well after a better thought out ways about search I think items should be not named in a creative ways. We can see awesome example in Themeforest. There is a name like “Locus” and then more descriptive naming “Responsive One Page Wordpress Theme” .
I think the items main rank shouldbe based on the items name and tags. Still… we have 50 characters for naming the item + 15 tags + description. There has to be a way to adjust the search to give REAL best matched results.
I think naming the item as “Creative name + Descriptive name” and increasing the tags from 15 to 30 would do a job.
I find boosting the titles a really bad idea – this leads to descriptive naming of files.
Well, at themeforest items have their own unique name at the start, but right after the dash they get descriptive, often with words that are present in the tags. That doesn’t seem like it’s going to change… Videohive could have unique item names until the dictionary ends, but they would still get descriptive after the dash because that’s what buyers look at… That’s the point of the titles being displayed in bold text, right? Grabbing buyers attention…
If I’m a buyer looking at a grid of 80×80px thumbnails, I don’t see what’s the big deal with getting relevant information from the title. The thing that especially pisses me off about the word “loop” isn’t how it shows up or doesn’t show up on searches, is that “vj loop” is actually a thing, so not being able to communicate this to potential buyers through the title is absurd.
OK guys, so basically it boils down to adequately representing these categories:
• new relevant items
• old relevant items
• top selling relevant items
The discussion up until now seems to be revolving around “tweaking” boost variables in order to not have one of these categories flood out the others from the result page(s).
Now, if proportionate distributions between these categories are priority (which they should be), why not simply allocate result space accordingly, and build a “mixed result list” from three distinct, separate searches?
A search result could look like this:
1. new item #1
2. old item #1
3. best seller #1
4. new item #2
5. old item #2
6. best seller #2
7. new item #3
8. old item #3
9. best seller #3
The 1:1:1 proportion here is just an example, you may want to have more new items, more best sellers at the top or whatever but the point is that it would be MUCH easier to structure the results into these categories if the search was back-end divided into discrete sections. The first-time end user would not “see” what was going on behind the curtains, and the seasoned user would find comfort in that all categories were represented. This would work regardless of the “tweaking” variables, and guarantee first page exposure for each – equally important – category.
Just a thought! Maybe you already had this in mind, but waited for me to point it out and get the credit. If so, thanks a lot
BTW, it seems like many are blaming search for dropping sales… but our sales are stronger than ever! Maybe something else is going on… aahh maybe Justin Bieber finally found our music
One of the things we want to add is better tracking of what search terms led to click throughs to an item, and what search terms led to sales … And possibly exposing this to authors so they can see what generates traffic, and let them optimise that.
Ooh – yes please! That sounds very cool – harness the power of the author. If the system is built right, we’ll be very useful partners.
Thanks for the in-depth post. It’s good to know things are happening.
MOTION GRAPHICS SALES ON MARCH.
11-12 Mars:6 sales of my latest 2 files. 13-15 Mars:8 sales of very old files. It’s totally absurd. Do they still tweak and change the search engine just to see what happens???
@Madlep Hey! Its been a while. So hows the search going on madlep? A throughout update would be awesome.