Search engines are not created equal. This may sound like an obvious statement, but we’re not talking in terms of market share, or even the accuracy and quality of the results. Search engines are like newspapers, in that each has a specific readership fiercely loyal to their ‘publication’ of choice, and its possible that the market you’re looking for may be more readily using Yahoo!, MSN Live or even Ask than Google. What is interesting is a selection of data recently released from Hitwise that indicates that Google tends to attract a more wealthy clientele, while Yahoo is more popular with those from a lower end of the economic spectrum.
There are a number of caveats that must be observed about this report . Firstly, it’s based on American data, and may not be applicable to the UK. Secondly, some of the comments to the article seem to be of the opinion that this is based on rather shakey information – many have rightly questioned how on earth Hitwise can know any given user’s economic status. Finally, although the graph showing the difference between Yahoo! and Google traffic looks clear-cut, there is actually not as big a gap between the search engines as it looks at a glance – it just shows the general trends. Now that I have covered myself with lots of disclaimers, what is the data purporting to show?
It appears that while Google is more popular with ‘affluent suburbia’, ‘upscale America’ and ‘small town contentment’, Yahoo! seems to find more favour with ‘remote America’, ‘blue collar backbone’ and ‘struggling societies’. If you take this at face value, then this should mean that budget holiday stores would find better conversions on Yahoo! where their target demographic can be found in a higher density, while Google should be media choice of the tailor-made, niche and luxury holiday retailers.
The comments of the piece make for interesting reading, largely because they contain more speculation and informative discussion than the post itself. Some point to the divide being more based on ‘techie vs. non techie’ rather than rich vs. poor (Google is simple and efficient, Yahoo! is colourful with a plethora of options) while others suggest it may be age related, with Yahoo! attracting a younger demographic than Google (which is how other blogs are reporting the news). In truth, it’s impossible to accurately profile the user base of any given search engine, but this still enforces the differences in users which should not be underestimated.
Of course, it’s dangerous to take this too far and we’d never advocate putting all your eggs in one basket. If your business is at the bargain holiday end, and Yahoo! does seem to provide the better traffic, it still only accounts for 20% of the total search engine user base, behind Google’s 60% - you’re bound to get good traffic from both.
It’s just worth reiterating once again that Google isn’t the only game in town, and that you may find that adjusting your PPC media mix could pay dividends in the long-run.
Travel, Cat Litter and Infidelity
Google for the Rich, Yahoo for the Poor? 
