Life After Google
Posted by josh on January 31, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Lately there's been a rash of Hollywood movies, television specials and documentaries concerning the fate of the human race. If you've been hiding your head in the sand - Spoiler Alert - We lose. Seems we're doomed to drown, burn up, poison ourselves or be devoured whole by a creature called Birdzilla.
All this doomsday rhetoric got me thinking about a couple of things: 1.) Start stockpiling birdshot and 2.) Nothing is without end. Which brings me to today's topic; What is life going to be like after Google? I know what you're thinking, and NO I'm not insane (not clinically anyway). Google may be the most powerful business entity the world has ever known but someday it will be no more.
How Google will pass and who will be around to attend the funeral is yet to be determined. Perhaps the search engine company will make a wrong assumption about its audience and release its own version of New Coke or Betamax.
Google CEO Eric Schmidt doesn't think they'll go out that way. In a recent interview he had this to say:
[Google is] run by three computer scientists we're going to make all the mistakes computer scientists running a company would make. But one of the mistakes we're not going to make is the mistake that non-scientists make. We're going to make mistakes based on facts and data and analysis. What kills a company is not competition but arrogance. We control our fate.
Interesting philosophy, I wonder if Bill Gates subscribed to the same school of thought on the eve of his release of Microsoft BOB?
So what will a world free of Google, or any traditional search engine, look like? Well it's difficult to say. Ten years ago it would have been virtually unfathomable that we could exist without the phonebook (or stacks of phonebooks) within arms length at all times. But when was the last time you blew the dust off and thumbed through thousands of listings to find the one you deemed most relevant to your search. Ten years from now, will today's methods seem as archaic?
Whatever lies ahead for Google, and the human race for that matter, is still uncertain. I for one, being a glass-half-full kind of guy, would like to believe we'll both persevere. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be prepared for the worst. Anyone looking to sell an extremely large bird cage?
Super Bowl - Bust Or Buzz?
Posted by anne on January 30, 2008 at 10:32 AM
"Super Bowl advertising is less about the relevance of a message but more about the entertainment quotient," said Devika Bulchandani, Executive Vice-President Director of strategic planning at the New York office of McCann Erickson. According to Devika, marketers aren't selling a product; they are creating a brand buzz.
But what about that buzz? Are advertisers getting the biggest bang for their buzz?
With 93 million viewers, according to Nielsen's measurement of SuperBowl XLI, advertisers are finding ways to be creative since their competition has the same 30 seconds. Let's take a closer look at some of the more creative measures expected to appear in this year's contest to attract the ears and eyes of the American consumer.
Who's Buying What in Super Bowl XLII?
The range is wide and includes warnings to parents about the danger of teens misusing parents' prescription drugs from the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy. Also, Bridgestone Firestone of North America has reserved two spots for tire ads. While the first spot, "Scream," shows a woman screaming as her car is about to hit a squirrel, the second, "Unexpected Obstacles," features an unlikely pair - Richard Simmons and Alice Cooper - and a deer.
Capitalizing on the fact that Valentine's Day is right around the corner, companies like Victoria's Secret target men and women. Why? The chief marketing officer knows that the Super Bowl is probably the highest-viewed dual-audience vehicle and the perfect target audience.
Would you pay $2.7 million for 30 seconds of air time during the Super Bowl?
That's the question. Last year, 93.2 million viewers tuned in to the game, which aired on CBS, and marketers paid as much as $2.6 million for a 30-second spot. This year, Fox has gotten some marketers to pay as much as $2.7 million to $3 million per 30 second to appear in the game.
But wait, here you have a collection of customers and their friends; why not throw that $2.7 million at it and watch the bottles fly off the shelves? According to Lisa Haverty, a cognitive scientist at Brain on Brand in Brookline, Massachusetts, who published an article titled, "Don't Flush Your Ad Down the Super Bowl":
You might make a cool ad, a memorable ad, an ad beloved by all who behold it, but unless you've incorporated some very fundamental cognitive elements, your ad most likely will be attributed to Bud. No one will recall your brand."
If you compare the cost of a 30-second commercial to an SEO/PPC campaign which is considerably longer than 30 seconds, more like 30 days or 30 weeks, the costs are significantly less! In the search engine optimization world, $2.7 million will not only create a buzz for your company, it will create a campaign that will last through Super Bowl XLII, well into Super Bowl XLIII, and beyond.
Tags
Super Bowl
Oneupweb
Microsoft Breaks HTML Email in Outlook 2007
Posted by jason on January 29, 2008 at 09:03 AM
I'm certainly not the first to report on this, but the effects have finally trickled down into my world and caused me enough of a headache to feel compelled to add my two cents to the ongoing debate.
Our good friends at Microsoft have done it again.
For years, they have been in the web browser market, producing Internet Explorer according to their own set of standards, (not the W3C's) making life just a little more difficult for us web developers. Coding for modern, standards compliant browsers and IE6 at the same time is guaranteed to make even the savviest web coders wince in pain more than once. With the release of IE7, Microsoft is finally beginning to get it right. But, in keeping with years of tradition, they had to throw a wrench in there somewhere. Why? Because standards compliance always seems to take a backseat over at Microsoft.
HTML emails have always been subject to very specific rules in order to ensure that the message displays properly in most email clients. CSS positioning and JavaScript haven't been widely supported in HTML emails for a long time, so tables and inline styles have been the name of the game for as long as this coder can remember. Outlook 2003 used IE6 as a rendering engine for its emails, so even though support was limited, marketers could rest assured that their emails would still render within a bona fide browser.
You would think with a new and improved Microsoft browser release (IE7), Outlook 2007 would be the HTML emailer's dream. Using IE7 as a rendering engine would bring a new level of standards support and features to HTML emails in Outlook 2007.
That is, if Microsoft decided to use it.
So why in the world would they decide to use MS Word as a rendering engine for HTML emails? I can't even begin to imagine why. The only thing I know is that emails I have coded that display beautifully in most, if not all, browsers and email clients suddenly don't properly display in Outlook 2007. As a word processor, it is great, but as a browser, MS Word offers an incomplete rendering engine, missing features previously supported by IE6. This is truly moving backwards.
An article by CampaignMonitor.com claims that Microsoft has "taken e-mail back five years." I would tend to agree, as five years ago I could do more with HTML emails than I can today - and still have widespread support.
I won't go into all the details about what you can and cannot do, but you can read what Microsoft says about it here:
Word 2007 HTML and CSS Rendering Capabilities in Outlook 2007 (Part 1 of 2)
Here is a useful tool to help you craft your new HTML emails:
2007 Office System Tool: Outlook HTML and CSS Validator
Lack of Animated Gif Support
One thing the new Outlook doesn't do is support animated gifs. Most other email clients do. So how do you cater to them all when creating an email marketing campaign, company newsletter, etc.? There is an interesting way around this that we came up with. (It does increase precious file size, but what else can you do?)
When creating your animated gif/banner, set the first frame to include your specific call to action, i.e... I recreate my last frame in the space of my first frame, but set its display time to 0 seconds. Now, in Outlook 2007, the last frame of my banner - which includes a call to action - displays first. And even though there is no animation, all the needed information is there. In other email clients, it skips over the first frame and goes straight into the animation. This eats up file size as you have to insert an extra frame, but it seems to do the job of creating a cross platform animated gif that can still be used in Outlook 2007.
Message to Microsoft
I'm glad you're here, but I wish you'd grow up and start playing nicely with web developers. While everyone else works hard to create standards compliant software that eases the deployment of information on the web, you seem to keep doing things your own way - taking true progress in two completely different directions: the standards compliant way and the Microsoft way. And it just doesn't do anyone any good.
Update: This was our most popular blog post for the week of January 28th. Listen to the author discuss this topic on the StraightUpSearch Podcast.
Tags
Microsoft
Outlook 2007
Oneupweb
ROI: Not Just Data on a Spreadsheet
Posted by luke on January 28, 2008 at 09:03 AM
Measuring your return-on-investment is about more than justifying budgets. It is the measure by which a company can identify opportunity, move forward and continue to grow. However, while the ability to accurately assess marketing's return-on-investment is critical for justifying more marketing budget, marketers are still finding difficulty in measuring the actual impact their marketing initiatives have on overall sales.
So where does this difficulty originate and how can we avoid it? The answer: defining ROI for your company. As simple as this may sound, the metric means different things to different people. A 600% return-on-investment within the marketing department may translate into a 450% return-on-investment within sales.
The point is, marketing and sales need to come to an agreement in terms of how ROI will be measured, whether that means including cost figures or defining a qualified lead.
Now let's say marketing has already launched multiple online initiatives, including paid search marketing and natural search engine optimization prior to meeting with sales.
As a search marketer, it's my job to help marketing accurately measure the overall value of these initiatives. Therefore, there are a few questions I need to be asking myself. Are we tracking every conversion opportunity? Is there a 'tell a friend' feature or live chat function that we can be tracking. There are multiple components within a web site that have the potential to provide added value to these online marketing initiatives.
Next, have I provided my client with all of the performance numbers as well as sound rationale necessary to show value and make the case for additional budget? Communication breakdown is too often overlooked and this means that search marketers need to be thinking beyond marketing and IT. Search marketers have the ability to feed information to the sales department. For example, insight as to when people begin looking for their product(s) and services throughout the week, month or year and the specific search terms that are being used by these potential customers is vital information.
A key enabler for success is a strong marketing automation platform utilizing a single database to collect, segment, and integrate all marketing campaigns. With such automation, companies have the ability to manage marketing programs that deliver accurate, timely and unbiased ROI reporting. In addition to traditional marketing metrics, marketers can then calculate how much revenue is generated from a specific campaign, offer or lead source.
In the end, real ROI goes beyond data on a spreadsheet and serves as the foundation to good marketing.
Taking TV Advertising Online - The Super Bowl Challenge
Posted by chip on January 25, 2008 at 09:00 AM
Duncan's post yesterday about the Special K diet and how well Kellogg's integrated television ads, search efforts and a website - this time in the form of a social community on Yahoo Groups - got me thinking about how companies are starting to become more conscious of the power of integrating their traditional media efforts with online and search marketing.
Seeing as though I work in search marketing, for years I have been disappointed at how many companies just simply drop the ball when it comes to coordinating their traditional marketing efforts with the vast opportunities that present themselves online.
Lately I have been pleased to see many companies doing a much better job of tying campaigns into a variety of different online efforts. From simply including their domain name in the spot, to encouraging viewers to go online for a special internet-only promotional offer, to launching fairly sophisticated niche sites and viral campaigns; more and more companies seem to be starting to "get it".
Surely you've all seen Burger King's Whopper Freakout TV ads by now. Whether you're a loyal Burger King customer, or you try to avoid fast food altogether, you can appreciate these ads.
First of all they're funny. Second, they aren't trying to get you to come down to your local franchise and order a Whopper (well, not overtly anyway) - the call to action in these spots is to visit WhopperFreakout.com where you will find more of these advertisements in the form of viral videos.
Also funny, though considerably more strange, Cheetos has launched a campaign consisting of spots urging viewers to visit OrangeUnderground.com and join their movement. This site consists of an initial video message and contains links to YouTube videos of these spots, a "recipe book" (which consists of what are essentially recipes for playing out nasty Cheetos based pranks) as well as a blog - all geared towards getting people to commit "random acts of Cheetos".
As the Super Bowl rapidly approaches, I've been thinking about the synergy of off and online media more and more. It will be interesting to see how many of the companies participating in the largest television advertising event of the year will have their Super Bowl ads supported by online campaigns. Last year was a resounding failure in this regard, with very few companies taking the initiative to coordinate any supporting online materials.
The cost of advertising during the Super Bowl this year has reached $2.7 million for 30 seconds. Paying to ensure you can be found for related searches during and after the big game is a mere pittance by comparison. There is no excuse for not making this investment. The return that can come from engaging your customers will more than pay for itself.
Hopefully this year will be different than last - we'll all just have to tune in and find out. I know that I'll not only be watching the game, but I'll have my laptop handy to see how the advertisers do. While I'll be interested in each one of the ads, I'll be looking to Anheuser Busch especially to lead the way - reportedly running ten spots this year.
Tags
Super Bowl
Super Bowl Ads
Oneupweb
UnSuper Size Me - Integrated Social Marketing
Posted by duncan on January 24, 2008 at 08:48 AM
I admit it. This blog idea came to me early on a Saturday morning. I think it was 3:39am. I had woken up and was hungry. I switched the TV on and stared while I snacked. I must have been watching fit TV.
A Special K ad came up. No big deal. I am from Michigan the home of Kellogg Company of Battle Creek. Everyone in Michigan grows up with Kellogg products. We are comfortable with their brands. What did strike me was that this Special K television ad was integrated with an online social marketing program.
The television ad told me to go to Yahoo! and simply type in the word Special K. Cool. I can do that. I turned on my laptop and went to Yahoo and searched for Special K.
Click Image to Enlarge
Yahoo listed a "Partner Results" link for Kellogg's Special K. This partner ad was in the same place on the Yahoo results page where we would typically see "sponsored results". Kellogg and Yahoo did a nice job of keeping good on what the television told me to do.
I clicked the ad in Yahoo and went to a Yahoo Groups page that was all about Special K cereals, snacks, shake mixes and more.
Special K is smart. This Yahoo Group is pretty cool. There are almost 10,000 members. There are forums keeping consumers involved by allowing them to share their stories with each other. In the age of consumer generated media this is great stuff. People often respond better to other consumers' stories and advice than they do to the advice given directly by brands.
Special K even offers to setup a custom diet for each user. You can design your own plan. You answer a series of questions and then the site gives you a diet that is about 80% Special K products (you have whatever you want for dinner).
I admit I was a little thrown by a diet so specific to one product line. It reminded me of the movie Super Size Me which was a diet of nothing but McDondalds food. Of course Special K is about losing weight, not gaining it like Super Size Me. I guess this is the UnSuper Size Me diet.
I went over to Google and typed Special K. There was a pay-per-click ad there as well. Clicking it didn't take me directly to the Yahoo Groups page, but there is a decent landing page there to get you into the Special K Design Your Plan website.
Click Image to Enlarge
There was no similar paid search engine marketing ad in the MSN.com search network for Special K. I think they missed the boat by not covering this base as well.
Will I start a Special K diet? No. I am too thin as it is. But I am pleased with how Kellogg and Yahoo worked together to integrate television ads, sponsored paid search ads, and "partner" banners within search engine results. This is a great example of how to use several marketing channels and the new tools of social marketing to gain a set of consumers that become dedicated to a brand.
Tags
Social Marketing
Special K
Oneupweb
High School Reunions Fall Victim to Facebook
Posted by jaymz on January 23, 2008 at 09:00 AM
After bumping into a former high school acquaintance at a local dive back home, my friend Nick and I began to converse about how much people change over the course of a few years. After sharing some of our most notable encounters (and a few beers) Nick professed his excitement for the infamous ten year reunion. "I can't wait to see what time has done to us all," he joked.
Initially, I shared in Nick's excitement; however, this excitement slowly dissipated as I considered my online exposure to former classmates. What do we need a reunion for anyway? The social-search power of Facebook and MySpace is all you need to stay up-to-date on the latest gossip, right?
Have these social networks spoiled all of my good reunion surprises? Possibly, but with a daily new user average of 250,000 people, Facebook comforts me by letting me know I'm not alone.
Nick, on the other hand, is one of the few outliers of my generation. Nick absolutely abhors computers! That must be why he is able to maintain his high school reunion excitement. This got me thinking how different our post-graduation social experience must be.
I thought about the thousands of news feeds that I have received over the past few years, the "pokes", invites, groups, updates, and messages that I had sent and received. I realized what a tremendous impact social networking sites are having on our culture. These sites have made it very easy for people to build and maintain enormous social networks that are used for more than just gossip.
I tried to explain to Nick that a plethora of young entrepreneurs have utilized the networking capabilities of social sites to launch their own businesses/careers. These sites have changed the way we find music, clothes, and movies. They have allowed us to form groups, and organize parties, talk about politics, and publicly end relationships.
Amazing! Thomas Friedman was right, the world IS flat!
There is no denying that online social networks are powerful tools that can be utilized for countless functions, and if their expansive user base and rapid growth isn't enough to convince you to join... at least you still have the reunion to look forward to... right Nick?
Democratic Debate - Capitalizing on Heated Exchanges
Posted by steve on January 22, 2008 at 01:07 PM
This is the third installment of our ongoing series about the evolving 2008 Presidential Campaign and how it's being waged online. This time we'll be talking about capitalizing on news events, such as the presidential debates.
Last night in South Carolina, the Democratic presidential candidates were part of a heated debate that was rather exciting to watch - that is, as far as debates go.
The candidates exchanged blows on a variety of topics, from the war in Iraq, to poverty, to education, and for the most part, these exchanges came from, and were directed at, Obama and Clinton. Throughout the debate, both Clinton and Obama eloquently defended their stances on the topics discussed, and from what I saw, there was no clear winner.
Those that saw the debate may have a different opinion as to whether or not one particular candidate came out on top, but they, along with those who only saw a portion of it, or for those who missed it entirely, may decide to follow up today for more information on the debate.
Over the years, politicians have gotten better at capitalizing on the Web as a means to reach and engage potential voters, but they still have a ways to go.
Here's an example:
I'm assuming that numerous people will be turning to the search engines to read up on the debate that took place last night. For these types of news stories, Google has been increasingly integrating results from its various verticals into its main index. For instance, here you'll see that the top listing for the term "democratic debates" was pulled from Google News:
Click Image to Enlarge
What's missing here?
Looking at the top and right of these results, you can see that there are no sponsored listings. Users who wish to find more information on Democratic debates are provided with news stories from Google News, CNN and ABC News (along with a Wikipedia page, of course).
When it comes to Google users, the Democratic presidential candidates are at the mercy of the authors of these news stories to convey their respective messages. This is the case for a variety of different terms.
In all fairness, though, when dropping the 's' from my previous term, you will see that Obama's campaign is in fact bidding on the term, "democratic debate":
Click Image to Enlarge
This is what I mean when I say that politicians have made progress when it comes to capitalizing on the Web, and in particular, the search engines. There is certainly still room for improvement, however.
These candidates are spending millions of dollars on their political campaigns. Why not set aside some of that money in order to gain a substantial and consistent presence in the search engines, and capitalize on the potential to act quickly and establish visibility for queries relevant to such current events?
By doing so, they will benefit from having some degree of influence on the information and message communicated for a wide range of important and popular topics.
Join us again next month for Part Four in our ongoing series on the Presidential Campaign online. Until then, you can read Part Two: McCain Buys Hillary. Mitt Buys A Bunch. Others By Stand.
Update: This was our most popular blog post last week. Listen to the author discuss this topic on the StraightUpSearch Podcast.
Tags
Democratic Debate
Oneupweb
The Reports of Google's Death Are Greatly Exaggerated
Posted by andrew on January 21, 2008 at 11:30 AM
Bad news from The Googleplex this weekend. Search share is down. Down. Not down by a lot. But down.
Nielsen Online reports that, for December, everyone's favorite burgeoning monopoly saw 56.3% of all U.S. searches, a slight decrease from its 57.7% share in November.
Google? Down? Whoa.
But before we get all "The sky is falling" and "Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off the floor" and "Knock me over with a feather," let's consider the long view of things.
Here are your six-month Nielsen totals:
Who's up? Google, pretty significantly. I mean, gosh, how do you increase from what was already more than half of market share? (By being ingrained, after only seven years, in people's behavior patterns, to the point where your company name is a verb and insignificant online writers refer to your office headquarters as "The [company name]-plex.")
Who else is up? MSN, less significantly. And Ask, if that matters. Who's down? Yahoo!, very significantly. And AOL, for what it's worth. (All together, 24-and-unders: "What's an AOL?")
To me, the continuing decline of Yahoo! is the biggest news to come out of the most recent data. One of the first Internet megapowers, Yahoo! continues to lead in things like quality of fantasy football user experience and amount of red in their corporate logo but, very clearly, they're losing significantly elsewhere. (Like, potentially, number of employees?)
A recent New Yorker article very eloquently demonstrated Google's reasons for success. From CEO Eric Schmidt:
One of the mistakes we're not going to make is the mistake that non-scientists make. We're going to make mistakes based on facts and data and analysis. What kills a company is not competition but arrogance.
While Google's growth has been staggeringly quick, it has also come from unique ideas and serving needs that users didn't know they had. Google's growth has been historically quick, but it has also been intelligently quick.
Yahoo!, meanwhile, just grew. And grew. And sometime, sooner than would have been imaginable five years ago, it might just go the way of AltaVista. ("The Most Comprehensive Search Experience on the Web!" - Just ask them.)
Google's 2008 Mobile Initiatives
Posted by mike k on January 18, 2008 at 11:40 AM
There is no doubt that Google has firmly set its eyes on increasing its presence in the mobile device market. Google has a number of projects currently running or in the works that deal directly with the mobile market. Here is a quick overview of what to look for in 2008.
Google Android Mobile Phone Platform
Google is planning to make its presence known in the mobile handset market with the introduction of the Google Android mobile platform. The platform was announced on November 5th 2007 as part of the launch of the Open Handset Alliance, a group of more than 30 technology and mobile companies that have partnered together in an effort to develop open standards for mobile devices.
In an effort to make sure there is developer support Google has announced the Android Developer Challenge which will provide $10 million in awards for developing mobile applications built on the Android platform. According to the challenge website some of the suggested areas for focus include social networking, email, instant-messaging, gaming, user interfaces, location-based services and more.
Google Partners with Wireless Provider Clearwire Communications
In a deal announced this week, Clearwire will start delivering Google's communication suite, Google Apps, to its customers. Clearwire expects to begin migrating its customers to Gmail and Google Calendar in the first half of this year.
Clearwire is excited to launch our relationship with Google to further our commitment to deliver all the Internet has to offer to a person rather than a place. Both companies are built on the foundation of providing a simple to use, rich and open Internet experience and we believe the addition of these communications tools will be a tremendous benefit to Clearwire's customers", said Scott Richardson Clearwire's chief strategy officer. "We look forward to expanding our working relationship with Google further enhancing our customer's access to the Internet -- anytime and anywhere.
Google's Intention to Bid in the Upcoming 700mhz Spectrum Auction
Probably the most exciting news for Google's mobile strategy was the announcement earlier this week that Google will be allowed to bid on the upcoming 700mhz spectrum auction. The auction is scheduled to begin on January 24th and Google will be bidding against some of the heavyweights of the telecom industry, including AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Echostar Communications, Cablevision Systems, Qualcomm Inc., and Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen.
Why would Google want to own part of the wireless spectrum? Quite simply the search engine giant would like to create an open, wireless internet that would allow people to use whatever devices or software they want to access the web. Pair an open wireless internet with Android and you potentially have millions of mobile users that will be searching (and being served ads!) with Google.
It will be interesting to see exactly how much Google is willing to put on the table to become a major player in the telecom industry. In July the company said it would be willing to spend $4.6 billion in the auction if certain "open" conditions were met in the auction rules.
2008 looks to be the year that Google really pushes to cut the wires and provide its services to as many mobile users as possible.
Tags
Google Android
Google Mobile
Oneupweb
Attention Advertising Sales Professionals: This Is What Media Buyers Are Searching For
Posted by carly on January 17, 2008 at 09:00 AM
You've spent days preparing the perfect sales pitch. This pitch is undeniable! No one could possibly turn down the tremendous "value" you are about to serve to your soon-to-be big ticket client. You have already spent the commission check mentally and you know for certain that this is going to be a "low-touch" client who you may never have to call again except to sell them more of your brilliantly lucrative ad space. In fact, you won't even need to do that. They'll call you begging for more! After all, you even set up a WebEx conference call. What more could they ask for? Pretty pictures, nice prices - done deal. You just scored a quiet client for life.
Right?
Right.
First, a disclaimer - this post is not intended to insult or offend the advertising sales professionals of the world. Sales is a difficult career. I know this. I tried it. Truth be told I wasn't strong enough to make a career out of it. Kudos to the professionals who are good enough to make it.
Now, I'm the "buyer". I jumped to the other side of the fence, but let me tell you, the grass isn't always greener. I'm equally as frustrated on this side at times because I can't find what I'm searching for. After all - isn't that the very principle behind our business here at Oneupweb? Make sure your clients can find what they're searching for? Once found, make sure it's easy enough to obtain. Then, keep checking. Right? It's our mantra here at Oneupweb: "Simple, but it works".
Salivate Advertising Sales Professionals, I am about to tell you what we, the Media Buyers, are searching for.
A Complete and Current Media Kit - Please note the words current and complete. Easy enough? Put it on your website and do everything in your power not to make it a 356k download. Much like sales professionals, we too like to prepare for the phone call.
The Demographic of your Audience - I do not care that you had 3 million page views last month if you can't tell me who any of them were or what they did when they got to your site. (Unless I am trying to market toilet paper.) Why would I? Think about it. If I have taken the time to narrow down a specific revenue target, job title, purchasing discretion and shoe size, why would I want to pay money to broadcast my company to people who don't fit that demographic? I'm not asking you to twist your demographic to match my target audience and I surely don't want to spend an hour talking about how a hobby sportsmen may very well be the CMO of a $200 million dollar company. I just want to know who your audience is... and please forgive my lack of understanding if you are unable to tell me who they are.
Loyalty - I could probably list this without explanation, but I'll explain. You rely on me, I am your client. Without your clients, sales goals go unmet, your commission check is lack luster and you soon may be out of a job. Likewise, I rely on you to keep my job. Make a phone call when needed, respond to questions with answers, contact me in advance of the deadline for the perfect issue that is directly in line with the goals of my company - not after the fact when you're trying to sell me (your old reliable client), remnant space. Not happening.
Value - Value does not = $ discount. If you really need to know what a potential client sees as value, feel free to read the three points above, and if further clarification is still needed, ask me. Sell the real value of your advertising space and services. You have the audience clients are after, you deliver top notch service, you know your product, can answer questions and help advertisers figure out new and creative ways to reach out to those elusive potential clients. That's value. While a 50% discount is welcome, it is of absolutely no value if you can't meet set expectations and deliver measurable results. And if for some reason you don't return phone calls, congratulations, you have found a way to offer negative value.
A Proactive Approach - I had a brilliant Sales Director in a previous position and he taught me the simplest, most effective sales tactic I know. Always call your clients before they call you. If something is wrong, don't wait for them to find it first and then call you. Why? Because now they're angry. Call them! Now they may be a bit angry, but they are secretly grateful that you're looking out for them and you are well on your way to building that sacred client relationship. Look at the campaigns of your clients; work with your production team to make sure things are correct. No one expects you to do this every day, but do it once or twice. If you do it for the first time and everything is going well, send your client an email to let them know that all is well. I can assure you they will be impressed.
Simple, but it works.
Tags
Media Buy
Sales Pitch
Oneupweb
Google's Quality Score Failures
Posted by adam on January 16, 2008 at 08:54 AM
To refresh everyone’s memory, Google rolled out "quality score" for its paid search network in August 2005. The 2005 quality score algorithm evaluated the relevance of keywords, ad text and click through rate.
Google revised the algorithm in February 2007 to incorporate landing page relevance when determining an advertiser’s minimum bid price for each keyword. This was Google’s official statement on the update’s purpose:
Simply stated, we always aim to improve our users' experience so that these users (your potential customers) will continue to trust and value AdWords ads.
To the other search engine marketers reading this, ask yourself these questions:
- How much has the introduction of landing page quality score improved the user experience?
- Has landing page quality score moved advertisers who provide little or no value to the searcher at least off the SERP?
If you’re unsure of your answer to these questions, search around. Just because Google has taken the position of a search engine that strives to boost the user’s experience doesn’t mean it does. If quality score was meant to improve the user experience, then why are the following sites still able to use these landing pages?
Click-research.info is designed to generate revenue by taking advantage of Yahoo's search network via clicks from Google sponsored listings. Click-Research.info gets paid each time a user clicks on one of these ads. Browse the site yourself and take note that most of the links on the site are outgoing.
Click here for a screenshot of the site in Google's sponsored listings. Below is a screenshot of their landing page.
Property-Search-Guide-Web.com is another example of a website getting traffic through Google PPC ads. This site is also designed to make money by taking advantage of Google’s search network advertisers. Its Google’s responsibility to make sure these types of advertisers aren’t able to spam the SERP. Back in February, I was under the impression the “new‎ quality score algorithm would do this.
Click here for a screenshot of this site in Google's sponsored listings. Below is a screenshot of their landing page.
Remember, in each of the examples above, two parties are making money. The first is obviously the advertiser (Click-Research.info & Property-Search-Guide-Web.com), otherwise they wouldn’t bid on Google search advertising. The second is the provider of the sponsored search results (Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc). In these specific cases, Yahoo also gets paid for a portion of each click; the remainder is paid to the publisher (Click-Research.info & Property-Search-Guide-Web.com). If you've never heard of this practice, it's usually referred to as click arbitrage.
Anytime a searcher lands on an irrelevant page, they have three options. 1) Click the back button, 2) Navigate through the site to find better content, or in these cases 3) To click on a relevant sponsored ad. In my opinion, this process produces a poor user experience.
Google has the power to determine how much traffic is directed to landing pages featuring sponsored search results. Google has the choice to either allow advertisers to use these types of landing pages, or not. It’s really that simple. Most of the ads in the sponsored links section can also be found on Google’s original SERP. Eliminating these advertisers would improve the searcher’s experience, while reducing competition for the advertiser.
Tags
Google
Quality Score
Oneupweb
Embrace Music via Technology: 2008 New Year's Resolution
Posted by ellen on January 15, 2008 at 01:12 PM
In 2006 I resolved to learn to "Catch Good" (grammar intended). I wanted to reach out my hand and effortlessly catch things. In May, I caught a wadded up dollar bill that had been thrown...to someone else...in the middle of a business meeting. Absolute satisfaction.
This year I decided to learn English to metric conversions. I planned to label it "Embrace Metric", but guess what? I don't need to learn English to metric conversions; that information is readily available online (it's also a 2nd grade skill... if Google is to be believed.)
So I scrapped the idea and decided instead that my 2008 New Year's Resolution is "Embrace Music via technology". Fifty-two weeks in the year to explore fifty-two new genres, artists, albums and songs. The internet and social media are going to help.
In fact, the internet and social media have forever altered the music landscape. Gone are the days of shelling out 15 bucks for a CD that might be a bust. Take a look at Radiohead. They recently embarked on a "Pay what you like" model for their new album "In Rainbows". Radiohead hasn't revealed how many downloads, what people paid, or the level of success or failure they experienced. However, a hard copy version came out New Year’s Day, and immediately went to #1 on Billboard’s album sales list, so something about their model worked.
Another way that technology has changed the landscape of music marketing is that today, artists with nothing more than a video camera can get national recognition. The playing field has leveled out and we are all the beneficiaries. For example, would any of us have heard of Tay Zonday or seen the video of The Wrong Trousers if not for YouTube?
On my Facebook wall I can see a friend's top picks for Hip-Hop music. My hairstylist burned me her favorite CD by "The National" and it's been uploaded to iTunes and is now on my iPod.
For me this will be the year to check out the social initiatives of MetaCritic as well as the shared media available on Pitchfork Media's Forkcast.
I'm blogging about music. Maybe I'll talk Oneupweb into doing a podcast on music and how social media has changed the landscape of marketing music. Maybe I will listen to Folk music. And maybe not.
So here's an idea; why not follow my lead and spend a year using online social media and technology to embrace music? On November 21st we can all participate in Bill Drummond's "No Music Day" to see how the void feels to our music saturated ears.
iPhone Users Call Google in Record Numbers
Posted by keirsun on January 14, 2008 at 10:19 AM
The holidays are long-gone, but Google continues to celebrate a mobile success that began with Santa leaving shiny, new iPhones under thousands of Christmas trees.
According to The New York Times, Christmas day traffic to Google from iPhones was greater than from any other mobile device. That's no small feat considering that the iPhone reportedly holds just 2 percent of the global smartphone market.
In addition to a slew of new iPhones getting unwrapped and fired up online all on the same day, Google also deserves a chunk of the credit for the influx of Christmas traffic.
The search engine has been keeping its developers busy lately building a streamlined mobile browser experience. Last month, Google released software designed specifically for mobile phone web browsers, calling it Grand Prix. According to a December New York Times article:
A project that took just six weeks to complete, Grand Prix allows for fast and easy access to Google services like search, Gmail and calendars through a stripped-down mobile phone browser. (For now, it is tailored for iPhone browsers, but the plan is to make it work on other mobile browsers as well.)
But Google's Grand Prix was just the start.
With plans to divulge the details of a new mobile interface at the Macworld Conference today, Google aims to keep its iPhone audience engaged and growing.
Lessons from National Geographic - Make Your Website a Resource
Posted by geoff on January 11, 2008 at 01:02 PM
This weekend (January 13th to be exact), The National Geographic Society will celebrate its 120th anniversary. There's no guesswork as to why it has been able to stay an icon and rock-solid resource for well over a century. In fact, many of the elements that have led to its longevity are things that go into making a website a valuable resource as well.
Let's take a look.
The Images.
Really. What more needs to be said? It's the first thing people think of when they hear the name National Geographic. Perhaps more than any other publication in history, National Geographic has become synonymous with striking images. They probably sell subscriptions on that aspect alone.
How are the images on your site? Are they grainy or low-quality? Are they stock photos that everyone in your industry shares? When a customer sees images of your products, will they associate those products with your organization? Take a look at your images and consider how they could be better. Who knows, you just might get some good social media rub from it as well.
The Content.
National Geographic doesn't take a surface-level approach to their content. They are not there simply to inform; they are there to teach. When you can create content on your site that goes beyond simply talking about your product or service and digs down into: how things work; why things are designed the way they are; and why this is something that potential customers would benefit from owning, then you are getting into the things that further establish you as a reputable source.
Look at your content. Where are you informing? Where are you teaching?
Navigation.
Look at the cover example. Sort of resembles a good homepage navigation doesn't it. You look at an issue of National Geographic and the first thing you see is what is enclosed and on what page to find it. Simple. Direct. Effective.
Is your navigation set up to get people to what they need as quickly as possible?
Affiliations.
National Geographic has made its affiliations a priority for a very long time. If you visit their website even now, you can see who they are working with to bring new and fresh material to readers.
Is your organization working with established leaders? Do you talk about it? Having your name continually mentioned in the same breath as well-respected organizations helps to define you as a well-respected organization as well.
Conclusion.
Too often it's easy to get locked into looking at sites in your industry. And it can lead to some tunnel vision. There are lots of organizations, however, that have had success for a very long time. Take some time to see what they are doing right. Then ask yourself how it can be done in a way that makes sense for you.
Improving Internal Link Structure on E-Commerce Sites
Posted by teal on January 10, 2008 at 04:49 PM
Ever since I entered the SEO industry, it has become increasingly impossible for me to look at a website without analyzing - even on a top level - its optimization and structure.
"Boy-o-boy," I say to myself, "this site is a mess!" or "Would you just look at this URL structure?!?!" or "This site would benefit from a navigation overhaul..."
It's really getting bad - I'm trying to find an SEO support group. How am I supposed to remember what I went to a site for in the first place when I end up analyzing their title and meta tags?
When I was in college, and SEO was in its embryonic stages, I wrote a rather lengthy paper comparing the site structures of middle-end fashion sites, such as J.Crew and the Gap, to high-end fashion sites like Louis Vuitton and Giorgio Armani. Ignoring search engines completely, I had launched into a theoretic and slightly pretentious analysis of social assumptions and equality, accessibility issues, and rhetoric, not knowing that in a few short years, I would be working for Oneupweb and would have a different perspective.
You may also like...
Nowadays, browsing through a website like Gap.com gives me great ideas for other e-commerce websites, not only to sell product but also improve their internal linking structure.
Many times, large e-commerce sites have a very top-heavy link structure - meaning, the deeper you navigate into the site, the less incoming links those pages have from other site pages.
A feature that the Gap and other e-commerce clothing sites have implemented is the "You may also like..." suggestion. This feature essentially outlines a handful of other products that the user may like in addition to the product they're currently viewing.
The image below demonstrates this feature on Gap.com. From an SEO perspective, the Gap has it right, too. The images are links, and have descriptive and accurate ALT text. The text below each image is also a link.
From this one product level page there are four additional links pointing to other product level pages. These links not only provide the user with a helpful pathway to other product pages, but also give the search engine web crawlers additional links to other product level pages.
Turn your attention to...
Other considerations that can be taken to improve internal linking on a large e-commerce site include implementing text-based navigation on all site pages to help search engines and users navigate easily among products and categories (especially if the main navigation is in Flash or other non-indexable format.) Also, make sure to utilize unique descriptions on the product level, and search friendly URLs with limited dynamic parameters. Social media enhancements like blogs and message boards also provide opportunities for adding links to those deep product pages.
See also...
Ready to improve your website's internal linking structure and overall usability? Get started now by downloading our recent white paper:
Time for Your 15-Point Usability Checkup