The E-Commerce SEO Game May Soon Have To Deal With Page Load Speed

Written by Evan Schuman
December 2nd, 2009

If an E-Commerce director had to choose a single marketing weapon, there’s little doubt that an effective search engine optimization (SEO) campaign would be among the director’s first choices. After all, the retailer that comes up first when a Google search simply seeks HDTVs or a Yahoo search wants Wii purchase points or a Bing inquiry asks for refrigerators stands to make a generous extra helping of cash.

It’s for that reason the word trickling out of Google saying page load speed will likely become a criteria in how sites rank is noteworthy. Google Software Engineer Matt Cutts spoke at PubCon last month and said that a speed-influenced ranking won’t happen in time for this holiday season, but it’s seriously being considered for early next year.

“We’re starting to think more and more about ‘Should speed be a factor in Google’s rankings?'” Cutts said. “Historically, we haven’t used it in our search rankings, but a lot of people within Google think that the Web should be fast. It should be a good experience, so it’s sort of fair to say ‘If you’re a faster site, maybe you should get a little bit of a bonus.'”

Before we get into whether this change will be a good or bad thing (time saver: it’s a good thing), let’s get the pragmatic points out of the way. Few details have emerged about what kind of weighting load time would be given, but it’s certainly likely to be minimal–at least in the beginning.

Google more wants to say that it’s in their weightings rather than actually punish sites, hoping that those words alone will boost the speed of enough sites to actually make a collective improvement. Under this line of thinking, relevance and size would still get a huge weight, so the Wal-Marts and Walgreens of the world will still get the considerable clicks that their current SEO efforts are delivering.

That said, is the overall effort a good one? Much of that depends on how sophisticated Google—and Yahoo and Bing, which are certainly likely to follow Google’s lead in this area—gets. Will it acknowledge that sites selling games, electronics and video will invariably have more multimedia content, which would slow them down? How will Google deal with huge sites, where averaging all page load times may not make sense?

The stated goal of this effort—to encourage sites to be as fast as possible—is hard to argue with, up until the point that it starts costing companies sales because rivals push ahead of their homepages by a few milliseconds. Will Google weigh these load times based on speed differentials or by sequence? In other words, would there be a rule that says something like “If the speed difference between four competitive sites is not more than XX seconds apart, no site gets an advantage. It defaults to our old criteria”?

Brad Canham, the vice president of business development at Web traffic monitoring site Dotcom-Monitor, argued that this Google change may have a profound impact on the largest E-tailers.

“If a large retailer drops a single ranking in its keyword starting in 2010 because of a slow server response time, it could cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars in a year” and possibly much more than that, he said. “For the first time, this is being brought front and center as a factor for organic search. Therefore, the pressure will be increased for IT directors to monitor and respond to Internet infrastructure elements like server response time even faster to maintain or improve Google page ranking. The bottom line is that, next year at this time, the online retailers with optimized Web pages that are monitoring their server response times are likely to have a leg up on slower competitors.”

Granted, any company that earns its living selling monitoring services has a strong incentive to make such a claim. But if Google acts on its comments, it’s a legitimate consideration. All performance issues have to be layered atop the Web’s—and even the Internet’s—overall traffic patterns. Will Google universally give every retailer a 10-glitch forgiveness pass? It’s sort of like letting all of the students in a class drop their lowest test score before final grades are calculated. If doled out uniformly and consistently, it couldn’t hurt.

If this move forces administrators to spend a little more time considering customer interaction and a little less on launching a site that simply looks impressive, we’re not so sure that would be such a bad thing.


3 Comments | Read The E-Commerce SEO Game May Soon Have To Deal With Page Load Speed

  1. Adam Brown Says:

    Very often performance is overlooked when specifying a web application and is often thought about at the end of the development process when it’s too late or expensive to do anything about. Perhaps now when the benefits of having a high performance web app have a direct impact on bottom line performance will become something that designers and engineers look at from the beginning.

  2. Rob Martell Says:

    As a consumer I know that if all the ads and other wiz-bang stuff on a page is held up by a slow secondary servers or other outsourced links, I just move on and try another site from the search.


  3. surfvoucher Says:

    I’m not going to believe that just by having a faster site than my competitors I’ll rank over them. I personally believe that what google is saying is that if you have a site slower than the average you might get some sort of penalization in your rankings.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.