By Peter Wood, The Wall, 27th January 2012

What is influence? It’s a massive question in the world of social media. Thousands of man hours are being pumped into companies who are trying to solve the problem in the hope that one day, you’ll be able to search a category and an application will spit out exactly the 5 top influencers you need to be communicating with to push your product.
I’m in the lucky position whereby I could be classed as an ‘influencer’ in a field (not social, sadly!), so I can quickly decipher which tools work and which don’t. I’ve tried blog ranking systems, I’ve had a go on Klout and I’ve used bespoke services. The commonality between all of them? [Read more →]

Hussein Ebied, SEO Manager, Steak

Web analytics can be a bastion of data, the answers to every digital marketer’s little (and big) problems. But to others, it’s data overload: TMI from the tech geek world; more info than some site owners know what to do with. How can you find the needle in the haystack, that juicy nugget to set your data free?

Meet Hussein Ebied – one of Steak’s venerable SEO managers with five analytics-crushing years of digital marketing experience. Hussein joins us from Steak’s sunny New York offices to explain analytics options, best practices, and how to use your analytics tool to  not just run web reporting, but develop eye-popping analysis and insights

Before we delve into strategy, let’s review basics.

Google Analytics is a free tool offered by Google that reports key statistics about visitors to a website, used primarily by marketers. One study notes that Google Analytics is used by 81.6% of all the websites, whose use of traffic analysis tools is known. This sample is 52.4% of all websites. (See market share of all analytics tools.) GA can track visitors from search engines, display advertising, pay-per-click networks, e-mail marketing and side materials such as links within PDFs.

The difference between Google Analytics (GA) and other analytics tools lies in cost, usability and expanded features. There are many free and paid analytics tools that allow you to track site traffic, keyword success and KPIs. Tracking these results allow you to shift your campaigns according to detailed metrics.

Other paid analytics tools have similar or more robust features, discussed below.  But tracking your website and keyword rankings does not tell a marketer about missed opportunities. We’ll discuss how to create web reports that provide analysis your clients will love.

What are the advantages of using Google Analytics (GA)?

Hussein Ebied: Google Analytics’ strengths are clearly its usability, accuracy, zero-cost and advanced features. Companies without a large budget for analytics, or advertisers who are new to the digital ad space would like GA for its quick elevation of key metrics and easy integration into any website.

GA also has a lot of features that come automated right out of the box, such as segmentation of paid and organic traffic and even tracking, which you might have to manually configure on other analytics tools.

What are the advantages to using paid analytics tools?

HE: Paid tools like Webtrends and Omniture’s Adobe SiteCatalyst could provide an advertiser with greater insights and segmentation features.  Until recently, multi-channel conversion tracking was not available on GA (currently in beta) but other paid tools have been doing it. Paid tools have a more robust integration with social media channels. Some tools have exclusive partnerships with large social properties that allow them to pull in unique data sets. Some paid tools are starting to combine analytics and campaign management under one platform.

What are the drawbacks of paid tools?

HE: Some analytics tools can come at a hefty price (in the thousands), which vary by packages and levels of customer service. If a web team does not budget for a higher level of service and does not know the tool, they could be in for a surprise. For example, Omniture, which powers Adobe SiteCatalyst, offers different types of platforms and service levels.  Implementation is also an issue.  While these tools are very powerful, it takes a serious commitment and resource level to ensure they are implemented correctly.  You’re definitely going to have to earn that increased level of insight.

What are the drawbacks of Google Analytics?

HE: Perhaps accuracy, but with any type of analytics solution your numbers will never match reality, even when compared to the accuracy of paid products. Also, you’re giving the people that create the keyword pricing direct insight into what those keywords are worth to you.  While Google has clearly stated that they don’t share data between AdWords and GA, it’s something to be aware of when making a decision on providers.

A Google Analytics Dashboard

What do marketing managers typically report with analytics?

HE: At the most basic level, marketers typically report KPIs (key performance indicators). Obvious KPIs like site visits and click-through-rates are compared on a month-over-month or year-over-year basis. Some agencies use this data to create custom reports showing easy-to-read metrics.  These reports, though, may not provide actionable learnings or recommendations.

Typical reporting also includes user actions or conversions. It’s important to not only look at the number of conversions, but also your conversion rate, which is the number of conversions over the number of visits to your site.

OK, we got the basics out of the way.  Let’s let’s get into the Steak, err, the meaty stuff.

So what’s the difference between web analysis and web reporting?

HE: The difference is that web reporting alone can be death-by-data – pages of info with no clear conclusions – while web analytics provides insight, actions and impact on the company.  (For more, read what the godfather of search and analytics, Avinash Kaushik, outlines in his colorful blog on real web analysis.)

Say you launched an SEO campaign for your website that sells the best, albeit most expensive, winter coats in the world.  When measuring on a year-over-year basis to account for seasonality, you might notice the following winter that your website saw an increase in traffic, but a dip in year-over-year sales. What went wrong? Now analysis becomes vital to the survival of your online business. A comprehensive web analysis should uncover several possible causes for this dip in traffic.

Step 1: Market Analysis

Your web analysis should question whether the previous winter was a special time for your business.  Was it the first time your coats entered the market? New product launches are susceptible to media buzz and word-of-mouth advertising. Monitoring your brand online is a great way to account for these trends.  Also, consider whether competitors’ discounts or economic factors have led customers to choose a more affordable product.

Step 2: Site Usability

If your traffic numbers are up year-over-year but your conversions (sales) and conversion rate went down, the problem could be usability and the conversion path users must follow on your website. Web analysis should help you pinpoint the sections of your site that experience the greatest bounce rate. Remedying design flaws on your website could increase the likelihood users will convert upon visiting.

Step 3: Search Trends / User Behavior

What if traffic did not increase, but your conversion rate improved year-over-year? A seasoned analyst might look at the actual keywords that drove traffic to your site but generated a lesser volume of traffic than the previous year. Using search engine tools, you may find there has been a general decline in search volume for those terms.

People may be less interested in searching for coats overall online.  Users may still be purchasing coats online, but rather than conducting generic, brand-neutral searches for “coats” on search engines, a great percentage of them now prefer to visit niche department stores or shopping aggregator sites, such as Amazon, that sell all types of brands including yours.

Web reporting - not analysis - despite the pretty colors.

How do some marketers provide reporting vs. analysis?

HE: Many agencies and in-house marketers overlook the importance of marrying the data in analysis to specific learnings and action items that could impact the overall goals of the business. A major part of any successful online marketing campaign is to ensure that your objectives are in line with the client’s business goals.

Some marketers don’t highlight causality.  Normal analytics tools don’t always reflect offline factors, environmental issues or shifts in consumer demand.  These tools can do the heavy lifting, but the operator must deliver the insights.

What factors should good web analysis include?

HE: You can’t just show that traffic has gone up or down. You have to uncover factors of why this increase or decrease occurred. If you examine offline factors, the possibilities are endless: facility changes, PR/ad campaigns, walk-ins, phone campaigns, public sentiment, etc.

Let’s say that one of your KPIs is conversion rate.  If the CR (conversion rate) has gone down, what are some of the related factors you should look at? Have impressions increased?  Has click through rates decreased?  What about the external factors?  Was there a price change on your site or on a competitor’s?  Did you get a mention in the press?

With online factors, however, you need to check what keywords drove traffic: Have they been changing over time? Are there major changes to the site? What changes have competitors implemented that could affect your company’s visibility?

Tailor KPIs to your clients

On what level, or for whom, should you write reports?

HE: A web analysis should address the needs and concerns of all stakeholders across different departments, levels and understandings.  Reports should be tailored across different levels of management: Your contact may be concerned with traffic and conversions, while top management is concerned with revenue. It’s impossible to create a report for everyone, but pay attention to who your stakeholders are and who your audience is.

Also, make sure you speak in a language everyone understands. The hotel industry, for example, may track REVPAR (reservation per available room) while the retail industry may want to see same store sale volumes.

What should marketers avoid?

HE: They should be careful about data overflow, because the amount of information they can pull from analytics could yield endless spreadsheets of data.  But great metrics are useless if not analyzed.  You also want to start with an open mind.  Many analysts want to prove a hypothesis that they already have.  Instead, I urge people to look at the data and let it guide your thinking.  Otherwise you’re just creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

What reporting do marketers often mistake for analysis?

HE: Rather than have a report full of graphs and numbers representing your conversions over time, you should supplement the report with a brief description of what the graphs means, how it affects the business, or how you can further improve your KPIs.

Web Analysis Fundamentals Diagram by analytics guru Avinash Kaushik

What else should web analysis explain?

HE: Find reasons behind your metrics; connect the dots.  Marketers know how to present numbers, but not all marketers provide analysis.  Your analytics will tell you traffic has increased by 30 percent. What it won’t tell you is what online/offline factors contributed to this increase. These answers are always in the data; it’s just knowing where to look.

In summary, what key points should marketers use to ensure better analysis and less data-drenched reporting?

1. Determine the best analytics tools for your needs and resources.
2. Make sure your marketing objectives are in line with the client’s business goals.
3. Uncover factors that lead to increases and decreases in your performance metrics.
4. Tailor your reports across different levels of management.
5. Ensure that analysis includes insights, actions and impact on the company.

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch,  Mar 2, 2011

In January, Google introduced a useful addition to AdWords that potentially makes managing negative keywords across multiple campaigns a lot easier. Maybe it was because January is such a busy time of year, but it’s a feature that seems to have passed by many advertisers. Here’s a recap.

What are Negative Keyword Lists?

Simply put, a central place to store master list(s) of negative keywords and apply them to multiple campaigns. This is an improvement on the old way of doing this in AdWords, when you had to laboriously copy and paste negatives between campaigns – a process which can mean copying 1000s of words for a mature campaign that’s been built out over time.

Accessing Negative Keyword Lists

The lists are easy to access. In AdWords, simply click “Control panel and library” on the left of the screen, and select “Negative keyword lists”.

In the example above, you can see that I’ve already got a list in place of 127 keywords applied to 4 campaigns. You can create multiple lists and apply them to different combinations of campaigns. This is useful if you want to apply a master list of negatives to all campaigns, and another, separate list to only a select few – for example if your product range is limited in some regions, but not everywhere.

Creating new lists is easy – just click the “New negative keyword list button”, name the list and paste in the keywords. Of course you’ll need to spend some time consolidating existing lists across campaigns – more on that later – and then you’ll need to apply them to campaigns. That’s where I am afraid AdWords interface design provides something of an obstacle.

Applying Negative Lists to Campaigns

Using this feature, it feels like Google designed it without thinking through the workflow involved for existing campaigns – i.e. most of their customers. Once you have created lists, there’s no easy way to apply them to multiple campaigns. Instead, you have to go into every single campaign and then apply the lists(s) that are relevant to that campaign.

Here’s the process:

1. Click “All online campaigns” on the menu on the left of your screen
2. Click the campaign to apply the list to
3. Click the “Keywords” tab
4. Scroll to the bottom of this screen
5. Click “Negative Keywords”
6. On the right of the inflated lists that appear, click “Keyword Lists”
7. Click “Add”
8. Click “Add” next to the negative keyword list you want to apply
9. Repeat across multiple lists
10. Click “Save”

Unfortunately, you need to repeat these steps for every campaign – there’s no way at the time of writing to select multiple campaigns and apply the same list(s) to them all at once – which would have been a real time saver. There’s no way to apply them to multiple accounts within the same MCC, either, something that would help with enterprise level accounts like national retailers.

Negative Keyword List Deployment Steps

Interface gripes aside, negative keyword lists are a worthwhile addition to any AdWords campaign. Here’s some steps to follow to get the most out of them:

1)     Download your account via AdWords Editor;

2)     Sort the columns in Excel and delete all of the rows and columns with anything other that negative keywords and the keyword type in them;

3)     Use these to plan the lists you need – I’d suggest a “Whole Account” list of terms you’d never, ever want your ads to appear for, and then any more specific lists you need around those you have in AdGroups or only in some campaigns in the download;

4)     Re-arrange the negatives in the download to populate these lists and save them;

5)     Add any additional terms that spring to mind, or you can find via SQRs or keyword tools;

6)     Save the master list(s) and then start adding them via the procedure above;

7)     Update your campaign build out process to include applying these lists to any new campaigns in future.

Negative keyword lists will no doubt become a standard of AdWords campaign management – hopefully Google will improve the interface over time and add support via AdWords Editor and the API, too.

By Gareth Owen, Search Engine Watch, Mar 16 2011

Depending on who you speak to, search engine optimization (SEO) is either largely influenced or not at all influenced by social media. I’m sure everyone has their own opinions, case studies, and sites that show greater or lesser correlations between their social media engagement levels and their natural search results.

If you were to carry out an investigation into whether social media was a big influencing factor, which metrics would you want to monitor in order to base your insights on more empirical data?

I’ve put together a list of 13 ranking factors below. Feel free to use these and any others you can get your grubby SEO mitts on!

1. Number of Followers (Twitter)

You’ll need your own corporate Twitter feed, which brings its own problems around brand protection and also the potential for dealing with customer service enquiries, but the more followers you have, the more authoritative your Twitter persona and the more value will be associated with your URL (assuming you have remembered to link to it).

2. Quality of Followers (Twitter)

The best followers are the ones with their own communities of followers. The more high value people who follow you, and retweet your stuff, the better.

3. Relevance of Followers (Twitter)

It’s one thing getting followed and retweeted by Stephen Fry with over a million followers, but it’s also important to get the same response from accounts that are more specific to your industry. Someone with “fashion” in their description who retweets your “20 percent off the new spring collection” offer is equally valuable.

4. Number of Retweets (Twitter)

Most likely as a ratio of tweets to retweets — the more your content is reproduced by others the more authoritative it is. Obviously the more followers you have, the more likely you are to be retweeted. However, it isn’t just about retweeting other people’s content or dishing out promotions. It’s about engaging in conversation with people in the industry.

5. Number of Fans (Facebook)

You’ll need to create your own corporate profile on Facebook, which brings the same potential banana skins as a corporate Twitter feed, only multiplied numerous times due to the sheer level of engagement of people on Facebook. However, if you decide to engage with customers and potential customers on Facebook, the total number of likes your page receives will add value to your URL.

6. Number of Comments (Facebook)

A large number of likes, but little engagement, is a sure sign of someone gaming the system. People will tend to like you if you talk to them. Successful Facebook pages include a lot of content written by other people.

7. Number of Views (YouTube)

An obvious one, but any content you upload to YouTube should link to your site in the description, and the more times it is viewed, the more value will be attributed to your video.

8. User Comments (YouTube)

YouTube is also about engaging with other YouTubers and commenting on popular videos. The more you comment, the more link juice is passed back to your profile.

9. References From Independent Profiles (YouTube)

Using YouTube can bring in some really good authority if done brilliantly — if your link from your video passes some value, imagine how much more value would be passed if you could get other people to parody your work and include links to you from their profiles. The prime example remains the Cadbury’s Gorilla, but there are lots of interesting mini-campaigns trying to leverage the above.

10. Title of Video (YouTube)

Any references to your target keywords in the title of the video will help ensure that any authority passed will be relevant to a specific theme. Keywords should also be in the tags and or transcript where possible.

11. Percent of Likes vs. Dislikes (YouTube)

Easy one. The more liked your content is, the more authoritative it is.

12. Positive vs. Negative Brand Mentions (All Social Media)

Use a tool like Radian6, or a free tool, and ensure that you have significantly more positive brand mentions than negative. It won’t be 100 percent accurate as these things don’t pick up on sarcasm. But Google has already made investment in this area in 2011, so it’s well worth monitoring.

13. Number of Social Mentions (All Potential Media)

Total visibility across all social media shows that your content is important to all people and not just a result of a large special offer for Facebook/Twitter users. HowSociable is a simple way of giving yourself a rating here.

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch,  Mar 2, 2011

Many agencies, publishers, and advertisers across Europe have been sent documents by the European Commission (EC) recently, requesting detailed information about the online advertising marketplace — and about search marketing and AdWords in particular.

This is part of an investigation into Google and antitrust. While a response isn’t mandatory, questioning from industry bodies has elicited a response that suggests the commission can, if it wants to, make it compulsory.

I’ve been critical of Google’s market dominance in the past and still firmly believe strong competition in every area of their business is good for the industry and for consumers. But while reading and answering the overlapping questions in the two documents my agency has received, I feel a growing unease that the bureaucrats who will ultimately pass judgment on Google may do more damage than good.

The questions in the documents fall into several broad categories:

• Define the digital services you provide and therefore the marketplace.
• The extent to which campaigns need to differ per country and to what extent that poses barriers.
• Scenarios around when ad spend would be switch away from horizontal PPC ads (i.e. AdWords) to other platforms or ad types.
• A surprising number of questions around how easy it is to port data between AdWords and other platforms, how easy Google make this and if it could be done “by a programmatic tool.”
• Questions about the AdWords API, legal agreements with Google and anyway Google tries to restrict the use of other platforms.
  It’s the questions about porting campaigns and the API that worry me. This isn’t one question but a series, probing for details of current processes, in-house and external tools, and the time and money involved — all asking if Google makes this difficult.

We all know that a copy and paste of a campaign from Google into adCenter or any other ad platform won’t bring the best results — the systems have different campaign options, treat search strings and match types differently, have different consumer user bases, etc.

I wouldn’t want to use a “programmatic tool” to dump campaigns into other system from AdWords.

Do I want to download them, open them, edit them to fit each platform and then quickly upload them? Yes. We all know how to use the various search engine editors and Excel today.

This feels like a line of inquiry a competing ad platform would push hardest — we all know there’s been lobbying. I’m not accusing any one company and I trust the EC has processes in place to prevent bias. I’m just wondering aloud if this is the most useful direction for the commission to proceed in.

What worries me is this is exactly the sort of narrow-minded approach to the market that could lead to a ruling that’s bad for PPC — at an extreme, ordering Google to add a “port” button to copy campaigns to adCenter or other systems — with no reference to the poor performance that may follow. Knowing how to get the best out of different ad platforms is a skill in itself.

Hopefully the detailed answers being written by search experts will steer the commission toward more genuine areas of concern, such as Google’s practice of contacting big advertisers directly without telling their agencies (I saw an example of this the other day, unsolicited by the client) or locking-off top AdWords slots for its own products — and that’s before we talk about DoubleClick or their market share as a whole.

Martin Sorrell never said a truer word when he described Google as a “frenemy.”

This topic will be a slow burning one in Europe — and in all likelihood, by the time the bureaucratic wheels have finished turning, the marketplace will have changed again, anyway.

By Gareth Owen, Search Engine Watch, Feb 16 2011

Alex Cohen yesterday wrote about how paid results are increasingly getting clicks at the expense of organic results in “PPC vs. SEO: Paid Search as Your Organic Competitor.”

Today, we’ll look at some of the changes in how we attribute value in SEO, and how we’re increasingly turning to tactics that were previously considered to be the realm of paid search professionals in order to meet client expectations.

Three trends have led this charge:

1.A clear and continuing drop in the value of major generic keywords in natural search (historic data, Google products, use of search).
2.Renewed interest in exactly how the “halo” effect of optimization works and how ROI can be attributed.
3.Speed of results from good optimization.
Drop in Generic Keywords in Natural Search

This has been driven partly by people and partly by the search engines. Check Google Trends for any number of “high volume” generic keywords (car insurance, televisions, loans, dishwashers, handbags, etc.) and you’ll see a consistent trend over the last five years.

While I wouldn’t necessarily put 100 percent faith in the figures, they would reflect a degree of reality from what I see in client campaigns.

Look at searches for [televisions]:

Aside from drop in volumes, the space attributed to natural search results has been quite drastically cut in a number of areas.

Paid search results consistently give three listings at the top of the page now, with sitelinks and product feed results too. They can even push natural search listings below the fold on some screens.

To further complicate matters, there are now many more “products” (e.g., local business results, shopping feed listings) to compete against. In a world where rankings used to really matter, position three is no longer position three.

Renewed Focus on ‘Halo’ Search Traffic

Anyone who has ever optimized their own website will tell you that building links for a certain keyword (e.g., “hamster cage”) will improve your ranking. But these links, as well as URL and branded links, will also improve the overall authority of your site after you get your first number one ranking, making it easier for your site to rank more easily for other keywords.

Attributing this value, however, is actually quite hard unless you’re starting from scratch.

The upshot has been that keyword ranking reports are getting bigger and bigger in order to more clearly show traffic increases as direct results of specific keyword ranking improvements. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, as long as other metrics like the total number of keywords driving traffic are also considered.

This is in turn moving us toward reports that include so much keyword data that merging PPC and SEO reports at keyword level could become much easier.

It has also meant that the keywords being targeted for SEO are bigger in number. Consider making bigger lists of categorized keywords for SEO a part of your strategy.

SEO Techniques Work Much Quicker Than Ever Before

This can be attributed to a number of factors and developments. But the sheer speed of indexing from Google in particular has undoubtedly been a factor.

On the plus side: small keywords can be targeted more easily, as the results of your activities are that much quicker and more transparent than ever before.

All in all, the keyword research and granular focus of PPC is becoming ever more a part of SEO — and this is no bad thing!

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch,  Feb 2, 2011

Following its successful rollout in North America, Microsoft and Yahoo are focusing on rolling out the Search Alliance in Europe, starting with natural search results on Yahoo UK.

This move is largely welcome. With a UK market share of less than 10 percent for Yahoo and MSN, it makes more sense to manage campaigns on one interface. Right now, Yahoo staff are being trained on adCenter in preparation for moving their clients’ campaigns over.

Filling in my agency’s response to the European investigation into Google, I had to list a number of features of the AdWords platform. We all know the depth and breadth of development of AdWords outpaced Yahoo (and Overture) and comparative newcomer Microsoft a long time ago.

But where are the beta trials from Redmond? Where are the new initiatives, the new ideas from engineers that will differentiate the adCenter platform from AdWords, raise the revenue per search Microsoft receives, and grow loyalty with advertisers?

Try as I might, I can’t remember the last “big” change or enhancement on adCenter since Microsoft launched a desktop tool similar to AdWords Editor.

Parallel Races

It’s easy to sit outside a company and poke holes at their strategy. Microsoft has lots of intelligent, hard-working people who are pushing their search efforts forward — sometimes despite other people internally, I suspect.

They’ve built a search engine, created a PPC platform, and started to take the fight to Google (but let’s be honest, Yahoo’s been the main loser and Ask was already fading away).

As Bing introduced new features and received attention, Google seemed to wake out of a slumber and started rolling out new features in search results, continued its relentless development of AdWords and, with increasing speed, the development of its display business through DoubleClick.

So the foundations are firmly in place from Microsoft. They’re gaining traffic from their Yahoo deal and their own activities. Bing keeps adding new features.

But where’s the innovation in adCenter? I’m not talking blog posts, research reports, or tools around-the-edge (which they are often good at); I’m talking hardcore, at-the-center innovation that every advertiser, big or small, will be able to use. Things like Google’s sitelinks — self-service, enhancing search results and, crucially from a revenue per search basis, raising CTRs (and often ROI for advertisers — leading to increased budgets).

Several races are happening in parallel here. Market share is one, but there are others (e.g., innovation in PPC, further exploiting the connection between display and search).

Microsoft and Yahoo have strong experience in display and have done some work in this area — but Google is catching up, fast. They may not have the premium level display inventory Yahoo and Microsoft have access to, but with remarketing in AdWords Google has made the sort of retargeting once considered the preserve of the most well-funded advertisers available to all.

Search marketers are adopting this tactic in droves — but only on Google’s platform or through third parties — not adCenter.

What Could Microsoft Do?

So, if I think Microsoft should be innovating more in PPC, what would I suggest? The obvious example, sitelinks, bears some thinking about.

Sitelinks undoubtedly offer convenient ways for site owners to channel consumers into the right section of a site following a one-word brand search or ambiguous generic. The format and mechanics could be different — sitelinks can be improved in terms of reporting data and control over which links are shown.

Is this copying an idea and developing it further? Yes. After all, Google wasn’t the first PPC engine — they took the idea and added engineering rocket fuel.

Several other areas spring to mind — things Google is already doing, but not always that well: local information in PPC ads, incorporating feeds to enhance PPC ads (more control of which products display for which searches would be a start), and the ability to buy non-premium display inventory via adCenter for retargeting.

There are probably much better ideas out there, not to mention the ones bubbling away in the heads of engineers at Microsoft.

Do I feel Microsoft is distracted by the challenge of onboarding an increased volume of traffic, new advertisers, and training Yahoo!’s staff? Yes.

Do I hope we’ll see a burst of innovation on adCenter afterward? Yes.

But underlying concern is it’ll be too late — Google will have moved ahead in all these races, and there will be new ones opening up that adCenter won’t be equipped to enter. That will be bad for all of us in search — especially those of us in a market where Google already dominates 90 percent of searches.

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch,  Nov 19, 2010

The search industry never stops. From AltaVista to Google, and GoToast to Search Ignite, the fortunes of companies and technologies evolve over time.

I was reminded of this recently when training new hires. They’d never head of names like AltaVista, Excite, Lycos, etc. — companies that defined the search space less than 10 years ago.

So, how do you keep up to date?

Ignore the Noise

It’s important to recognize that there are many, many blogs and articles published about search every day — and many more “experts” on forums and Twitter and in Facebook and LinkedIn groups.

You can ignore most of them. The ability of the search industry to report on, discuss, analyze, argue about, and regurgitate a fact until it has been distorted out of all proportion and attained myth-like status is legendary. There’s a lot of noise — so you need to spend your limited time on sites that are credible and, most importantly, correct.

It’s also important to note that the search engines are no longer search companies — they offer much broader product lines; so you will need to keep up to date on developments in all their products, too, as search is often integrated into them (and paid search revenues pay for them).

Select an RSS Reader

I can’t think of an industry news site that doesn’t have an RSS feed — so choosing a good reader is crucial. There are many available. I use Google Reader to collate and organize feeds by topic in folders as it’s tied to my Google login and easy to use on any computer, iPad, or mobile.

I often use Feedly linked to Google Reader as it offers a slicker interface that feels closer to a magazine. Another bonus of Google Reader is that you can add any URL to it — not just RSS feeds — and Reader will monitor the page for changes and present them as if a feed has updated.

Many sites offer several feeds — follow those most relevant to your area of work and interests; it’s easy to overload yourself with feeds and find you have more than 100 articles to wade through every morning. Pretty soon you’ll find you’re too busy to bother, and end up reading nothing.

Keep an Eye on the Mainstream Press

Sometimes announcements by the search engines receive mainstream coverage — or a story breaks about a negative issue, like the recent Google Street View privacy coverage. Add the technology sections of mainstream sites like the New York Times, USA Today, BBC News, etc., to your reader to ensure you know the stories your clients (and their bosses) are reading over their breakfast.

Digital Overall

To keep any eye on the wider industry I follow a few key sites — Mashable, The Next Web, Robert Scoble, John Battelle’s Search Blog, and Econsultancy, to name a few.

The Search Stalwarts

There are a few search-focused sites that are must-reads. Search Engine Watch and Search Engine Land are the two heavyweights; I receive their newsletters every morning as well as follow their feeds; they provide a summary of the most important search news and topics. Search Engine Roundtable is also important and often have details of new Google tests or rumors with some basis to them as reported on other sites or forums.

There are of course many other digital industry and search sites — the above sites link to good sources as they cover stories, helping you find other sources.

Don’t Forget To Cull

One last piece of advice: don’t forget to delete feeds. Over time, sites change editor, or their focus shifts or their writing declines in quality. So when a site seems to publish nothing of interest, delete it — your time is precious.

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch,  Oct 22, 2010

Recently I posted some tips for paid search newbies. This time, I’m focusing on five ways the stakeholders employing PPC experts can help (or hinder) their efforts.

Communicate!

I still hear of situations where agencies or in-house teams are told days (or even hours) beforehand of a site change — whether it’s a page moving, new product launch or worse, lots of changes. Sometimes they find out only when performance drops.

This never ceases to surprise — search has been around long enough for many marketers to know that on-site changes have an impact on campaigns and sales figures often suffer as a result.

Let everybody know about a likely change, even if it’s not signed off, so they can plan resources, assess any impact on performance, and provide feedback that might improve performance even further (especially in terms of SEO and AdWords quality score optimization). A “mundane” change might be the opportunity to use technical resource already secured to make additional changes that will have a positive impact.

Go Beyond The Click

Many brands give their experts the scope to significantly boost their traffic and achieve their KPIs — but don’t involve them formally in what happens post-click.

Optimizing landing pages can significantly improve quality score and aid SEO — that’s a given. Perhaps more significantly for the bottom line and senior management, combining this with optimizing all the steps to sale can create a further step-change across all traffic sources, not just search.

Recently, I helped a client’s internal team go from a 2 percent to 9 percent conversion rate in one redesign, which helped them exceed targets and invest more budget.

Optimizing pages and the path to conversion, as well as campaigns, creates a positive feedback loop; as every dollar spent on traffic works harder because the site works harder, so keywords or placements that were previously ruled out on a performance basis can come back into reach — exposing the brand to more consumers and potentially increasing market share.

Google knows this — hence Google Optimizer being provided for free.

Automate

PPC can become extremely time consuming — especially if inventory changes on the website a lot, whether in terms of stock levels or prices.

Feeds are a perfect way to automate much of the change required, and some paid search tools can work with them to automate this work. Yet many brands don’t have adequate feeds in terms of content, quality, or frequency of update.

Educate Upwards

A scenario I’ve encountered many times:

1.Campaign starts.
2.Initial data is used to optimize, changing average positions.
3.Client’s boss phones up and angrily asks “Why aren’t we number one for keyword X?”
4.Agency receives a worried or irate phone call or e-mail.
5.Agency diverts time to answering this with a presentation for the boss, meaning they have less time to make the client money by further optimizing campaigns.
This doesn’t need to happen. Much of this time can be saved by educating upwards.

Explain to senior stakeholder that positions are based on achieving targets, not ego building. This is a fundamental step in managing expectations — and yet so often, doesn’t happen and PPC experts find themselves under largely unnecessary pressure born of misunderstanding.

Challenge

After the initial launch period, it’s easy for campaign reporting and meetings to become repetitive and even stale. Challenge the teams — asking what they would do in perfect world of unlimited budget and resource (within reason!) can kick start interesting conversations and ideas — especially if you throw the doors open to other digital channels, the website itself, and business processes.

A client recently started a meeting with several agencies by saying “There are no sacred cows — everything is up for discussion and change today.” I wholeheartedly agree.

I doubt there’s a single PPC team that doesn’t have a mental wish list of three or four things they would fix if they were in control — tap into that. Your sales figures may well thank you.

Yesterday I posted a FAQ on Google Instant and discussed if consumers will hate it.

Today I’m going to look at what this might mean for campaigns; the reality is nobody will know for sure until they have gathered data over a decent period of time, roll-out has finished to eligible computers – and consumers have got used to the feature.

US and UK Rollout – A Big Difference

Below are my thoughts from a UK point of view – Steak NYC will be posting their thoughts shortly, too. There is already an important US to UK difference – in the UK, you have to be logged in to a Google Account for Instant to work; in the US, all consumers will see it if their browser etc supports it.

Here are my (UK centric) thoughts:

Impressions on Generic Terms to Rise?

The idea is simple; as consumers start typing, they may be driven by Google’s suggestions to use generics more (either by clicking through, or by reading search results for more than the 3 seconds Google requires to count an impression). I’m not so sure this will happen – see my comments on the long tail below – and I think this would provide consumers less relevant results; a real threat to Google’s loyal user base who love it’s relevancy.

Impressions on Brand Terms to Rise?

I’ve seen a lot of brands appear in results when I start typing – for example “e” brings up eBay results, potentially increasing impressions for this brand term. The same is true of many other letters in the UK and US, and no doubt this spreads to other brands 2 or 3 letters into typing.

If a consumer is starting to type in a non-brand search, and happens to be shown a relevant brand by Instant, then there is the possibility they will go to that site straight away – robbing competitors of the opportunity to compete for them in “normal” non-brand search results.

Brand CPCs to Rise?

This may well happen because of the knock-on affect of more impressions without a click as a result of the above, affecting brands whom are shown for searches where they receive no click – but do have an impression counted against them. However, if the market as a whole experiences this, the competitive affects may be limited – everybody will have the same experience.

Long Tail to Suffer?

I’ve seen a lot of commentary stating that the long tail will suffer, and even that businesses that receive most of their traffic and sales via it will die.

If Google can show search results within a few letters that are relevant compared to the long(er) tail query the consumer was going to type in, then some long tail queries will be diverted onto generic terms of one or two words. However – so far – I’ve rarely had this experience when searching with Instant. No doubt Google will improve the algorithm – it is only day 2, after all.

The more I consider this and talk to colleagues, the less likely this seems, so…

Long Tail To Grow around Suggested Search Strings?

Consumers who are typing in a long tail search know they need to use several words to find what they are looking for – they are taking deliberate action based on past experience. Will they suddenly abandon that behaviour because Google is showing them search results as they type the first few letters? I don’t think many will – if anything, they will “type past” Google’s suggestions to the results they want (i.e. that are relevant) – and maybe add to/edit the long tail search as they see the results it generates. Something they probably would have done anyway, over several distinct searches on the “old” Google.

So long tail might grow – as more consumers notice that the search results change as they type and they think more explicitly about what they are typing, they may be driven to enter more words to refine their search or use the suggested search terms that seem relevant. This would raise long term volumes and, for suggested searches, effectively push consumers onto “predefined” search strings with all the impact increased competition on a term brings for advertisers.

More Keywords To Add?

Google Instant may mean that some consumers start to click through on “half-formed” search terms – e.g. somebody who was going to type in “home insurance” clicking through on a site shown for “home ins”. This may in affect create new keywords to add to campaigns, researched by brainstorming or reviewing analytics/tracking alongside the normal keyword tools. Match type settings will play a part in this coverage, too, for paid search campaigns, and I imagine that Google will ensure broad match covers some of these searches off.

Ranking Even More Important?

As consumers quickly scan results as they type, sites below the fold won’t get any opportunity to catch their eye and draw their click – somebody typing isn’t scrolling. So ranking above the fold will be important in this situation.

Dust-Off Abandoned Generics

A very interesting point Mark in our New York office has made is that brands may need to look at increasing exposure on generic (aka head) terms to ensure they are ranked well for the first term consumers will see results for as they type; so there could well be increased competition for generic, one-word terms. It may be worth re-considering generics previously removed from keyword lists because of high CPCs/competition across paid/ natural search…

Conclusion

I don’t think a fundamental shift to generic terms will occur; I’m increasingly thinking that consumers will start to click through from longer search strings, either by clicking on a search suggestion or typing more words in; if anything Instant will prompt them to improve the way they search.

However, the jury is still out and I know colleagues here at Steak and elsewhere in the industry have different opinions…

So I could be wrong – for all the technology, commentary and gut instinct we all collectively have, consumers can be notoriously unpredictable and the ultimate test will only be time – and data. I can see a long Excel session coming on…

UPDATE:

Our sister agency Minute Steak have also been blogging about Google Instant during it’s beta testing and also their thoughts on the launch and its implications.