Despite this, there are still many who will treat or describe SEO as a purely on-page technical exercise. Essentially they’re saying that high amounts of traffic can be recieved simply by tweaking various tags and attributes and strategically using keywords on one’s website. Whilst this can certainly help, and, in the case of some very niche keywords, raise rankings, this is sort of activity will not enable a website to compete on phrases where large amounts of traffic are available.

This situation partly explains why it’s possibly to get 10 radically different solutions for an SEO strategy with equally radical price differentials – many of the very cheap solutions are only optimising the on-page technical factors, which, according to industry experts are only around 15% of the algoirthm.

The explanation for this is very simple – there’s simply too much competition on the web. To demonstrate my point I’ll show you exactly how much competition there is for a big phrase. Here is a search on Google for the phrase “Car Insurance” :

Yes, that’s right – 35 million web pages seemingly competing on that result . Ok, so you’re probably thinking that most of those pages aren’t relevant at all, and this is where the clever SEO comes in. Not so.

If we use Google commands to search for the same phrase with that phrase in both the title and page URL (a very strong indicator that the web page is actively optimising for that phrase) we see that there are still a staggering 439,000 web pages in Google’s index. It doesn’t matter how advanced your software is, or how technically adept somebody may be, there’s simply no way you can do anything on-page that puts you head and shoulders over half a million results, because there isn’t a logical way for Google to determine which is the most relevant.

It would be rather like trying to pick 10 people to hire from 439,000 applicants based purely on the contents of their CV – they can *say* whatever they want on their CV – but it ain’t necessarily so – you’d definitely want to meet them, collect references and so on before hiring, right?

There is the also argument that on-page is fine if you’re not targeting super competitive phrases, but even for some less competitive terms you’ll need to do a lot more than tweak a few elements on-page.

There are many people who prop up the ‘tweak it and they’ll come’ theory – these include designers of wordpress plugins; £199 website optimisation ‘tools’;  lazy SEOs and those who simply don’t know any better. The sad thing is that it not only does it not work, but it could cost the business owner thousands of pounds of lost sales.

So, if you’re in the market for some SEO consultancy make sure you take a long hard look at those proposals. Ideally the activity proposed should comprise of:

1. Technical & on-page
2. Content creation (NB you may be able to save yourself some pennies if you’re willing (and able) to create the content yourself)
3. Link building

Oh, and bear in mind that great old adage – “pay peanuts… get monkeys”.

The pay per click model came about in the late 1990s and differed from previous methods of advertising which were based on CPM (cost per thousand impressions) rather than cost per click. GoTo.com (later Overture, now part of Yahoo) were the first search engine to offer PPC in 1998.  Google were a little late to the party, adopting the PPC model in 2002.

Back in the bad old days it was literally an auction with the advertiser who was willing to pay the most per click securing the top position.

However, it quickly became obvious that this wasn’t the best model – a pretty irrelevant ad which gets only 1% of the clicks @ £10 per click generates less revenue than a relevant one which gets 10% of the clicks @ £2 per click.

As such in the mid-noughties Google introduced quality score – an algorithm which essentially ensured that most relevant ads (i.e. the ads which generated the most revenue) would get pushed to the top of the results. Yahoo and MSN later followed suit with algorithms of their own.

This changed the face of PPC – as instead of fighting an auction war, PPC-ers had to get a little bit cuter and make sure their ads were as relevant and attractive to users as possible in order to secure a decent position on the page and (potentially at least) reduce the cost they pay per click.

Quality Score Explained

Quality score is calculated every time your keyword matches a search query – that is, every time your keyword has the potential to trigger an ad.

So, how is it calculated?

Quality score on the search network is calculated based on the following metrics:

1. Historic click through rate of the keyword, ad and display URL
2. Relevancy of the keyword and ad to the term which is being searcher for
3. Relevancy of the keyword to the ad copy
4. Relevancy of the keyword to the landing page
5. Landing page quality
6. Historic account click through rate

You can read more here.

For obvious reasons Google don’t reveal quite how these factors are weighted, however it’s easy enough to guess

It’s pretty much all about click through rate.

This a nice metric as high click through rate indicates that users think that your ads are relevant/offer an attractive proposition AND of course clicks = money for Google.

Should you *always* worry about Quality Score?

Frankly, no. Whilst having a high quality scores is good from a cost per click point view (as you’re likely to be paying less per click) – you shouldn’t necessarily let it bother you overly. Obviously Google want you to play by their rules and create relevant ads that people want to click on so they can continue to rake it in; however – on some occasions you might want to bid on certain keywords, but limit the number clicks you get.

For many clients we use ad text to pre-screen clicks. For example, we may bid on a term like ‘taxi insurance’; but because our client only wants to insure taxi drivers over a certain age we might elect to run an ad like this:

Low Cost Taxi Insurance

Over 25? Compare Leading Taxi

Insurers & Find the Cheapest Quote!

TaxiInsuranceExperts.co.uk

Now here, we’re actively trying to limit the number of clicks which we’ll get – which of course may impact our quality score – however it’s far more important for us to deliver the right sort of leads to our client. So it’s not necessarily something you ought to be tyrannised by

Questions, comments, etc? Hit up the comments my dears.

Image credit KB35

The general industry-accepted idea is that while Broad Match keywords are useful for new and old advertisers alike, there are many situations in where using them may not be in the best interests of the advertiser.

Whilst Broad Match keywords promise to give the advertiser maximum exposure, exactly how relevant that exposure is often called into question. The result is that many advertisers will get left with numerous mismatched impressions that negatively affect their campaign quality score and worse, clicks that result in no material gain; as in some instances searchers will click on these mismatched ads, but not go on to convert once on the site. Hence, the cost of that click may not be realised now or ever.

While the more restrictive Phrase Match option covers this issue to a large degree, it achieves that by compromising on ad exposure which means lower traffic and conversion volume. Increased ROI at the cost of significantly lower volume of conversions is not very appealing to businesses/marketing professionals.

The accepted norm in the search marketing community until now has been to start with Broad Match keywords with an extensive list of accompanying negative keywords to manage exposure to relevant searches. Search marketers will then identify the keywords/phrases that perform to the desirable level of ROI and subsequently move them to the stricter Phrase and Exact Match types. In all this, the start of the campaign has been most crucial and the precision and accuracy with which the initial selection of Broad Match and negative keywords work has been of great impact on the success of the campaign.

The search community has long debated over the usefulness of Broad Match and demanded an alternative for and more control over the random search queries their keywords end up getting impressions for. Google have finally answered by introducing a new match type in the arsenal. It’s called the Broad Match Modifier (BMM). Essentially, it fits somewhere between the Broad Match and Phrase Match keyword types. The object it satisfies is to stop individual words from Broad Match keyword phrases from triggering impressions on ‘deemed’ related words in user searches. Google have released the graphic below to explain exactly how BMM differs from all other match types.

Click for larger image

With Broad Match, the words ‘formal’ and ’shoes’ will both be independently considered and matched to singular/plural versions, synonyms and other related words not included in the campaign keyword. ‘Formal’ triggered impressions for ‘Evening’ and ‘Men’s Dress’, while ‘Shoes’ triggered ‘Footwear’ and ‘Wingtips’. If the advertiser earlier only wanted people searching for shoes and Phrase Matched ‘Formal Shoes’, they would lose impressions on searches like ‘Evening Shoes’ and ‘Black Dress Shoes’ because their ad will only show if the phrase ‘Formal Shoes’ was part of the search query.

However, by introducing a “+” sign just before the word shoes, they can achieve exactly what is desired, without losing on a possible load of other search queries that are not part of their campaign.

Google has reported that advertisers who used BMM during beta testing of the new match type reported seeing higher clicks and conversions than before. However, Google reported their findings from advertisers who earlier mainly used the Phrase and Exact Match types. Clearly, the increase in exposure lead them to receive more traffic, but with greater control over click-quality – this probably led to the rise in conversions. The report clearly shows the BMM as a means to entice cautious advertisers to have a more bullish approach with their marketing without losing too much control. But what does it mean for the rest of the advertising community that already uses Broad Match?

Other beta testers have independently revealed that on introducing BMM keywords into campaigns with existing Broad Match keywords, BMMs had significantly higher CTRs and conversion rates than the traditional Broad Match terms. We experienced similar results on testing the BMM with one of our clients.

Overall, we observed average conversions on BMM keywords to be double that of the Broad Match keywords.

All in all, Google seem to have hit the right note with search marketers with this release, although it will be interesting to see how keywords utilising these matching options perform in the longer term.

Please note, for now, the release has been made available to advertisers in the UK and Canada only.

These instructions are intended for those businesses who have 10 or fewer locations – if you’ve more than 10 locations, you’ll need to do a bulk upload – click here for instructions.

Ordinarily there are two steps to getting listed; you’ll need to submit your business details and then verify your listing.

However, in some instances you may find that your business is already listed. Typically (but not exclusively) this tends to happen to restaurants, pubs, bars etc. If when you search for your business on Google maps, you’re already there – you’ll need to claim your listing.

So first things first – search for your business!

Go to Google Maps and type in your business name and location; then skip to the relevant section below depending on whether or not a listing appears for you:

No Business Details Appearing…

1. Go to Google Places
2. If you already have a Google account, sign in with your username and password. If not, you’ll need to create one.
3. Click on ‘add new business’
4. You’ll then be taken to form which you’ll need to complete with your business details
5. Click next, and you’ll be taken to a further form which will enable you to enter more details about your business – the most important part of this is the categories section – Google will suggest categories, but remember you only need to choose one of the categories which they suggest. The remaining four categories are free text – so you can pop in anything you like. These categories will help people to find your business so make sure you’re using terms which people are likely to search for.
6. Throughout the process you’ll be able to see your listing as it will appear on the right hand side of your screen. Once you’re happy with everything – click submit.
7. You’ll then need to verify your listing. This can either be done by post, or by phone. If you elect to go for the post option you’ll receive a postcard with a pin number. Once you receive it, you’ll need to login to your account and submit the pin to verify your listing. If you elect to go for the phone option – make sure you’re sitting right next to the phone and you’ve got a pen at the ready! The phone call comes through almost instantly in my experience – a funny, tinny, automated voice will read out your pin. Login to your account and submit the pin to verify the listing as before.

Business Already Listed…

Google have used a variety of sources for local business listings – e.g. directories, other review sites etc, so it’s actually pretty common to have a listing even if you’ve not submitted the details yourself. If your business is already listed you’ll need to follow the steps below to verify and take control of the listing:

1. Click on the ‘more info’ link alongside your listing
2. You’ve now arrived on your full listing page – click on the ‘Business Owner?’ link
3. If you already have a Google account, sign in with your username and password. If not, you’ll need to create one.
4. You’ll then be asked whether you want to add, edit or suspend your listing – whichever option you choose, you will be asked to verify your listing. This is normally done via postcard – once you’ve verified your listing you’ll see your changes go live.

Hopefully you’ve found this post useful, if you do have any questions, please let me know via the comments, or drop me an email – hannah@gravytrain.co.uk

Image credit Lars Plougmann

Currently in the UK,  total ad spend is £20bn, with 23% of the total spent online. However, there’s a bit of a disconnect when it comes to Brand Marketing –  offline, the split is around 50% on brand marketing; and 50% on direct response. Whereas online, just 5% is spent on brand marketing and the remaining 95% is on direct response.

Perhaps unsurprisingly the primary purpose of the session was to grab some more of that brand marketing budget… well there’s no such thing as a free lunch, right?

However, the session managed to avoid being entirely pitch, and some pretty interesting stuff was shared – so in the interests of share and share alike, I thought I’d share some of it with you.

Undoubtedly digital has profoundly changed both how companies reach their target audience, and indeed the ways in which they communicate with them. Traditionally marketing has been very much about the ”push’ – i.e. transmitting messages from the brand to the consumer. However, increasingly brands are electing to utilise ‘push’ techniques in a slightly different way – rather than simply ‘pushing’ their advertising messages, they are using ‘push’ techniques to encourage consumers to engage with their brands. This stimulates ‘pull’ – i.e. where consumers actively choose to view a brand’s content. ‘Pull’ is essentially about consumer engagement – and of course, here content is king.

The challenge for brands today is to create content which ‘pulls’ consumers in – they actively want to engage with the brand, and perhaps even participate.

Doritos were highlighted as a case study see http://www.youtube.com/user/DoritosYouMakeIt – a campaign (NB this was heavily supported offline too) encouraging consumers to create their own TV ad.

Incidentally – did you know…

1. Video accounts for one third of web traffic, and by 2013 they’re predicting this will reach 90%
2. 24 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute
3. 2bn videos are streamed every day – or in other words, everyone on the planet watches 10 videos per month
4. YouTube is the second largest search engine – proof further (if indeed it were needed) that Bing/Yahoo have a long way to go

Bruce Daisley also highlighted that of course, YouTube is not just for brands… Check out this kid – well it is Friday:

I’ll spare you the rest of the YouTube sales pitch… and instead highlight some free, fun tools which you should definitely go play with:

Google Insights for Search – check out search trends over time.

Google Ad Planner – know what your customers look like? (I mean demographically – not literally) Check out which sites they frequent here.

Twittr Ratr – see whether people are responding to your brand positively or negatively on Twitter (NB this isn’t particularly reliable, but quite fun nonetheless)

Brand Tags – a collective experiment in brand perception. See what people think of famous brands here – tons of fun…

Well that’s all for today folks, hope you have a fabulous weekend

Whether this proves to be significant will depend largely on whether Google takes the reports submitted seriously. If there is a strong indication that submitting such a report leads to your competitors rankings suffering, it’ll become too tempting for many SEO’s to ignore.

As it becomes increasingly easier to analyse your competitor’s backlinks, it also gets increasingly harder to hide what you are doing.

Such a scenario create a tricky dilemma – are the benefits of reporting your competitors more significant than the drawbacks? While the benefits might seem obvious (your competitor could drop in the SERPS, possibly below you), the drawbacks are probably more complex than you might first think.

Firstly , the new form isn’t anonymous, meaning that you need to submit from an actual Google account , and whilst I’ve no doubt that most would-be-reporters will use a fake/spare Google account for this purpose, it doesn’t necessarily mean it won’t be traced back to your website. If there is any way of Google knowing who’s behind the report, then you better be sure your website would stand up to similar scrutiny.

Then there’s the problem of shared links – even if you have used a disconnected account to report your competitors from, you might still lose out if you have shared links with your competitor. Should the algorithm be used to apply penalties to sellers (and it likely will be), you might find that Google discounts all links from websites linking to both of you. Imagine you gained a natural editorial link from a website – it wouldn’t be unforeseeable in competitive industries for your competitors to have approached the publisher and ended up paying for a link; in this scenario it’s quite possible that both the editorial and paid links were invalidated.

The ultimate question in both of the above cases would be your view of the playing field – given most websites will likely have some questionable backlinks (even if you haven’t bought links or spammed blogs, there’s previous SEO agencies to think about, ex-employees, competitors, or just being unlucky enough to have attracted links from websites that are usually spammy), your strategic call would depend on where you see your websites links compared with those of your competitors. If you are low in the SERPS but have a much cleaner link profile than your competitors, then you are probably well placed to submit reports.

Even if you do judge yourself of having more to gain though – it doesn’t mean you will actually want to do this. I’ve never personally reported a competitor, and I know many others who would say the same – it just feels wrong. Even if you do feel it’s the right thing to do, do you really have time? It’s kind of like playing a game of Darts – you can try and put off your opponent, but may just prefer to focus on your own game.

All things considered, savvier SEO’s may come to another conclusion altogether – whether or not you choose to report your competitors, future proofing your own links has to be the way forward.

Image credit Drew_

So last time we gave a brief overview of what PPC is. Today we’ll be looking at the planning stages you should go through prior to setting up your PPC Campaign.

Before you rush straight in there creating your account, picking keywords, creating ads and so on, it’s a really good idea to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Now’s the best time to get your house in order.

So what do you need to do first?

Decide what you are trying to achieve…

Now this might sound obvious, but it’s a really important step. Depending on what sort of business you run you might be looking to achieve one or more of the following:

1. Sales / Purchasers
2. Leads
3. Email sign ups
4. Whitepaper downloads
5. User registrations

This is by no means an exhaustive list, your own objective(s) might be different – but now’s the time to decide.

Check your website & internal processes are up to the job

All too often we see clients whose PPC campaigns have been ill-fated from the start, simply because their websites and/or their internal processes weren’t set up to fulfill their objectives.

You need to get this sorted out now. As soon as your campaign’s up and running you’ll be spending money, and that money will be wasted if your website or your internal processes aren’t up to scratch.

For example if you’re running your campaign because you want to generate sales leads – here are some key things to double-check:

1. How can visitors register their interest in your product or service? If they need to complete an online form, does the form work? Is it easy to complete, or does it throw back endless errors? Does it ask for more information than you really need?
2. Where do the completed forms go to – make sure they don’t get ‘lost’?
3. What happens with the completed lead forms? How are they dealt with internally? Does just one person deal with the leads? What happens if they’re not in the office?
4. Are there other routes to conversion? E.G. can visitors call you to register their interest? How are you going to track that? How will those leads be dealt with?
5. How are you going to monitor how many of the leads turn into sales?

We really could go on (and on and on) about this – but I’m sure you get the general idea.

Think about what you can afford to pay per click

Again – this really is fundamental. So much so we devoted a blog post to the subject. You don’t need to set this in stone right away, but it is worth thinking about this now.

Agree Budgets

When you first start a PPC campaign it will be a steep learning curve.

It is unlikely that from the get go you’ll have a profitable campaign. You’ll need to test and learn as you go. You’ll also need to get commitment from others to do likewise.

As such it’s a really good idea to agree a budget from the outset. Ideally you should also gain agreement as to how long you’re going to give the trial. When we take on a new client we ask that they sign up for a minimum period of three months. This allows us to iron out kinks in the campaign, test, get rid of the bits that don’t work, maximise the bits that do and so on.

Above all, make sure that everyone’s comfortable with the budgets which have been agreed.

So, plenty to be getting on with

Next time, we’ll be looking at setting up your PPC campaign – same bat time, same bat channel (or something).

Image credits Cliff 1066 & goat_girl_photos.

Puzzled by PPC?

Don’t feel bad, whilst the overriding concept is simple, in practise PPC Campaigns can quickly become complicated.

But don’t worry, we’re here to help. Over the next few weeks we will be running a series of posts designed to give an overview of what PPC is all about, and give some handy hints and tips to improve your campaign along the way.

So, first things first. Are you sitting comfortably? Got your tea / coffee / water / G&T? Then I’ll begin.

What Is PPC?

PPC stands for pay per click. You might also see PPC referred to as Paid Search – it’s all the same thing.

So, you know what it stands for, but what does PPC mean? Well it’s advertising. Now where PPC differs from traditional advertising is that you are only charged when someone clicks on your ad (hence pay per click) rather than being charged for your ad to appear.

The PPC Model was created by Bill Gross, founder of GoTo.com (which later became Overture, and is now part of Yahoo) in 1998; and Google began offering PPC in 2002. PPC really changed the landscape of advertising on the internet – as prior to it’s inception most online advertising was based on ‘impressions’ – i.e. how many times the advert was viewed.

Why is there so much hype around PPC?

On the face of it PPC looks really good. PPC ads appear on search engine results pages, so effectively you are putting your message directly in the path of those looking for your products or services. As such – it’s a very powerful model in terms of targeted advertising. However, a poorly managed PPC campaign can burn through money and offer little in the way of return.

Which Search Engines Offer PPC?

All of the major search engines offer PPC advertising. however each search engine’s PPC programme has it’s own little nuances. We run campaigns for our clients on Google, MSN and Yahoo – however not all clients elect to run campaigns on all of the search engines.

Which Search Engines Do People Use?

In the UK, Google is strongly favoured – for the four weeks ending 9/5/09 Hitwise rank the top five search engines (measured by volume of searches conducted) as follows:

Google (.co.uk)   77.37%

Google (.com)   13.26%

Yahoo   2.86%

Ask   1.65%

Live (MSN)   1.49% 

As such, you can see that by advertising on Google alone you can capture over 90% of the searches completed in the UK. Therefore many clients elect only to run their campaigns on Google.

The UK PPC Market

According to the Internet Advertising Bureau:

So, PPC continues to grow – but how do you take advantage of this potentially powerful media without getting burned? Be sure to check out the following posts in the series – we’ll be talking you through the processes we implement for our clients, so you too can create a PPC Campaign that really works for you.

Image credits jhritz