Official statement
Other statements from this video 25 ▾
- 1:36 How can you effectively test JavaScript rendering before taking your site live?
- 1:36 Why has testing JavaScript rendering before launch become essential for Google indexing?
- 1:38 Why does a website redesign cause rank drops even without content changes?
- 1:38 Does migrating to JavaScript really affect SEO rankings?
- 3:40 Hreflang: Why does Google still stress this tag for multilingual content?
- 3:40 Does Googlebot really see every localized version of your pages?
- 3:40 Does hreflang really group your multilingual content in Google's eyes?
- 4:11 How can you make your hyper-local content URLs discoverable without sacrificing traffic?
- 4:11 How can you structure your URLs to enhance the discoverability of hyper-local content?
- 5:14 Can user personalization trigger a penalty for cloaking?
- 5:14 Could personalizing content for your users lead to a cloaking penalty?
- 6:15 Are Core Web Vitals really measured on users or bots?
- 6:15 Are Core Web Vitals really measured from Google bots or from your actual users?
- 7:18 Why isn’t schema markup enough to ensure rich snippets appear?
- 9:14 Is dynamic rendering really dead for SEO?
- 9:29 Should we ditch dynamic rendering for SSR with hydration?
- 11:40 How does the JavaScript main thread block interactivity on your pages according to Google?
- 11:40 How does the JavaScript main thread affect the indexing of your pages?
- 12:33 Can Google really overlook your critical tags in the battle between initial and rendered HTML?
- 13:12 What happens when your initial HTML differs from the HTML rendered by JavaScript?
- 15:50 Is it true that Googlebot doesn't click on buttons on your site?
- 15:50 Should you really be concerned if Googlebot doesn't click on your buttons?
- 26:58 Should you prioritize JavaScript performance for your real users over optimization for Googlebot?
- 28:20 Are web workers truly compatible with Google's JavaScript rendering?
- 28:20 Should you really be wary of Web Workers for SEO?
Google confirms that compliant structured markup makes your content eligible for rich results, but does not guarantee their display. The algorithm decides on a case-by-case basis if a rich snippet adds value for a given query. In short: correctly implementing Schema.org is necessary but not sufficient — contextual relevance remains the decisive factor.
What you need to understand
What’s the difference between eligibility and display guarantee?
Eligibility means your page meets all the technical criteria for a rich result to be potentially displayed. You have implemented Event Schema markup, adhered to Google’s guidelines, and passed the Rich Results Test. Your entrance ticket is valid.
The guarantee of display, however, does not exist. Google reserves the right to never show your rich snippet, even if everything is technically impeccable. The algorithm evaluates in real-time whether displaying a rich result enhances the user experience for that specific query, on that device, at that moment.
What criteria determine whether a rich snippet is displayed?
Google remains deliberately vague about these criteria. We know that search intent plays a major role: a broad informational query is unlikely to trigger Event markup, unlike a precise geolocated search. SERP competition also counts — if ten pages have valid markup, Google selects based on opaque quality signals.
The device used influences display. Event rich snippets appear more often on mobile than on desktop. The freshness of structured data, consistency between markup and visible content, and probably signals of overall domain trust come into play. But none of these factors is officially documented.
Does this statement change anything for SEO practitioners?
Not really. Experienced SEOs have long known that valid markup guarantees nothing. What changes is the official confirmation: Google publicly acknowledges that it discretionarily filters the display of rich results.
This relative transparency has an implication: stop promising clients that "Schema.org = guaranteed rich snippets." The realistic promise is to increase the chances of display by optimizing all controllable signals. The rest is beyond your direct control.
- Eligibility: compliant markup + adherence to guidelines = entry ticket in the rich snippet lottery
- Actual display: opaque algorithmic decision based on contextual relevance, intent, device, competition
- No guarantee: Google may never display your rich snippets even if everything is technically perfect
- Temporal variation: a snippet displayed today may vanish tomorrow without any change on your side
- Business impact: do not base an SEO strategy solely on obtaining rich results
SEO Expert opinion
Is this statement consistent with on-the-ground observations?
Completely. All SEOs who track rich snippets daily notice this inexplicable volatility. An impeccable event markup generating a nice rich result for two weeks, then nothing — without any change in markup, without losing organic positions. Splitt simply verbalizes what practitioners have been experiencing for years.
What’s interesting is the total absence of quantifiable criteria. Google doesn’t say, "we display rich snippets for 60% of eligible queries" or "prioritize domains with DA > 50." Just, "the algorithm decides." This deliberate opacity allows Google to adjust the rules without ever being held accountable.
What risks does this discretionary approach pose?
The first risk is wasted investment. Implementing clean Schema.org takes time, technical skills, and maintenance. If Google shows your snippets 5% of the time, the ROI becomes questionable. Especially for small sites that heavily invest in markup at the expense of more profitable optimizations like quality content or internal linking.
The second risk, more insidious: false reassurance. A client sees their rich snippets displayed for a month, convinces themselves that "it works," then they disappear. They think there's a technical error on your part when it's just the algorithm changing its mind. This volatility complicates client communication and budget justification.
When should structured markup still be prioritized?
For e-commerce sites, Product Schema remains essential despite the uncertainty — review stars can significantly boost CTR when they show up. For event or recipe sites, the visual impact often makes it worthwhile. But for a general corporate blog? [To be verified] whether the markup is really worth it compared to other optimizations.
The real question is: does your content type naturally generate queries where Google likes to display rich results? If yes, implement it properly and hope for the best. If not, don’t turn Schema.org into a religion — it’s one signal among many, not the SEO panacea some SaaS tools sell for a premium price.
Practical impact and recommendations
What should be done practically with this information?
First step: audit your existing markup to ensure it meets all eligibility conditions. Use Google’s Rich Results Test, fix any errors, and ensure the markup exactly matches the visible content. No over-promising in structured data — if your event costs €50, don’t mark it as "free" to try to grab attention.
Second step: track the actual display of rich snippets in Search Console, under Performance Report > Appearance in Search Results. Compare impressions with and without rich snippets. If the display rate is Appearance in results
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
Pourquoi mes rich snippets disparaissent-ils alors que mon markup est toujours valide ?
Faut-il quand même implémenter Schema.org si l'affichage n'est pas garanti ?
Existe-t-il un seuil de qualité à partir duquel Google affiche systématiquement les rich snippets ?
Les rich snippets influencent-ils directement le classement organique ?
Comment savoir si mon markup est responsable de la non-affichage ou si c'est une décision algorithmique ?
🎥 From the same video 25
Other SEO insights extracted from this same Google Search Central video · duration 30 min · published on 11/11/2020
🎥 Watch the full video on YouTube →
💬 Comments (0)
Be the first to comment.