Thursday, October 1, 2009
Classic Misuse of Dynamic Keyword Insertion
Next time I'm looking to buy cancer balls, I'll know where to go for the best deal!
How does this happen? How could Google be showing me an ad for something so far from what I was searching for (resources about testicular cancer), let alone something this vendor almost certainly does not have for sale? It's not Google's fault, unless you want to blame them for offering a powerful feature that's too easily misused. That feature is Dynamic Keyword Insertion (DKI). I won't go into all the details of how it works (but here's a great post about it), but the quick explanation is that DKI allows you to automatically insert into an ad whatever keyword in the list of keywords associated with the ad most closely matches the keyword searched for.
Used in highly-targeted situations, DKI can be a powerful and effective tool for increasing both click-through rate (CTR) and conversions. You are reflecting back to the searcher exactly what she was looking for.
The oddball result that was shown above came up because the advertiser simply created a very generic "one size fits all" ad and then dumped a huge amount of (probably broad match) keywords into it. This is the laziest form of pay-per-click advertising.
So the Nextag.com example above is funny, but is there any real harm done?
First, I doubt there is any such product as "cancer balls" (at least, I hope not). A click through on the ad takes you to a page of various products that have both "cancer" and "balls" somewhere in their description, but what is the likelihood that any of these are what someone searching for "ball cancer" is looking for?
Second, this is a waste of the advertiser's money in so many ways, as well as a complete misunderstanding of the value of pay-per-click advertising. Inevitably the advertiser is paying for a lot of clicks from people who have no possibility of becoming a converted customer. Pay-per-click is one of the most efficient and cost-effective forms of advertising ever invented, but only because it allows you to narrowly target a niche market of people who are already actively looking for what you have to offer. What Nextag.com has done is the equivalent of throwing spaghetti against the wall to see how much sticks. In the case of both spaghetti and real customers, the answer is: not much.
Last, this kind of advertising can result in a negative backlash against your brand. Consumers will learn quickly that they can't trust your ads to take them to what they actually want.
By the way, if you've spent any amount of time watching pay-per-click ads, you've probably spotted the all-time worst offender of slinging out these kinds of meaningless ads. I won't embarrass them here publicly, but if you're taking aim at a certain big box discount retailer, you probably just hit the _____. ;-)
*********
For intelligent internet marketing, check out Virante (http://www.virante.com)
Monday, September 28, 2009
Google's Sidewiki: The Only Thing to Fear Is...Not Much?
This morning Sean Carton of ClikZ ruminated over the possibilities and pitfalls of Sidewiki for businesses and marketers. On the fear side, Carton asserts that this is one more giant leap toward complete loss of control by marketers over their message. That has certainly been true for some time now; do something that pisses off consumers and it will be all over social media, blogs, forums, and product review sites. Sidewiki significantly ups the ante, however, in that now those comments can appear right on your own web site, and there is nothing you can do to stop or block them. (Actually, that's not completely true. One commentor on Carton's post said that he had successfully used an SSL certificate to block Sidewiki. This has some backfire potential, however, as a Sidewiki user visiting a site so blocked may have suspicions about what the site is trying to hide.)
Two things occur to me that are not brought up in Carton's post:
- It is not yet clear how widespread Sidewiki usage will be. How many people will actually bother to install it (and have to take on the Google Toolbar if they don't already have it)? And among those who do install it, how many will form the habit of using it and checking it regularly? I'm a Google toy addict who installed Sidewiki the moment I heard about it, but even I forget about it most of the time I'm surfing.
- Marketers who have already gotten over the fact that you can't hide anymore--and better yet have embraced the idea--should welcome whatever community does end up using Sidewiki with open arms, viewing this as one more channel for valuable listening and interaction. Google has put in place some safeguards to try to minimize spamming and abuse (comments can be voted up and down, and there is an easy link to report abuse), but it remains to be seen how effective they will be.
In fact, I love Bald Head Island and its scenic beauty so much, I'll even share my video with you if you don't want to install Sidewiki. Here you go:
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Google vs. Bing: Quo Vadis* Small Advertiser?
Fred Aun at clikz.com reports an observation that Microsoft's re-branded and overhauled search engine Bing seems to be going after "quality" rather than quantity of PPC ad displays. In a test of keyword searches, Bing consistently showed fewer (and subjectively, more relevant) ads on the front page as compared to live.com (Microsoft's previous search engine). Aun's conversations with Microsoft's Bing representatives led him to believe that this is intentional as Bing seeks to differentiate itself from Google (as a "decision engine" as opposed to just a "search engine").
Aun quotes an AdGooroo report that hails Microsoft's decision as "a boon for paid search advertisers, who have far less competition to deal with." But who's getting the boon? Apparently it's the big guys; Microsoft brags about adding Dell, Sears, Hotels.com, Marriott and Home Depot to its roster of advertisers. Fewer slots on the front page means the front page goes to those with pockets deep enough to buy their way on.
This would seem to imply that the advent and initial (relative) success of Bing** means that Google AdWords is even more important for the small advertiser. Correction: the smart small advertiser, the one who knows what he's doing (or is smart enough to hire someone who does) will be working even harder at getting Google right. Yes, it's much harder to get to the top in Google because of the number of competitors, but the good news is that Google is still the place where, like the young American child told anyone can grow up to be President, anyone willing to put in the effort and educate themselves to be better than the competition can still rise to the top.
*Quo vadis is Latin for "where are you going?"
**Microsoft's share of the search engine market increased from 0.3% to 6.5% after the introduction of Bing. It remains to be seen if this will maintain or increase, or if it is similar to Wolfram Alpha's impact ("let's look at it because it's new, but then back to Google").
Looking for help with your Internet marketing effort from people who "get Google"? At Virante, all of our PPC account representatives are AdWords Certified Professionals who specialize in small-to-medium advertising accounts. Ask us how we can help your business rise above your competition on Google. On the web at http://www.virante.com