Feb
28th

Viruses & Spyware Don't Taste Like Cookies

Posted by Jak on February 28, 2006 at 10:10 am

When I first started working with computers a little over ten years ago I had never heard about viruses. I could safely browse the internet without worrying about what might pop-up, or what the next site I visit may do to my computer.

Today, viruses and spyware have made many internet users skeptical of websites that add something to their computer. While it’s important to be aware of these additions, user fears can make tracking site customer behavior much more difficult. Webmasters want to track as much information about their customers’ habits as possible without invading privacy. This can be done with the use of HTTP cookies.

To date, setting user cookies is the most search engine friendly method for tracking user behavior without treading all over privacy. Cookies are neither a virus or spyware; they are simple pieces of data that are harmless to a user’s computer system. However, public fears of computer viruses and spyware has led to misconceptions about cookies. As with anything, a little education can go a long way.

Most internet users today still don’t realize the importance of using antivirus software or that it needs to be updated. In a past job, I spent at least 75% of my time removing spyware from my customers’ computers. It started with annoying pop-up ads seemingly out of nowhere. Then it kept their computer from booting, made it run slow, or blocked them altogether from getting on the Internet. When they forked out cash to have their system cleaned up, they always acknowledged the fact that they should have had antivirus software installed.

Here’s where the self-education comes in handy. Microsoft provides ongoing info about Windows security updates and PC Magazine offers comprehensive antivirus software reviews. So before you start deleting everything in your Temporary Internet Files folder, find a source you can trust for information about protecting yourself online.

I don’t know of any, but maybe a listing of web sites known for producing spyware would also be helpful. Of course a third party would need to verify before a site was added to the list. But this could help remove the offending sites from search engine indexes, in effect making the sites harder to find.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.

Feb
27th

Poor Positions Hurt in More Ways than One

Posted by Keirsun on February 27, 2006 at 1:30 pm

While it may be a common after-lunch ritual to check your website positioning in Google for your company name, there’s another online traffic source to keep an eye on – Web Browsers. Here’s why: not everybody uses a search engine every time to find a company’s website. It’s just as easy to type a company name into your browser’s address bar as it is an engine’s search field.

Now let’s take into account that the majority of people on the Internet use Microsoft’s Internet Explorer as their daily web browser. So if someone types your company name into IE’s address bar, it would be nice to assume that your company website is promptly delivered. However, that assumption would be wrong.

For awhile now, Microsoft has been sending these browser bar queries to an MSN Search results page. For example, if I enter “microsoft” into Internet Explorer’s address bar I am served an MSN Search results page, just as if I had performed a keyword search for “microsoft“. No big deal, right? Your website should be sitting in the #1 spot for a search on your company name, or at the very least somewhere on the first page. Unfortunately, this isn’t always the case.

Case in point: an episode of the TV show Globetrekker inspires me to search for more information on an exotic escape to Guatemala. Sidestepping a trip to my favorite search engine, I plug “globetrekker” into my browser’s address bar. But even with the unique spelling of the show’s name, I don’t find the TV show’s website in the first 10 results. A look on the 2nd page of results reveals the site halfway down the page. But how many searchers would have kept looking?

Normally, if I don’t see a company positioned at or near the top for its own name, I conclude:

a. The company doesn’t have a website (which is preposterous)
b. Some shady dealings have transpired and their site has been penalized or banned
or c. Their site is so new it has yet to be indexed by the search engines

Regardless of the reason, a lack of positioning equals lost visitors.

Even more interesting is how the Firefox web browser handles address bar searches. With Firefox reportedly grabbing more than 25% of the web browser market share last month, it’s a no-brainer to make sure your site plays nice with this browser.

According to Firefox, “By default, if you enter a search term in the address field and press Enter, a Google ‘I’m Feeling Lucky‘ search is performed, and you’re taken to the first result of that search directly.”

Therefore, using my previous example, when I enter “globetrekker” into the Firefox address bar, I am automatically served up Globetrekker.com, an online travel service that holds the first position in Google for a “globetrekker” keyword search. Since this is by no means what I was looking for, I could easily become a lost visitor.

So, the moral of the story is: Help guide your online trekkers (and potential customers) to their goal by taking the necessary steps to ensure your website holds strong positions in all search engines for your company (or TV show) name.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.

Feb
23rd

Don't Take Our Word for It – Take Google's

Posted by Keirsun on February 23, 2006 at 11:01 am

Maybe you’ve seen the TV ad. Maybe you haven’t. Regardless, every time I see the GM commercial asking viewers to “Google Pontiac” I become more fascinated by its implications.

The exact ad wording is, “Don’t take our word for it. Google Pontiac and discover for yourself.” It’s simple. It’s direct. It’s, dare I say, genius. Why has no one else done this? (Forgive me if another company has; I haven’t seen it.)

Simply put – I’m betting no other company to date has been willing to make this marketing leap. Why tell an audience to go to Google first, instead of just giving out the company’s online address? I see two reasons. Credibility. Usability.

First, credibility. As Max Kalehoff points out in a recent article, “GM’s campaign implies tremendous authority and trust in the Google brand. It’s almost as if Google is moving into the territory of J.D. Power & Associates as the ubiquitous barometer of customer satisfaction.”

Google is an internationally recognized name brand. As the leader of the search engine pack, people have taught themselves to trust Google as a source for qualified information. Therefore, GM seems to be saying, “See, Google trusts us. There’s our Pontiac website right there at the top of Google’s search results. It’s even listed there twice (Adword). So if Google trusts us, you should trust us too.”

Second, usability. I don’t have the data to back it up, but I’m guessing there are literally millions of people who have set Google.com as their browser’s homepage. A company that advertises their website is relying on viewers to remember that online address. But no matter how simple the URL, it’s easily forgotten in the muddled memory stream of “Things I Saw on TV Last Night”. By herding viewers to Google first, people only have to turn on the computer, open their browser to Google, and type the company name into the search box. And a company name or buzzword is almost always easier to remember than a URL.

Back to the ad itself. There’s one very important visual that makes the ad click in viewers’ minds. A 3-4 second screen shot of Google with the word “Pontiac” typed into the search field. Think about it. The advertiser, General Motors, is putting up a screen shot of someone else’s website, Google’s, on national television. That screen shot alone may pause the fast-forwarding-through-ads on more than a few Tivo machines.

As Tessa Wegert points out, telling potential customers to visit a third-party for more information, certainly comes with risks. But doesn’t taking risks sometimes lead to great rewards? I only wonder if GM’s ad firm spelled out these risks to their client. If so, I have more respect for GM. But still not enough to give up my Toyota.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.

Feb
21st

Do B2B's and B2C's Collide in Search Marketing?

Posted by Duncan on February 21, 2006 at 11:05 am

I talk with marketers and IT folks all across the country about their web sites and their potential to use the search engines to drive traffic. Many point out that their company is business-to-business and they want to work with someone who specializes in that space. Still others are in the business-to-consumer space and are sure they need a specialist in that realm. Often I almost lose each group’s attention when I say we specialize in both. They pause. The silence is defining. I try to get them back, “Both B2B and B2C’s want to position well in the search results. We specialize in helping sites position well in the engines. Therefore we specialize in both business and consumer flavored sites.”

I then let this sink in for a couple of seconds. If there is still a defining silence I can mention a client or two of ours that is B2B or B2C. This always seems to make the call more comfortable.

Please don’t get me wrong. I am not saying or pretending that there aren’t significant differences between the B2B and B2C spaces. I just want to make it clear that the framework of best practices for search engine optimization and marketing is sound for both areas.

Let’s use a couple of examples to draw this out a bit. How about real estate? We all know what that is. In this case we are talking search engine results real estate. You want to have a visible listing on the search results page. This is the real estate you are working with. Whether it is in the natural or the paid listings, you need a solid best practices plan to keep visible at all. No difference between B2B and B2C here.

“Oh, but we aren’t in this for just branding,” is what you may say. Well, many sites both B2B and B2C are in this, at least partially, for branding. You may be a B2C that doesn’t want branding. You just want sales. Talk to one of your B2C colleagues at another company and she may point out that branding is precisely what she needs. In this case the B2B vs. B2C argument is thrown out. Now it’s B2C vs. B2C. You see how complicated it can get? (By the way, everyone should be aware of branding in the search results. But that’s a blog post for another day.)

Do the search engines specialize in B2B and B2C results? The answer is yes and both. Last I checked, Google, Yahoo, MSN, and Ask (yes I dropped the Jeeves part on purpose) did not have radio buttons to mark a search B2B or B2C. Nope. Any one search starts with the same little search box and button.

In the end it is all about doing the right things to earn a decent nod from the engines. Building relevant sites that people want to visit and link to is key. The engines are happy to see you listed near the top if you deserve it. Whether you B2B folks just want sales leads that convert over months, or you B2C folks want a sale a second, its all the same to the engines. You have to earn it and there are no short cuts or tricks that work, for the long-term anyway.

Much the same can be said for the paid search marketing space. B2B and B2C sites face essentially the same challenges. They both seek a decent return on ad spend, an acceptable cost per acquisition, a workable ROI index, and maybe some branding thrown in.

As you look for a vendor or partner to help with you search engine placement you should look for companies with a solid track record of successfully and safely positioning sites. That should come first. Whatever your goals, they should be able to help.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.

Feb
20th

Haunted By A Super Bowl Ad

Posted by Vern on February 20, 2006 at 1:57 pm

Yes, I admit it. I watch the Super Bowl for the ads. This year’s crop of Madison Avenue’s best was disappointing. Blame Justin Timberlake, Janet Jackson, corporate re-shuffling of marketing budgets or just plain lack of creativity. Most of the ads during the big game were truly forgettable. But there was one ad that scared me to death. I was stopped in mid nacho-crunching bite by an initially unassuming ad for the new ESPN mobile phone. “We got our sports scores the old fashioned way”, the gray haired gentleman uttered, “on the internet.”

The internet “old fashioned?” I’m an early-adopter – being one of the first in line to embrace the internet. ESPN calling the internet, the greatest gift Al Gore ever gave the nation, old-fashioned? Has that much time passed? It seems like just yesterday that Casey Cowell, co-founder of the innovative U.S. Robotics, was knocking on the doors of nearby Torch Lake, MI cottage owners to raise money for his new fangled invention called the modem.

The internet “old fashioned?” This earth shattering concept occupied my mind during the entire halftime show. (One could argue that was old-fashioned as well. Mick’s comment that they could have played at Super Bowl I adds credence to that argument.)

The internet “old fashioned?” Don’t you believe it for a minute! After downing a second helping of Swedish meatballs to clear my head, it hit me. The internet is alive and well but how we access the bounty of information and entertainment available on the net is evolving. I breathed a sigh of relief and grabbed a helping of shrimp cocktail. The internet is as fresh, interesting and vital as ever. It’s just going mobile. The next question is: How will you take advantage of the new mobile internet? If you’re involved in search engine marketing, and I suspect you are, Oneupweb can help. Check out our Mobile Marketing Services.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.