The Google Effect and Search Market Share Surveys

Imagine for a second that I’m a doctor.

Now imagine that I specialize in…ahem…erectile dysfunction.

Let’s say the average married couple has sexual intercourse 3-4 times a month–backed-up by most national surveys.

But, I conduct a survey among my viagra-popping patients, and release a report that suggests married couples are in fact having sex 8-10 times a month.

Would you throw out the other data? Or, would you piece this together and say, "wait a minute, of course you’re seeing a higher number?"

Well, that’s the observation I made when reviewing iCrossing’s new study that suggests Google (GOOG) accounts for almost 77% of search engine visitors–compared to the 65% and 71% suggested by comScore and Hitwise respectively.

Either I’m the only one seeing this, or it’s all in my head, but wouldn’t a company that helps its clients improve their Google traffic, see higher numbers like this? Now, I know that SEO firms supposedly help you with all your search engine traffic, so this Google-bias should be negated, but do they? I don’t know a single search marketing firm–or client for that matter–that doesn’t focus 90%+ of its efforts on increasing traffic from Google.

With that kind of focus, aren’t you artificially increasing the search share you realize from Google?

Look, I’m not out to bash iCrossing. I just want to help you connect the dots that this data is no more unbiased than Click Forensics’ reports on click fraud.

Comments

[jack dee]

There are boat loads of companies producing data that confirms comfort and surprises in order to get headlines.

Apple this, Bill gates that blah blah. But when you look at the metrics , when you look at the source, often there are holes you could drive a bus through.
And the data gets published and punters take it at face value, believing that the stock they love does indeed control xyz, or is highly favored by group ABCs

2009 Oct 28 12:44 PM