007. With that review, she wanted to learn how the other three major search engines felt about paid links. At the writing of her post, Yahoo and MSN failed to comment. Ask did and their response was quite refreshing.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2008/01/why-cant-google-be-more-like-ask.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Google Misleading Search Marketers?</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/07/is-google-misleading-search-marketers.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/07/is-google-misleading-search-marketers.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:58:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search Engine Optimization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEO]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://174.133.136.242/blog/?p=387</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I started my Monday off with a strange phone conversation. I had put together a proposal for a potential client for both SEO and paid search management. The SEO portion of the proposal involved an initial cost which would allow us to develop and implement a strategy to optimize their site so that they could improve their visibility for organic search. Following up today with a phone meeting, my point of contact said they had just spoken to someone at Google who said that "Google" themselves would optimize their site for nothing - no initial investment, no set up costs, free. The potential client's next question - "Why would we pay you to do something that Google will do for free?"]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/07/is-google-misleading-search-marketers.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What Are Google&#8217;s Intentions With the Acquisition of DoubleClick?</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/06/googles-intentions-with-doubleclick.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/06/googles-intentions-with-doubleclick.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:10:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DoubleClick]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://174.133.136.242/blog/?p=372</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Alex Kinnier, a Group Product Manager at Google, has shed some additional light on why Google went after DoubleClick in April of this year, an acquisition that is still in process of completing. The post first of all provides a short history lesson on how online advertising ha evolved since its birth. We then are reminded what ad serving actually is and how it works. Before revealing the exact reasons why Google is buying DoubleClkick, the author points out some differences between the two companies - Google sells ads while DoubleClick provides ad serving.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/06/googles-intentions-with-doubleclick.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Your Business Survive Online Without Google?</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/06/can-your-business-survive-without-google.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/06/can-your-business-survive-without-google.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 23:00:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fun Stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bento boxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://174.133.136.242/blog/?p=363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Most web site marketers wouldn't even consider such a question especially where Google can at times send 50% if not more of a web site's traffic. How about if you take Yahoo!, MSN and Ask out of the equation as well? Would your business have a chance of attracting traffic and succeeding if these engines were to send you zilch traffic?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/06/can-your-business-survive-without-google.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Google Acquisition Report Card</title>
		<link>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/05/google-acquisition-report-card.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/05/google-acquisition-report-card.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 16:22:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Wallace</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://174.133.136.242/blog/?p=354</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Joe Sinkwitz from the Pay Loan Affiliate Blog has put together a "report card" on Google's acquisition progress over the years. Not only does he list the date, the company and the type of product or service Google acquired, he scores each acquisition as good, bad or mixed.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.searchrank.com/blog/2007/05/google-acquisition-report-card.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

