Hitwise announced today that Google accounted for 70.60% of all U.S. searches for October.
Yahoo search share was 16.14% down 1%
Bing.com search share rose 7% from September to 9.57%.
Hitwise also found that Longer search queries, averaging searches of five to more than eight words in length, increased 3 percent between October and September 2009.
Searches of eight or more words increased 4 percent.
The same time period showed that shorter search queries, those averaging one to four words long, decreased 1 percent from month to month.
Having said that, One word searches accounted for 24.03% of all queries.
|
Percentage of U.S. clicks by number of keywords |
|||
| Subject |
September 2009 |
October 2009 |
Month-over-month percent change |
| One word |
24.32% |
24.03% |
-1% |
| Two words |
23.55% |
23.13% |
-2% |
| Three words |
20.52% |
20.53% |
0% |
| Four words |
13.69% |
13.83% |
1% |
| Five words |
7.94% |
8.13% |
2% |
| Six words |
4.30% |
4.42% |
3% |
| Seven words |
2.33% |
2.43% |
4% |
| Eight or more words |
3.35% |
3.49% |
4% |
| Note: Data is based on four-week rolling periods (ending Oct. 31, 2009, and Oct. 3, 2009) from the Hitwise sample of 10 million U.S. Internet users. | |||
| Source: Experian Hitwise | |||
It might be me, but I do not understand this chart. It could be just late here and my brain not functioning, but how do you have 14% gain on the different word lengths, and only 3% loss? Where is the other 11% coming from?
Am I reading this wrong?
Matt
These don’t have to even out
Some categories gained others lost but they don’t have to equal out
The change percentage in each row is calculated on a different base.
-1% of 24.32 is different from +1% of 13.69
Oh right snicksnack. 😉 That makes sense now.
Durrrr lol
The chart I think should show % gain / loss from 1 month compared to the other, not on a whole. That’s why it got me confused.
As web users grow more and more sophisticated, utilization of longtail will increase right with them.
In another decade, we will have a generation of people entering their earning years who haven’t lived a single day of their lives without internet. When these people search for shoes, they don’t search for “shoes” like folks did in 1999.
Succinctness has fantastic branding gravity and works great in non-web based promo campaigns, but as long as SE algos continue to weigh relative keyword purity in the domain, it’s entirely possible that longer-tail keyword names and their built-in ‘filtering’ capacity might be better- in some circumstances- than shorter, more generic strings.
LSM… Or they will just go to zappos 🙂
The smart peeps in the next ten years will make zappos type sites out of their great domains