RSS

Monthly Archives: August 2009

Google AdSense Welcomes 3rd Party Ads. Publishers Rejoice, Middlemen Replaced?

26 Aug

Just got this little email from the Google AdSense team. It reads, in relevant part:

We’re writing to let you know about an upcoming update in your AdSense account designed to help you generate the maximum revenue from your ad units. You’ll soon be able to allow multiple ad networks to show on your pages, which means that advertisers from external Google-certified networks will be able to compete with AdWords advertisers for your ad space.

If you’re unfamiliar with what ad networks are, they’re companies that partner with advertisers and publishers to buy and sell ads on sites they don’t own themselves, similar to AdSense. Ads from these networks will compete with Google ads to show on publisher sites, and the ad generating the highest revenue for publishers will be displayed.

So what does this mean? In a nutshell, this is basically Google’s way of improving optimization and revenue for their publishers while simultaneously nipping in the bud middleman optimization companies like Pubmatic, YieldBuild, and Rubicon Project.

One might also speculate that this leads the way for Google to persuade these third party networks to let AdSense into their networks as well, thus enabling Google to gain incremental revenue by increasing CPMs for their publishers, as well as gaining incremental revenue by increasing the distribution scope of the Google Content Network. Smart move.

So now Google has the DoubleClick network and the expanding Google Content Network, Yahoo has YSM, Right Media, Blue Lithium, and their AdReady self-service partnership, and AOL has Quigo, Advertising.com, and an upcoming self-service bid management tool. Let the exchange/network wars begin (er, continue to get more intense!)

Complete email screenshot is here:

 
1 Comment

Posted by on August 26, 2009 in adsense, pubmatic, Right Media, rubicon, yieldbuild

 

Bay Bridge Authority Using Google Content Network to Warn Citizens of Closure

25 Aug

I got an interesting geo-targeted ad today on Gmail:

If you can’t read it in this screenshot, the headline is “Bay Bridge Closed” followed by the description: “Over Labor Day weekend, the SF – Oakland Bay Bridge will be closed.

On the one hand, kudos to the Bridge Authority for using online marketing to get the message out to the masses (in addition to road signs anywhere within 30 miles of the bridge, it seems). Of course, being the consumate search marketer that I am, I couldn’t help notice a few flaws in the ad text.

My biggest suggestion to improve the ad would be to add a call to action to get me to actually click through and read about the closure. For example, you could do something practical like”

SF – Oakland Bay Bridge closed over Labor Day. Get alternative routes now!

Or you could try one of the four basic human emotions. We could start with fear:

Don’t get stuck in hours of traffic this Labor Day – Avoid the Bay Bridge at All Costs!

Vanity:

Be a smart driver, find out all the details about the Bay Bridge Labor Day closure now!

Greed:

Save gas by avoiding the Bay Bridge over Labor Day. Use the money for a picnic!

Exclusivity

Limited offer! First 1000 visitors get free “I Survived Bay Bridge Closure” sticker!

So good start Bay Bridge, but next time read Blogation before you write your ad . . .

 
2 Comments

Posted by on August 25, 2009 in Uncategorized

 

Conversion Rates Don’t Vary by Position, You Say?

21 Aug

Google’s Chief Economist, Hal Varian, noted in a post on the AdWords blog today that conversion rates are pretty much the same across positions on AdWords. To quote the post:

… on average, there is very little variation in conversion rates by position for the same ad. For example, for pages where 11 ads are shown the conversion rate varies by less than 5% across positions. In other words, an ad that had a 1.0% conversion rate in the best position, would have about a 0.95% conversion rate in the worst position, on average. Ads above the search results have a conversion rate within ±2% of right-hand side positions.

In the great scheme of things, I suppose this is possible. If you are analyzing millions or billions of pieces of data, I imagine that the data just normalizes down to small percentage differences between different positions.

The problem here, however, is that the data set is too big to draw real conclusions. For example, if I told you that 95% of Americans make between $0 and $166,000, and that 60% make between $19K and $91K you might conclude from this data that wealth is evenly distributed in the US, right? But then if I told you that 10% of the US population controlled 71% of the wealth in America, and 1% controlled 38%, you might think of the data in a different light.

Here’s a different way to think about the Google conversion rate data that I think would probably have a much different outcome. Do a conversion rate analysis by “token length”, which is search engine language for the number of words in a search query. If someone types in “baseball” for example, what’s the conversion rate differential between position #1 and position #10, versus a query for “buy Louisville slugger size 28 wooden baseball bat.”

I suspect that the conversion rate for the first query is going to be very low for the first position, simply because you are going to have a lot of browsers who simply click on the first ad that they see. Any browser who eventually makes it down to position #10′s result may very well have turned into an actual shopper after clicking on all the other ads. Conversely, if you already know the exact product you want – and your search query indicates that intent – you are much more likely to convert on the first ad you see that actually offers the specific product you want.

Suffice to say, I’ve seen plenty of examples where conversion rate does vary dramatically by position. To make a general statement that position does not factor into the equation is something that, well, a smart economist who loves statistics but doesn’t really understand SEM might be apt to conclude.

Postscript: for those of you wondering about the picture at the top of the post, it’s a scientist explaining why the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded. For a great explanation of why statistics and the presentation of statistics failed to alert NASA that this disaster would occur, check out Edward Tufte’s book, Visual Explanations.

 
2 Comments

Posted by on August 21, 2009 in conversion rate

 

Search Engine Watch Learning How to Write Like North Korean Newspapers

19 Aug

Talk about self-serving. Here’s a ‘review’ of Search Engine Strategies (SES) on Search Engine Watch, the online Web site for, um, SES. The headline says it all: “SES San Jose 2009 Attendees Give Conference & Expo High Marks.”

In other news, the editors of Blogation.net have awarded PPC Associates “best SEM firm”, “best CEO”, and also “best overall company in the world.” In the category of best blog, the winner – for the sixth year in a row – was Blogation, getting 100% of the first place votes.

None of these stories, however, should overshadow some of the important news coming out of the Korean Central News Agency. This week alone there was the eye-opening “Story About Removed Straw Mat“, where Kim Jong Il stopped his car to save a few grains of rice for farmers, the People-esque piece “Kim Jong Il Enjoys Art Performances“, and the food section update “Fermented Flatfish Mixed with Yam.”

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 19, 2009 in Uncategorized

 

Alert – Google Cash Scam

19 Aug

Move over flogs, now there’s something meatier! Introducing, um, fnews – fake news! I got a full-screen pop up today from the “Los Angeles Tribunes” with the headline “Breaking: Google is Hiring at Home Workers. Pay $373 Dollars a Day (or more).”

Surely the Los Angeles Tribunes wouldn’t lie about such great news, would they? What’s more, ABC News has also somehow participated in this story, as evidenced by the prominent ABC News logo at the top of the page.

The ‘article’, is, of course filled with factual errors about Google and outright fabrications. For example, the article quotes from “CEO Larry Page” but shows a picture of actual CEO Eric Schmidt. And it includes a ridiculously fake quote from Larry Page:

“We know that times are hard right now and hiring this pool of online workers will not only allow thousands of Americans to earn a healthy salary from home, it will help Google do our job more thoroughly. . . The key is knowing that our home workers are not required to have extensive computer or internet knowledge, if you can send and receive email, you can take part in this exciting new opportunity.”

In fact, Google’s hiring process is strict to the point of ridiculous. Even if you have ten years of experience in your field and graduated from college in the last millennium, Google still asks for – and actually considers – where you went to college and your college GPA. If you didn’t graduate with honors from Stanford, Berkeley, an Ivy, or maybe Duke, don’t bother applying to Google. Is Google making an exception because “times are hard right now?” Um, not.

The payment amounts that you can make with the program are all over the map. There’s an ad at the top of the page that says you can $173/hr, which works out to around $1000 a day, but the headline claims “$373 a day (or more). A few lines later, the article suggests a range of “$30,000 to $75,000 a year”, which is between $82 and $205 a day, or between $10 and $25/hr. And then on the sign-up page, the offer claims “up to $349 a day”, which would be around $30/hr. Of course, $10/hr would be great with this program. Instead, it will end up costing you $1000/yr to participate, as we’ll see below.

The name of the program that ‘Google’ is offering is called “AdWork“, a clever play on AdWords, the actual Google program. And it turns out that Google is not alone in offering this great opportunity, as there is a link at the bottom of the page that proclaims “Ebay to Join Google in Make Money From Home Program.” As noted on this blog numerous times, eBay and Google aren’t good friends and they aren’t about to band together with a joint program for the good of America.

Some other interesting things about this fake news article and fake program: the “comments” section is of course, fake. So much so that if you look at the source code, you can see that these are simply hard-coded into the page:

<div class=“ptcMessageDiv”>Nice strategy Google. First you make the best search engine then you find a way to actually use it for the good. I am doing this program and already beat my last job’s pay. I never thought I’d say this, but THANK GOD I GOT FIRED!!!!!!!<br><span class=“ptcPostedByCaption”><span>Little Dog Toto<!–span><!–span>&nbsp;<span class=“ptcPostedByDateTime”>Aug-13 <!–span><!–div>

And it also appears that whoever created this scam page ripped off the format directly from an ABC News page, and that they didn’t even have time to remove some of the ABC tagging. ABC’s Omniture and (ironically) Google Analytics tracking are still in the code! Here’s some Omniture code from a cash for clunkers story (s_omni.pageName = “abcn:s1_business:8318714:ford raises output as \”clunker\” sales surge:wirestory“; //content name).

In case you are wondering how this scam works, when you click on any link on the “news” page you end up at a typical lead capture form. If you click on the small print, you get the following notice:

By submitting an order, You automatically receive a 7-day trial to the Start Up Kit Using Google. Your 7-day trial begins immediately upon placing your order. You will be billed $2.95 at the time of order submission. Once Your trial is active you have 7-days to decide whether to accept Your Subscription. Prior to the expiration of the 7-day trial period, You may cancel Your subscription by calling toll-free at 1-800-497-4988. Should You fail to cancel Your Subscription within the 7-day trial You will be billed $79.90 at the completion of the 7-day trial and every month thereafter for continued services and hosting of your Visual Webtools software unless canceled by You.

Note that your trial beings “immediately upon placing your order.” So if it takes a week for your kit to arrive and you don’t like it, too late, you’re trial is over – let the $79.90 a month charges commence!

So let’s summarize this offer, here are the basics:

  1. It starts with the fake Los Angeles Tribunes, and adds in an ABC News logo
  2. It steals the code directly from ABC News;
  3. It claims that Larry Page is the CEO of Google and wants to hire uneducated at-home workers;
  4. It promises anywhere from $10 to $173/hr in income;
  5. It sends you to a site that will start billing you $80/month in perpetuity a week after you enter your credit card.

P.T. Barnum, eat your heart out!

 
3 Comments

Posted by on August 19, 2009 in google cash scam

 

Coupon Sites: In Google’s Crosshairs?

15 Aug

Coupon sites seem to single-handedly power the affiliate industry, especially for retail affiliate programs. Many in the affiliate industry swear by these sites. My friend Brook Schaaf of Schaaf Consulting – one of the leading outsourced program managers (OPM) for affiliates – recently advocated for the value of coupon sites, but also acknowledged some of the complaints publishers have about these URLs:

I think coupon sites are an excellent value add. Beyond online and offline deals, they have a natural affinity for loyalty, price comparison, community, and more. At the same time that the coupon vertical is growing, I perceive a simultaneous growth in the myth that coupon sites don’t provide value because orders “would have happened anyway” or some similar logic.

He may well have been talking about me, since I’m one who tends to propagate this ‘myth.’ I think a lot of coupon site revenue is not “incremental revenue” to publishers; when a consumer goes to an etail site, adds an item to his shopping cart and is about to check out, and then sees an “enter coupon code” link, and ends up finding a coupon via SEO from a coupon site, I question how much work the coupon site did to earn their affiliate commission. Moreover, if in fact the sale ‘would have happened anyway’, the merchant has lost tons of money here when you add up the affiliate commission, affiliate network fee, OPM fee, and the coupon discount.

I tend to think that Google agrees with my side of the argument; they hate it when the SERPs are filled with coupon site after coupon site, especially when many of these sites are optimizing against merchants that either don’t currently have a coupon, or don’t offer coupons in the first place. Indeed, Zappos apparently got so annoyed by coupon sites trying to get affiliate revenue by SEOing around “zappos coupons” that they’ve create a page called “The Truth About Zappos Coupons.” The page is pretty clearly attacking coupon site SEO:

Don’t get confused either. Some sites might try to offer you “Zapos Coupons” or “Zoppos Coupons,” but don’t let them fool you. There is only one Zappos.com and again we do not offer Zappos coupon codes. They may try to get you by using terms like:

  • “Zapos Coupons”
  • “Zoppos Coupons”
  • “Zappo Coupons”
  • “Zappo’s Coupons”
  • “Zappo.com Coupons”
  • “Zappa Coupons”

But again, don’t let them fool you. They are not going to give you any discount since Zappos Coupons are not offered.

Today I was browsing the Google Code labs (the place where Google releases code that they are in early public testing stages) and noticed something that I thought might be a Google attempt to push coupon sites out of the organic results. It’s called Google Coupon Feeds and Google describes its utility as follows:

Google coupon feeds enable businesses to provide coupon listings that will be included in Google search results. Coupon feeds enable merchants to easily distribute coupons for free via the web. Consumers can also search for, print and redeem coupons for free. This service brings tangible value to both merchants, who can use coupons to find new customers who are very likely to make purchases, and for customers, who can find more competitive offers for the products and services that they buy.

Hmm, a way for merchants to upload coupons directly to Google that will be “included in Google search results” and “brings tangible value” to merchants and customers. Sounds just like a coupon site, except for perhaps the “tangible value” that is difficult to see on coupon sites, at least from the merchant perspective.

Granted, right now this product is in beta and is not anywhere near ready for primetime; after all, you need to be comfortably formatting and uploading a feed to Google, something that anyone who has worked in the comparison shopping business knows is not a core strength for most merchants. But the fact that this program even exists tells me that at least Google understands the value of couponing and may well be thinking about ways to monetize this traffic themselves instead of leaving it to affiliates.

Indeed, since Google acquired Performics and their affiliate program (now called the Google Affiliate Network or GAN), you could potentially see Google using this coupon feed and uploading all participating GAN merchants’ coupons through it. It could either be an argument for merchants to join the program (Use GAN and you will get actually free traffic from coupons in SEO, instead of traffic from coupon sites who use your affiliate link and then get the SEO traffic themselves), or perhaps even a way for Google to monetize these coupons themselves (append an affiliate link to the coupon listings and directly take the affiliate commission for themselves!). While I doubt that Google would ever do the latter and attempt to actually monetize SERPs through affiliate links, the former could be a good selling point to any merchants sick of questionable traffic from coupon site affiliates.

Americans love coupons, and more and more Americans are turning to the Internet to find the latest and greatest deals. Google loves pushing out middlemen, and coupon sites often fit that definition. And merchants are wary of gray-hat affiliate techniques, not least of which is the “cookie stuffing” that can often occur on coupon sites. Perhaps the expiration date on coupon sites might not be too far around the corner.

 
3 Comments

Posted by on August 15, 2009 in cookie stuffing, coupon sites, google affiliate network, google coupon feed

 

6 Things Google Could Change Tomorrow To Make Life Easier for SEMs

14 Aug

Short post, because it is past midnight but here goes:

  1. Unlimited goals in Google Analytics per profile. Why in the heck do I have to create a new profile every time I go beyond four goals;
  2. Time of day conversion tracking in AdWords reporting. I want to do day-parting, but Google only gives me day of week conversion data. I hate log files;
  3. Allow campaign management companies to “clone” Google accounts to YSM and MSN. Search engine, please! (that is supposed to be said like a gangsta);
  4. One email address for multiple AdWords accounts. Every time a client gives me access to their account, I have to create a new email alias. Ugh.
  5. Don’t change account reps every three months. Can’t I just work with someone and get to know them at least a little bit?
  6. Parameter insertion a la MSN AdCenter. This is the only time you will see me giving credit to MSN for SEM innovation.

There are more I could add and for the record if this post was about YSM or MSN, the list would be longer, trust me . . . What did I miss?

 
1 Comment

Posted by on August 14, 2009 in Uncategorized

 

SES Catchphrase Bingo!

09 Aug

I just read a good (and therefore cynical) article on next week’s Search Engine Strategies show in San Jose from SearchQuant (a/k/a Chris from Omniture). Don’t get me wrong, SES serves a purpose, and that purpose is that it’s a good place to meet clients and old friends. But as Chris aptly notes on his blog:

Panelists, vendors, consultants and engine folk, let’s admit it – in our haste to secure our piece of this rapidly expanding pie, we have turned this conference and others like it into a glorified feeding frenzy where insiders position tactics as unique insight, features as solutions and experience as vision.

Amen to that (I plan to do my best to get some of the pie while I’m there!).

Here’s my idea for a fun way to spend an hour on the floor of the SES exhibit hall: SES Bingo! Here’s how it works. Get a group of people together and walk the floor of SES with bingo cards. Create your list of buzz words you expect to hear as you walk the rows and get ready to shout BINGO!

If you need help generating your initial list, here are some sample phrases I expect to hear next week:

  • “Proprietary algorithm”
  • “Adwords certified company”
  • “It’ll be in the next release”
  • “Wanna a free koosh ball?”
  • “What’s your monthly spend?”
  • “I’m good friends with Matt Cutts.”
  • “Hey, is that David Rodnitzky of Blogation.net? Where’s my camera?”
  • “Percentage of spend.”
  • “ROI or ROAS?”
  • “We’re not black box technology.”
  • “What happened to the Google Dance?”
  • “I’m good friends with Danny Sullivan.” (oops, wrong conference)
  • “Microhoo.”
  • “Follow me on Twitter.”
  • “One second, I’m tweeting.”
  • “I’m good friends with David Rodnitzky” (put this one in the middle square).
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 9, 2009 in search engine strategies

 

Come See This Performer – We Promise He Won’t Spit On You!

07 Aug

Here’s a good way to *not* market a concert:

I’m sure Enzo really appreciates that subtitle.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 7, 2009 in Uncategorized

 

The Revolution Will be Attributed

07 Aug

What’s the latest trend in search engine marketing? Attribution, my friends. If “plastic” was the secret to success in the 1960s, the 2010s will be attribution (well, at least for SEM). Since most search marketers are quant nerds, there has been a constant need to get better and better data about who is buying, what they are buying, how they arrived at their decision, and why.

Web analytics was a good start toward getting this sort of info. Combining Web analytics with search engine-specific tracking pixels, and then overlaying both with aggregated third party data sources like Compete and Quantcast was the next evolution. And now we are on to attribution.

I see several types of attribution that are important for SEM:

  • Multi-channel attribution: When a user clicks on several marketing channels, how do you attribute the conversion amongst all of them?
  • Multi-click attribution: When a user clicks on several keywords on the same search engine, do you give credit to the first click, last click, both, or neither?
  • Post-cookie attribution: If a user converts after your tracking cookie expires (usually a 30 day cookie), how do you attribute this revenue to your marketing?
  • Offline attribution: What happens when someone clicks on your ad but then picks up the phone and calls your sales team and buys from you?
  • Lifetime value attribution: Are you attributing orders that come in months or years down the road to your SEM keyword?
  • True revenue attribution: What happens if you have a lot of returns or cancellations – are you subtracting this from your ROI calculations?

Marketers that can get a handle on these issues have a huge advantage over marketers who continue to rely only on the Google Conversion tracker or Google Analytics (or any basic Web analytics package). In the last few months, I’ve seen some interesting tools that are attempting to solve this attribution issue. Included in the list of notable companies: Convertro, ClearSaleing, and the Google Analytics Super Cookie (the name alone merits mention)! I have also heard that Kenshoo is promoting their attribution model in their pitches, and that the other campaign management companies either already offer an attribution model or are quickly building systems to integrate into their existing platforms.

This is all great stuff and I am personally excited to dig into these tools and try to fully figure out attribution for my clients. I’ll update this post in a couple months with some (hopefully) good results!

 
2 Comments

Posted by on August 7, 2009 in clearsaleing, convertro, kenshoo

 

Google One Ups Napoleon – Two Front War, How About an Eight Front War!

05 Aug

If you take one thing out of a military history class, it is likely to be this: never fight a two front war. Napoleon simultaneously attempted to battle the Russians, British, and Spanish, and met his Waterloo. Germany made this mistake twice – first during World War I (French, British, Belgians on one side, and then Russia on the other; then during World War II (pretty much the same enemies). One could also argue that the mighty Roman empire eventually collapsed because it had grown too large and was fighting too many enemies on too many fronts.

So if you take a second thing out of a military history class, it will likely be this: history repeats itself. Fast forward to today’s Internet world and perhaps that is exactly what is going on today at Google. Google, perhaps like Roman Emperors and Napoleon, has made some brilliant strategic moves in its day, and also happens to have a lot of ‘generals’ filled with boundless hubris and enthusiasm. Its not surprising then, that Google’s leadership may have concluded that history doesn’t apply to them and that no enemy or combination of enemies can stop them.

Which may explain why Google has declared war against virtually every major business power in its brief 10 year existence. Let’s review a few of the heavyweights Google has and currently is attacking:

Fighting a war against Microsoft would be fool-hardy enough, but add Yahoo, eBay, Apple and the entire media world and that’s a lot of fronts against a lot of powerful foes. Maybe Google will buck the trend and prevail – after all, we exist in a business world where the rules of engagement are still being defined daily. Of course, that’s what the Romans thought, and Napoleon, and Hitler, and some might say the US (i.e., Iraq and Afghanistan).

If you take a third lesson from your military history class (I know, what are the odds that you would learn three things in one class?), it’s this: history is written by the victors. The battle rages as we speak, so far be it from me to declare a winner yet. It seems to me, however, that lessons #1 and #2, will likely be proven correct at some point in the future.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 5, 2009 in napoleon, two-front war

 

Two Random Observations That I Was Too Lazy to Turn Into An Entire Post

04 Aug

Random Observation #1: If I told you I knew of a start-up that literally produced one new company a month, and then turned around and sold that company in 30-45 days for around $1 million, you’d be interested, right? Well what if I told you that these new companies could be built for around $5,000 to $10,000 each, and the startup’s return on each company was around $30,000 before build costs (so about $25K)? This company I’m talking about – it’s called being a realtor in the Bay Area before the housing bubble burst!

Random Observation #2: Isn’t it amazing that we as consumers have extreme cognitive dissonance when it comes to marketing? We see an ad on TV for an incredible piece of electronics and we are wowed by how technically awesome it is. Then we look back at a magazine from a few years ago and see the same advertiser proclaiming the virtues of an older version of the same product and laugh – how quaint that product looks today! And yet, we seem to forget (as we go to the store for the hot new tech gadget) that we’ll be thinking that about ourselves a few years later. All the while, the manufacturers are sucking us in for another ‘upgrade.’

BONUS! Random Observation #3 (only for parents of small children): Why is it that Sir Topenhat continually praises Thomas and his friends as “really useful engines” when it is clear that they are anything but? They are constantly wrecking, fighting, screwing around and otherwise being the exact opposite of good employees. I think some tough love is needed on the Island of Sodor!

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 4, 2009 in Uncategorized

 

Uncle Sam Wants You (To Reduce Your Wrinkles)?

01 Aug

The latest online marketing trend? Using President Obama as justification to buy something (or basically anything).

Consider this series of YSM ads I discovered today:

President Obama has increased my financial aid (great), but he also wants me to refinance (good thing he increased the financial aid, that will pay for the closing costs on the refi).

But wait, Obama has more recommendations (thank you advertisers for alerting me to these):

Yes, it turns out that Obama has some stocks he wants me to invest in, and he also thinks its time for me to consider getting new auto insurance (not sure why, maybe this is related to the “cash for clunkers” program)?

Earlier this week, Obama sat down with Professor Gates and a Cambridge police officer “over a beer” to settle their differences. Is it a stretch to conclude that Obama wants me to drink Miller Lite whenever I have a dispute with someone (and at lunch, no less). Obama also has an occasional cigarette – should I go out and buy some Camels?

Interestingly, during the Bush administration, these sort of “President says do this” ads were non-existent. Perhaps rather than public opinion polls, the best measure of a President’s popularity is whether online advertisers are willing to associate their products – however tenuous that association may be – with the White House!

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 1, 2009 in barack obama

 
 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.