Google Wants to Eliminate Keywords?

Google is contemplating eliminating keyword-based search and advertising results in favor of "just let Google decide who to connect with your ads."

So reports Rebecca Lieb at clikz.com from Google AdWords' team head Nick Fox's keynote at the recent Search Engines Strategies meeting in San Jose. Fox imagines a world in which "seach ads just...happened. You tell us what you're selling, we do the rest." In this world (apparently already under development by Google engineers), Google will not only match your selling proposition with prospects using its search service, it will even create the ads for you. Fine (maybe), but what about my competitors asking to sell the same product or service? Fox promises only that their new technology "will somehow be fair and objective enough to make everyone happy if and when all this comes to pass."

If you're an AdWords advertiser, this announcement should be making at least the following hairs stand up on the back of your neck:

• "Fair and objective treatment" of competition sounds a bit too much like a bit too much like the old visions for a socialist utopia. Online advertisers are inveterate capitalists. They don't want fairness with competitors; they want to do better than them. I don't see advertisers willingly releasing their freedom to try to be smarter than their competitors to the Google politburo.
• Fox seems to put forth a fairly flat vision of why entities advertise on Google. For example, in the same address, while advocating a cost-per-action over cost-per-click payment model, Fox said, "Leads, schmeads. We want to more closely align advertising with performance." Sounds good, but will Google really be able to precisely define and measure every possible "action" for which advertisers place ads? To some of my clients, generating "leads" is far from "schmeads."

I do see one positive in this announcement: a recognition that the present keyword system quickly becomes hopelessly complex for anyone but the smallest advertisers. The number of variables that have to be evaluated and managed in a large account quickly approaches impossible levels, at least for hands-on human management. To me, a better thing for Google's geniuses to be spending their time on would be developing more and better keyword management, reporting, and feedback tools.

The good news is that Google has opened up a feedback forum for advertisers to discuss this idea. I'm betting they'll get an earful as this becomes more widely known.

* * * * * *

For intelligent Google advertising management that has you're goals and interests in mind, check out Virante.

Westward Ho! for Google Ads

We noticed yesterday a subtle change in the layout of Google search: the column of paid ads has been shifted into a fixed space, more to the left than they were before. Whereas previously the ads were aligned with the right edge of a fixed-width page, they now float with wherever you place the right edge of your browser. In other words, it is impossible to make the ads disappear (unless, of course, you're running ad blocking software).



If you squeeze your browser down to less than a few inches in width, the organic results actually get pushed down below all of the ads.



It will be interesting to see how much of an effect this has on click-through rates. Anyone out there doing Google CPC noticing anything yet?

Tr.im Trimmed Itself - But It "Got Better"

URL shortening service tr.im wasn't turned into a newt, but it did very suddenly make a self-enacted disappearance yesterday. Citing inability to come up with a revenue model (and inability to compete with the virtual monopoly granted bit.ly as Twitter's default shortener), owners Nambu announced they were immediately shutting the service down.

But they "got better."

Just one day later they resumed service, explaining that an overwhelming response from users made them reconsider. No other conditions have changed: still no revenue model (that they can live with) and still discriminated against by Twitter.

Such a drastic move by a fairly popular service (especially occurring on the same day that FriendFeed was absorbed by Facebook) should give those whose business model is heavily dependent upon social media pause. If that's you, you should...

1. seek to diversify your social media "portfolio." Don't build all your business or promotional channels through one (or even a few) SM outlets. Very few have yet found viable revenue models; nearly any of them could disappear at any time.
2. keep backups of any data (such as analytics) or post archives generated on any SM sites over which you have no direct control.

In the meantime, it will continue to be interesting to watch how (or if) the plethora of free services that grew up around the social media boom of the past few years are able to create acceptable and profitable revenue models.

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

Free Isn't Always Best

Tested two ads for a client recently. One offered a stay at a resort for $19.95. The other offered it for free. $19.95 was the convincing winner. Go figure.

Lesson learned: Don't assume that giving something away will attract more people than selling it at a good deal OR People generally believe TANSTAAFL (There Ain't No Such Thing As a Free Lunch).

When Auto-Tweeting Fails

I'm a huge fan of the Tour de France; love to know what's happening over there as it's happening. Downside of "over there" though is that most of the happening happens while I'm at work "over here." So I was looking forward to this year's race, sure that Twitter would come to my rescue.

And it did. Sort of. Yes, the official Tour de France site did include a "live as-it-happens" Twitter feed this year (http://twitter.com/tdf_updates), and yes, to some extent that feed feeds my hunger, with "turn-by-turn" news from the peloton. But here's the fail: the tweets turn out to be auto-generated from the headlines of their real-time news on the actual site. Nothing wrong with that in itself; smart use of the technology. However, many of the most interesting headlines are teasers for mini-articles ("List of all crashed riders in 2nd stage"), but the tweeted version contains no link to the article.

This is fail on two levels:

1. The user (me) obviously misses out on the information, making the tweet useless.
2. The site loses the opportunity to draw me to their site. Huge miss for them; the tweet alone does nothing for their visitor count or advertising revnue; does nothing to draw me to their other content.

Moral: Auto-tweeting headlines from your blog or site is fine, but always include the link!

Twitter "Improves" Following/Follower UI by Making It Worse

When it comes to user interfaces (UI), the "U" should also stand for "useful." Flashy is no substitute.

When I heard yesterday that Twitter had "upgraded" the UI for both "Following" and "Follow" pages for users logged in at twitter.com, I assumed this would mean an improvement in usability and usefulness. 

At first glance, the new Following/Followers pages certainly look better, and seem to have added features:

1. You can choose between "Expanded" and "List" views. List give you just the Twitter ID and "actual" names, while Expanded adds location and the most recent tweet.
2. Two new buttons to the right of each follower: "Follow" and and options button with drop down choices to reply, direct message, follow, or block the follower.

So everything looks nicer now, but is it more useful?

No. In fact, it's less useful! Here are things we lose with the new interface:

1. Blocking a user now takes two clicks instead of one.
2. You can no longer easily see who is following you back (used to be indicated by a Direct Message link next to the name).
3. Seeing the most recent Tweet is nice, but would be more useful to see the user's bio. Now have to click through to their page to see that.

Thankfully, all these functions and more are handled (and handled well, in most cases) by third-party Twitter applications. The best I've run across for the functions mentioned above is Refollow.com. Please let me know of others you like in the comments.

Sadly, the new additions at Twitter.com do have one useful function: good teaching example of what happens when "new feature" means more flash but less usefulness.