Disruption Tour --- Run To Survive

My Photo

July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Entries categorized "Marketing - Search Engine"

June 15, 2009

50% Of Google's Self-Serve Advertisers Don't Come Back The Following Year


Siliconalleyinsider.com

Around 50% of all search advertisers that buy their ads directly from the search engine companies, including Google (GOOG), don't do it again the next year, according to a new study. Businesses like Yodel, ReachLocal and LookSmart lose 60% of their local advertisers each year.

The news could mean greatly diminished growth prospects for Google and its competitors.

In 2006, Google (GOOG) said local advertisers would spend $10 billion on Google search ads by 2010. But this new study, commissioned by Clickable and carried out by Borrell Associates, reports that local businesses won't spend more than $5.3 billion online until after 2013.

Until now, the explanation for such slow adoption from local advertisers -- the kind that made local newspapers cash cows for years -- has been that local businesses are slow to adopt new technologies.

In 2006, Google exec Sheryl Sandberg explained the challenge:

We think the [local] market is widely under penetrated. It sounds surprising to a lot of us, but even in the United States, arguably the most developed market in the world for ecommerce less than 50% of businesses even have a Web site, or let alone advertisers, so we think there is tremendous opportunity to bring those people online and bring them into our advertising product.

Clickable's study suggests a new -- and for Google, alarming -- possibility. When we learned the bit about how 50% of all self-serve search advertisers don't do it again the next year, we wondered: Maybe these local advertisers have tried to get on board -- advertising their businesses on search engines Google and Yahoo -- but decided their marketing money was better spent elsewhere.

Clickable, which paid for the study in hopes of turning up new new sales leads, sees the results differently and says the problem is that without a handy service like Clickable, local advertisers have a difficult time measuring the return on their search ad-buying investment. So they should become Clickable customers.

But Borrell CEO Gordon Borrell sees it more our way. He told the WSJ that the problem is that for local businesses, search advertising is more expensive than it should be. “Search advertising has been over-hyped and over-sold to local businesses,” he said. He also noted that over-charging middlemen, known as affiliate marketers, are part of the problem.

If it's true that the multi-billion dollar local advertising market is not "under-penetrated" as Google has always argued, and that local businesses are simply uninterested in search advertising because it doesn't generate enough return on investment, the growth prospects for search engines companies like Google must be considered greatly diminished.

June 08, 2009

op-google-advertisers-april-2009

http://seekingalpha.com/article/141369-top-google-advertisers-april-2009?source=email

June 03, 2009

10 things you didn't know about Google's (GOOG) search business:

businessinsider.com

We cover Google for a living, so we thought we'd read Steven Levy's feature about Google's search business in this month's Wired and learn nothing, absolutely nothing. We were wrong.

10 things you didn't know about Google's (GOOG) search business:

The people Larry Page and Sergey Brin tasked with figuring out how Google should make money in 1998 were a pair of know-nothings in their early 20s. Salar Kamanger, Google's ninth employee, had been a biology major at Stanford. His partner, Eric Veach studied computer science. Together they implemented Google's now $21 billion business, AdWords. Neat.

The first company to buy and run an ad through Google's automated auction business was a live mail-order lobster store.

The ads above the results on Google search results pages used to be sold by impression, not per click like they are now. Then, only the ads on the side were sold by cost-per-click (CPC) auctions

Many of the big advertising customers that bought these ads sold by impression were pissed when Google decided to switch and sell them based on CPC. Former Googler, now AOLer, Jeff Levick says one "threw us out of his office and told us to fuck ourselves." Yow!

In order to reassure bidders that they wouldn't be way over-bidding their competition for a keyword, Google used to guarantee the winning bidder it would charge them just a penny more than the next highest bidder. This immediately encouraged higher bids.

Now the price advertisers pay is determined by the formula P = (B2 X Q2)/Q1, with P = price paid by the advertiser, Q2 = Quality score of the next highest-placing ad, Q1 = Advertiser's quality score, and B2 = the next-higheset-placing ad's bid.

Obsessed with auctions, Google even makes its own divisions bid for servers by auction.

The order of ads on a Google search results page isn't determined by simply putting the highest bidder at the top.  Something called a "Quality Score" also comes into play.  Steve reports an ads Quality Score is composed of "relevance of the ad to the specific keyword or keywords, the quality of the landing page the ad is linked to, and, above all, the percentage of times users actually click on a given ad when it appears on a results page."

Google tries to forecast which ads will get clicked on based on the day's temperature. This makes sense when you start to think about queries like "ski boots" and "bikinis."

The House Where Google Got its start

Berkeley professor Hal Varian, Google's "chief economist," keeps an apartment on campus -- the ranch house where Google got its start. Since Google HQ is called the Googleplex, Steven calls the apartment Hal's "pied-a-Plex." We hope Hal calls it that too.

May 15, 2009

Analog, Digital, Social

by Kevin Hilstom Minethedata.com

Folks seem to be self-selecting themselves into three camps.

The first camp is the classic direct marketing crowd, rebranded as the "multichannel marketing" audience. I call this audience the "Analog" audience. This camp knows more about strategic direct marketing than anybody else in direct marketing, having been introduced to direct marketing as the credit card, the 1-800 number, and the database took prominence. This crowd reads Catalog Success and DMNews. This crowd attends ACCM and Internet Retailer. Ask this crowd to launch a new product or service, and they'll have a business plan for you in a couple of hours, one that spans multiple channels.

The second camp is what I'd call the "Digital" crowd, online marketers who burst onto the scene during the late 1990s and early part of this decade. This crowd knows more about classic online marketing than anybody. They can tell you that shopping cart abandonment is 43.84830048% if various criteria are met. They're great at SEO and Paid Search and Banner Ads, they know that the open rate on the last e-mail campaign was 22.438%. They know and love tactics. They can be strategic direct marketers, but seem to adore their form of marketing, are are willing to forego bigger opportunities to stay loyal to their niche. This crowd attends Shop.org. Ask this crowd to launch a new product or service, and they'll have your Google marketing plan coupled with an e-mail campaign strategy ready to go in just a few hours.

The third camp is what I'd call the "Social" crowd. This crowd is motivated by technology, the "shiny new toy", if you will. The shiny new toy might be an iPhone app, it might be getting 11,000 followers on Twitter, or it might be creating a viral campaign using Facebook. This person might be 55 years old, this person might be 25 years old. Ask this crowd to launch a new product or service, and you'll have your new product or service in a few hours!

What seems to be missing from the marketing departments of 2009 is a balanced representation of Analog, Digital, and Social strategy.

The traditional catalog brand spends 50 minutes of a 60 minute meeting debating whether 124 pages is better than 116, wondering if an 8 page insert will boost demand, considering whether a Wed-Fri in-home window might work better than Mon-Wed. Analog topics dominate the meeting.

The online brand struggles with driving traffic ... we'll over-think an e-mail campaign that will cause only 1 in 700 recipients to purchase, or we'll dig into our pile of 74,000 keywords to come up with micro-copy that will stimulate clicks. Digital marketers often need analog tools to drive traffic, but there's a fierce independence among this audience.

And then we have the social crowd --- everything is viral! If the product is good enough, it will stand out on its own and will create its own audience ... so let's make it free and social and then things will work. The wisdom of the digital crowd is missing, the strategy of the analog audience seldom surfaces.

In the 2010s, the opportunity exists for a leader to straddle each frontier ... analog, digital, and social. The leader doesn't have to be an expert in each area, but the leader has to hire folks proficient in each realm.

In the 2010s, the best strategies will incorporate percentages of Analog, Digital, and Social strategy.

In 2009, I sit in too many meetings where a faction with Analog, Digital, or Social experience dominates the meeting. Knowledge of the target customer, coupled with a strong mixture of varied experience, will yield positive results.

April 18, 2009

Google as a channel

From Kevin Hillstrom Minethedata.com

Google. There's a channel. The algorithm that is managed by algorithms!

  • Does The Channel Scale? This depends upon who you are. I've yet to meet an online business that says that Google scales. In fact, every online business I speak with looks to "detether" from Google. You're less likely to detether from a channel that has unlimited sales potential. If you're tiny, like me, then yes, Google scales. But if you're everybody else?

  • Does the channel do a good job of acquiring new customers? For a period of time in the middle of this decade, when we went from 2 billion searches a month to 32 billion searches a month, Google did a good job of helping us acquiring new customers. I fear our potential peaked in 2008. How do you break through now? Search for a sundress, and all the big and mid-sized players are there in paid search (JCP, Victoria's Secret, Target, Macys, Zappos, Nordstrom, American Eagle). Algorithm fanatics dominate natural search. There was a time, five years ago, when you could make some hay here. Now you're just part of the echo chamber.

  • Does the channel aid in profitable customer retention? Have you seen a study that indicates that, without Google, customer retention drops by "x" points? I haven't seen such a study, either. Then consider that many of you tell me that half of your paid search customers are existing customers. Does that mean that Google is helping us? Is Google sending our customers to competitors (you bet they are). If Google isn't helping you retain customers, and half your paid search customers are existing customers, well, then, who the heck is benefiting from that relationship? Just something for you to think about the next time you hand over $0.40 for the phrase "sundress" so that Google will steer your own customer back to you.

  • Does the channel aid in customer service? At best, a "maybe".

  • Does the channel feed other channels? Google customers are loyal to Google, aren't they? They're more loyal to Google than to our e-mail or catalog marketing programs. And we consistently find that Google customers have lower lifetime value estimates than customers from other channels. Too often, Google is in isolation mode, yielding low value customers.

  • Does Google generate profit? The secret to making Google a profitable channel seems to be two-pronged: Step 1 = Hire somebody to manage a bidding algorithm that outperforms other bidding algorithms. Step 2 = Hire somebody to game the natural search algorithm --- you're not selling to your customer when you work with Google, you're selling to an algorithm that reserves the right to change the rules of the algorithm without your consent. Do these two steps well, and Google generates profit for you.

  • Does Google educate customers? Google does educate your customers. Google tells your customers what your competitors are doing. Customers have never been more educated! Google might be the best thing that ever happened to small businesses, but is frequently detrimental to the brand that uses offline advertising to drive a customer online for research purposes.

  • What is the exit strategy for Google? What are the business scenarios that would cause you to not participate in paid search, and to not care about natural search results? Or what if you're a small business owner that hosts your blog on Google, runs your RSS feeds through Google/Feedburner, analyzes your visitors via Google, and obtains a third of your traffic through Google (oh oh, that's me)? Many online businesses seem to have an active strategy to grow the business independent of Google.

  • What is your R&D strategy for Google? This means so much more than adjusting your keyword bidding algorithm. In our world, Google offers things like Google Checkout, and some of you have told me that Google offers some companies the opportunity to tie inventory systems into Google's systems in exchange for preferred search outcomes. That's exciting and terrifying all at the same time, huh?

  • Does Google lend itself to in-house expertise or vendor expertise? More and more often this expertise is best managed via the vendor community. It seems to make sense to couple smart in-house knowledge with outstanding vendor-based knowledge.

The Channel Advisor walks a fine line working with Google, almost playing the role of a "risk manager". The Channel Advisor recognizes that Google is important, while realizing that one cannot let Google control more than a small minority of the total sales volume --- the volatility makes inventory management very challenging. The Channel Advisor works overtime to find micro-channels within Google (i.e. keywords) or advertising micro-channels (catalog + Google, e-mail + Google) that deliver significant value.

Of course, Google isn't my area of expertise, so your thoughts about how a Channel Advisor manages Google are welcomed.

March 28, 2009

Modern Catalog Marketing: E-Mail Marketing or Transactional RSS

By Kevin Hilstrom/Minethedata.com.

Bold by Thegies

Many catalogers spend way too little time thinking about e-mail marketing.

Not enough and virtually none of them are thinking about how to integrate a product sydications (Transactional Rss) like RSSCheck into their marketing mix.

The modern catalog marketer views the world in a different way.

The modern catalog marketer actively tests varying combinations of catalog mailings and e-mail campaigns to comparable audiences. These folks (those who execute the tests) frequently learn a secret --- e-mail marketing is a much stronger marketing channel when catalogs don't exist.

In the rapid segmentation process, the modern catalog marketer wants to quickly assign customers into the "digital marketing" path. These customers see a reduced diet of catalogs, with the cataloger attempting to make up some of the volume with inexpensive e-mail marketing campaigns. It doesn't always work out this way, but you have to run the tests, don't you?

Using RSSCheck consumers can self-select themselves into the marketing product category of their choice. So when a Merchant delivers a product syndication feed to their Consumer, the Consumer is interested and responsive to recieve it. It is the markerters holy grail of segmentation. Opt-in, Private and Annoynomous

The modern catalog marketer uses tools like e-mail to introduce new items without having to spend money on expensive paper to subsidize awareness.

Better yet what if you can use RSSCheck to deliver New Arrivals and or Sale Merchandise multiple times a day without the fear of an opt-out from over saturation or canibalization from full price to sale buyers.

The modern catalog marketer realizes that a lack of an e-mail address results in a more likely assignment into the "traditional marketing" segment.

The modern catalog marketer has between five and twenty different versions of an e-mail campaign, assigning different customers to different versions.

The Merchant who uses RSSCheck can work with its Consumers to deliver pre-selected catagory choices. These are not picked by business intelligence engines but by the Merchant's Consumers themselves.

The modern catalog marketer uses clickstream data (i.e. what the customer looked at), merchandise purchased, recency/frequency/monetary, and customer preferences to determine which version of an e-mail campaign the customer receives.

RSSCheck provides the Merchant with real time analytics which are delivered for them in their own online dashboard. A merchant is no longer dependent on its own Analytics or lack thereof.

The modern catalog marketer does not measure e-mail campaign success by open rates, click through rates, or conversion rates. The modern catalog marketer evaluates e-mail performance based on the change in annual retention rate, and change in annual customer profitability, caused by e-mail marketing.

RSSCheck provides the analytics and our Merchants manage them as they see fit.

The modern catalog marketer is very willing to deliver a month's worth of e-mail campaigns that do not sell a single item


Conversely, the modern catalog marketer actively plans the sales per e-mail at a customer segment level, planning these metrics months in advance.

The modern catalog marketer is willing to accept $0.05 per e-mail delivered without a promotion, and is willing to forgo $0.15 per e-mail delivered with a free shipping or %-off offer.

The modern catalog marketer lets the customer determine contact frequency.

If you could speak to your customer about sale merchandise or other catagory merchandise that your Consumer self-selected and you can do it several times every day would you want to do that if the Consumer asked to hear from you? RSSCheck enables you to do just that and only for a small transaction fee of what is sold..

The modern catalog marketer gives the e-mail department a seat at the leadership table.

The modern catalog marketer knows exactly how much of paid search expense is caused by e-mail marketing, and blends that aspect of paid search expense (and conversion) into the e-mail profit and loss statement.

RSSCheck can pass along a variable for our product push syndication which allows you to see by channel how your promotions are doing. This is in addition to deliver separate real time metrics.

The modern catalog marketer runs matchback analytics with e-mail getting more priority than catalog marketing, just to understand what the results imply/suggest.

No differerent for the Product Push Channel (TRSS).

The modern catalog marketer executes a post-mortem of every single e-mail marketing campaign, analyzing every item offered in every version of the campaign. Every link in every e-mail campaign is analyzed. The merchandising, inventory, creative, web production team, online marketing team, catalog circulation team, and e-mail marketing teams are all present. The CEO participates on a quarterly basis, if not more often.

RSSCheck provides real time reporting for every client and it is included in your base service (for a limited time) fee. A merchant can see daily number of subscribers, click through by feed, landing pages, conversions by feed and total dollars sold.


The modern catalog marketer tests every possible creative treatment, blatantly disregarding established best practices in an endless thirst to discover new and exciting ways to present merchandise.

RSSCheck can help Merchants build customized landing pages and develop work arounds for challenges Merchants have in their own online channel selling channels.

The modern catalog marketer realizes that e-mail marketing is about merchandising and service, not about geeky metrics and tactics.

At RSSCheck we provide a Relationship Manager assigned to each Merchant client who helps them navigat all aspects of their Transactional Product Push Syndication business.

The modern catalog marketer instinctively knows how every single item will perform if offered in an e-mail campaign, and actively shares that information with every employee in the company.

RSSCheck's relationship with Database Strategic Partners drives business intelligence decisions around which products to promote and when. As we are in the 365 day a year merchandise business getting this extra edge is helpful to our client's businesses.

The modern catalog marketer "households" e-mail addresses. In other words, the modern catalog marketer will combine kevinh@minethatdata.com and kevin.hillstrom@gmail.com, and evaluates the performance of the all e-mail marketing activities at the "household" level.

As you can see, the modern catalog marketer views e-mail very differently than the way the average catalog marketer views e-mail marketing.

And Merchant consideration of a Product Syndication Business delivered by RSSCheck is a relevant 2009 business decision just like moving into email was in 1996 to sell product along with using PPC in 2000-present to bring traffic to your website. In both cases, the early adopters leap frogged their competition. Will you be an early adopter or watch from the sidelines as your competitors Product Syndication Business managed for them by RSSCheck bullet trains by your business. For more information on RSSCheck see rsscheck.com

 

Thegies has an equity interest in RSSCheck


March 15, 2009

What do you do when you read Kevin Kelly?

<p>Seth's Blog</p>

From the Thegies...I read the below and thought if every client and merchant I know does what Seth suggests they would they jump in, test and optimize a new online opportunity just like they did with email in 1995-2000, affiliate programs in 1996-2003, search in 1998-2004, remarketing programs from 2005  and a few years ago to present the social web. Now why don't you check out RSSCheck.com and see how you can jump into a whole new marketing channel with zero cost or risk.

From Seth Godin's Blog.

The Rorschach test question is this: When you read big ideas online, do you nod your head knowingly, do you argue in favor of the status quo or do you actually do something? Kevin wrote his book ten years ago. If you had known then what you know now, what would you have done differently? Of course, you did know it then. So, what do you do when you read stuff like this?

Do something as in start a new division, change a major policy, quit your job, launch a project, change everything? When people read great ideas online, I often wonder what happens to them after that... it's not too late to start a Permission Marketing campaign, but it would have been better in 1999. It's not too late to start treating your customers with respect or build ideas that spread either.

Nodding is fun to watch, but largely ineffective.

July 29, 2008

The worst SEO mistake you can make

Learn where most companies misstep when it comes to this crucial component of their online marketing strategies.

Search engine optimization, or SEO, is the process of tuning the content and coding of a website in order to maximize its listings in search engines. SEO should be part of every well-rounded online marketing program. Pay-per-click advertising is all very well, but it means you have to pay for every visitor. SEO is about getting free traffic from the search engines. Over the course of two years or more, nothing has a better return on investment than SEO. Thus, if you plan on having a website that runs for more than two years, search engine optimization should be a key part of your online marketing strategy.

I started doing search engine optimization in 1996 when Web Position (the world’s first SEO tool) was in beta. I remember receiving an e-mail from the company that pointed out that its tool would make it possible to sell SEO services to clients. At the time, nobody was doing search engine optimization, but it was instantly obvious to me that such a service would be essential if people wanted to be found on the web. I have now been doing search engine optimization for 12 years -- and in some areas I "own" Google.

The most common mistake that organizations make with regard to SEO is bringing their SEO consultants into the process too late. Many companies fail to give SEO its due consideration during a website's design phase. In fact, many companies don't give it any thought at all until after a site's design has been finalized. However, it is during the planning and design processes that SEO considerations are most important and will provide the greatest advantage.

Coding for success
The coding of a site affects search engine optimization in many ways. In fact, coding has a greater impact on a site's listings in the search engines than the site's content. Many sites -- including those of some top brands -- simply cannot be read by search engines at all. If you want to see for yourself, install the Google taskbar in your browser and start looking at the page ranks that appear when you visit various sites. Page rank is Google's assessment of the global importance of a site. It will not take you long to find major sites that have no page rank. Unless the site is very new, a lack of page rank means Google cannot read it.

The technology used to build a site has a direct bearing on search engine optimization. For example, most search engines will not read pages if a URL contains a question mark. A question mark indicates that the content is the result of some dynamic process, such as a content management system or PHP. In other words, it tells a search engine that the content is being generated automatically.

When a search engine perceives that content is automatically generated, it has no way of knowing if the content is generated every hour or only once a year. There is typically a delay of six to eight weeks between the time that a site is read by a search engine and the time at which it appears in the listings. Thus, the search engine has no way of knowing whether what it has just read will still be there when it sends a user to the page in a month or two. In short, any page with a question mark in its URL is potentially untrustworthy. It was precisely for this reason that the mod_rewrite module was produced for Apache. (Microsoft has a similar module for IIS.) Mod_rewrite enables you to lay static URLs over dynamic ones. Adding mod_rewrite to a system before you start coding it is a small job. Adding it to a large dynamic shopping site after it is running is a major headache, and may simply be impossible.

If you read Larry Page's and Sergey Brin's Stanford University dissertation, describing the algorithms they wanted to use in a search engine, you will find that a great deal of space is devoted to the analysis of the importance of pages according to their position inside the navigation structure of a website. Therefore, how you arrange the pages and how they link to each other has a direct bearing on the search engine optimization of those pages. I have used this information to look at potential site designs and, in some cases, have found that the core content would actually rank as less important than the site's privacy policy, simply because of the way links were built to the respective sections.

There are many ways of coding the same page, and not all ways are equal to a search engine. Dynamic menus are a case in point. At present, search engines cannot run JavaScript or Flash. The only hyperlinks that they can follow are standard HTML <A> tags. You want search engines to follow your links because that is how they find the pages inside your site. It is therefore important that you create navigation structures that they can follow. Some dynamic menus can be followed by search engines and some cannot. It depends on how they are coded. Generally speaking, menus that are dynamic because of changes to CSS properties are fine. However, those in which the target page is called via programming are not. Once again, it is best to lay considerations like this down during the design brief because changing every link in the site later is expensive.

This becomes more important if you plan on having a content management system (CMS). If software is going to be writing your copy, or code, you need to ensure that what it produces is as search engine-friendly as possible. Many content management systems generate horrific code from a search engine point of view. Once again, changing a CMS after it has been deployed is a major nightmare -- and often impossible.

Early communication for optimal results
You often won't hear complaints from SEO consultants unless search engine activity is absolutely impossible (and sometimes not even then). SEOs are used to dealing with (from their perspective) sub-standard sites, sites that are barely readable by search engines, and sites that contain many problematic elements. SEOs have learned to accept such sites, and they often have no choice but to do the best they can with the garbage they are given by customers. Many SEOs have learned that pointing out problems may result in a client's deciding to go to a yes-man who will not make waves and is happy to take the client's money for a year or two while achieving nothing.

If you want to get the most out of search engine optimization, your SEO consultant should be the first person you talk to when developing a site -- before you even write a brief and start searching for potential designers. The sites that have had the most success when I've worked with them are the ones that asked me to modify their briefs to cover the requirements of SEO. The last time I did this, three of the five design agencies that had been asked to bid withdrew because they could not meet the standards required to make a search engine-friendly site. Throughout the design and construction process, I worked closely with the coders. Most new sites don't get listed by Google at all for months. Our site was No. 1 in Google within two weeks of launch.

Bring SEO experts into the discussions of what will be built at the earliest possible moment. Don't let the design agency or your own designers get their feet under the table until you have spoken to the SEO expert.

There are many elements that need to be considered during the SEO process, and these discussions often result in the SEO expert becoming the most unpopular person at the table. Such conversations often degrade into a litany of "no, you can't do that because the search engines don't like it," followed by "no, you can't do that because the search engines don't like it." Companies have to watch their favorite design features drop like flies. Sometimes designers have even gone so far as to accuse me of trying to cripple their designs. But ultimately, it is not the fault of the SEOs; they are just the messengers. They are simply telling you the way things are. When it comes down to it, if you want your site to get listed in the search engines, you have to give the search engines what they want.

Remember: Search engines do not have to list every site on the Web. In fact, despite what they may claim, they don't even try. All a search engine has to do is provide people with a list of 10 reasonably valid results from which to choose. The lesson: You need the search engines. They don't need you. Therefore, it is incumbent upon you to understand what they require and give it to them.

Bringing an SEO in after a site is finished is like deciding to do the electrical wiring on a house after you have moved in. By bringing an SEO into the site design process, you can save time and money later. In addition, your site is likely to achieve listings that it could never achieve if SEO were undertaken after the site was already finished.

Design a site for the search engines, and the viewers will follow. Design a site the search engines can't read, and nobody will ever know it exists.

Brandt Dainow is an independent web analytics consultant and the CEO of ThinkMetrics.

July 20, 2008

JavedCustomized Landing Pages: The Unsung Hero of PPC

By Zeeshan Javed
Search Marketing Specialist
iProspect

 
There's no question about it.  When it comes to search engine optimization(SEO), marketers get the value of content.  In fact, if you listen closely, you might even hear them chanting the SEO mantra: "Content, Content, Content."  Yet with pay per click advertising (PPC), a shift takes place.  In this arena, keyword bidding and ad copy creation take precedence, while content development is largely ignored.  This is both unfortunate and unwise, especially when it comes to landing pages.   

Why you should care

While it is understandable that search marketers would give priority to keywords and ad copy  - after all, these elements affect the visibility of ads and entice click-through - this approach overlooks an important factor.  Namely, that customized landing page content can have considerable impact on a PPC campaign.  In fact, it could be the very thing you need to push your PPC campaign forward.  Not only does it drive the time users spend on a website, it also affects the quality score of PPC ads.  Moreover, it also has the power to improve conversions.  In essence, customized landing page content really is the unsung hero of paid search.

Making it happen

Benefiting from customized landing pages requires development resources.  So before you jump-in, it's important to first take a look at how to select the content that is most relevant to your users.  Below is a four step plan on how to do just that.

  1. Assess the major groups of users that click on your PPC ads.  This will help establish your target user groups and set a foundation upon which to perform conversion analysis.  
          
  2. Analyze your landing pages to assess the path users take from the time they land on the website through conversion.  Doing so will reveal where the greatest bounce rate occurs, and in turn, pinpoint where additional content is needed.
          
  3. Research the types of content your target users seek.  This is important as users have predetermined interests when they click on a PPC ad.  For example, a user who clicks on a health insurance PPC ad is most likely looking for comparative pricing information between providers.  However, if that type of content is absent from the ad destination page, the user will likely leave and go to a competitor's site.  
        
  4. Conduct multivariate testing to determine what content leads to the largest net increases for time spent on the website, and what content actually decreases the bounce rate.  
Overall, PPC marketers would be wise to adopt their SEO brethren's above mantra, as content really does matter, even in paid search.  The more customized the content, the more time a user is likely to spend on your website, and the more likely they are to convert.  Smart marketers will be sure to make it a priority, and fully capitalize on its value. 

May 27, 2008

CITYSEARCH SUED FOR CLICK FRAUD

Yusef Robb wrote:

For Immediate Release / May 27, 2008

Contact: Yusef K. Robb / 323-384-1789

 

CITYSEARCH SUED FOR CLICK FRAUD

 

Los Angeles – Citysearch.com is defrauding its advertising customers of millions of dollars by not only turning a blind eye to click fraud, but in fact encouraging it as well, according to a lawsuit filed today in Los Angeles Superior Court by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP.

 

"Most click fraud cases involve companies that simply turn a blind eye to it," said the victims' attorney, Brian S. Kabateck, Managing Partner of Kabateck Brown Kellner. "Citysearch does this too, since it has no real program to prevent click fraud.  But Citysearch goes beyond indifference to actively incentivizing click fraud. Citysearch's motive is simple: clicks equal cash, whether they're fraudulent or not."

 

Kabateck recently won a multi-million dollar settlement from Yahoo! and was part of an earlier $90 million settlement from Google on behalf of advertisers who were victimized by click fraud. He also recently filed a federal class action suit against Google for fraud within its "AdWords" pay-per-click advertising system.

 

Citysearch, part of IAC/InterActiveCorp, which is headed by Barry Diller, pays commissions to its salespeople based on the number of clicks their customers' ads receive, providing an incentive for click fraud, according to the lawsuit.  Furthermore, the suit contends, contrary to Citysearch's own representations to its advertisers, it takes no real steps to prevent click fraud. And when customers become victims of click fraud, Citysearch fails to adequately advise them that they have been victimized or refund the money paid to Citysearch for that fraudulent activity.

 

The lawsuit seeks to represent all people or entities in the United States who paid money for pay-per-click advertising through Citysearch.com.

 

As detailed within the suit, the case of plaintiff Tom Lambotte shows Citysearch refusing to acknowledge blatant indications of click fraud.

 

Lambotte's Citysearch ad received a total of 7 clicks (plus two more that he generated) between December 11 and 25, 2007. On December 26 he received a response from Citysearch to his December 22 request to cancel his ad.  Suddenly, his ad began receiving 12 to 16 clicks a day, for a total of 69 clicks between December 26 and December 31, when his ad was finally cancelled. He received in these five days 10 times as many clicks as he had received in the previous two weeks. Despite this, Citysearch refused his repeated requests to reverse these charges.

 

Click fraud can be detected by software that can track suspicious patterns, such as repeated clicks from the same source. Although Citysearch assures its customers that it applies this technology, the experiences of many of its customers shows otherwise, according to the suit.  Still, customers are led to believe that Citysearch is in fact actively fighting against click fraud.

 

According to Citysearch's "Invalid Click Policy": "Citysearch also has sophisticated algorithms to track sessions and user behavior on our site to assist us in identifying click patterns that would indicate invalid clicks.  In the event we identify a click as invalid, our customers are not charged for such clicks."

 

"Citysearch is operating contrary to its own contract with its customers," Kabateck said.

 

Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP is one of the nation's foremost consumer law firms. Its clients have won more than $750 million against Coca Cola, Farmer's Insurance, Eli Lilly and other major corporations. As a plaintiff's-only firm, Kabateck Brown Kellner is always on the consumers' side.

 

###