RE: UKNM: Search Engines

[Chris Meachin]

<rant>


I think this thread is in danger of gross over simplification of the issues

involved (as discussions on this topic always seem to be).


It's probably a given that being well placed in search engine results will

generate more traffic than banner advertising (provided that both get

similar overall exposure): Search engine traffic is intrinsically more

targeted because, in simple terms, users are looking for something specific,

rather than being 'ambushed' while browsing.


Many people are more inclined to trust search engine listings, believing

them to be 'neutral'. It has also been well documented that experienced web

users mentally block out banner shaped areas at the top of the screen. And

more users are becoming more experienced.


But that isn't even half the story: To discuss the relative merits of banner

advertising against search engine placement purely in terms of traffic is

meaningless.


It's conversions you want (sales/money/registration/whatever).$$$


For many of the same reasons listed above, conversion rates are also far

higher with search engine traffic.


D.Dias wrote:

"...let's say you sell posters for around 4 quid, and the average order

comprises two posters, giving you a total of 8 pounds per average order.

You then buy 100,000 banner impressions at a CPM rate of say 25 pounds.

Which costs you 2500 pounds. You get a click thru rate of [optimistically]

1%. Of these 1% [1000 people], 2.5% actually make a purchase [25 orders]."


"If you were selling PCs at 1000 pound per system then based on the

conversion rates above, then of course it would make sense."


Erm, that's assuming that conversion rates would be the same. I'd bet money

that they wouldn't even be close. Choosing to compare the purchase habits of

PC buyers next to poster buyers seems a little odd anyway: A car sales

campaign based on experience of selling chewing gum is destined to fail.

Very quickly.


And anybody who thinks that there is a single rule, resource or tactic in

existence which will guarantee decent search engine results placement is

sadly deluding themselves. Search Engine Watch is a valuable resource, and

much of the advice banded about here is valid. But not on it's own. Not

nearly.


Depending on what your business is and how saturated the market is, getting

listed requires intricate (almost obsessive) knowledge and understanding of

search engine ranking algorithms. No search engine will publish this

information (for obvious reasons) and anybody who does have an inkling isn't

gonna post their 5 years worth of research on a public list like this.

You're best bet is to get a pro in.


kpolley wrote:

"Many web design companies are now advocating their placement in the middle

or lower down a page."


That's priceless. I'll remember that one next time we fail to get a client

at the top of the listings! A touching display of naivety.


Summary:

1. Banner advertising (though not necessarily *all* placement advertising)

sucks and will go the way of the dodo.

2. Search engines are not simple. Anybody who tells you they are is a liar.


</rant>



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  The biggest, best Chinwag Networking party...ever...

    **27th September 2000**  put it in your diaries now

 RSVP to http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing/party.shtml

  To sponsor the event email

spareanychangechinwag [dot] com

               generously supported by...

  *** DoubleClick ***      http://www.doubleclick.net

  The leading provider of comprehensive global Internet

 advertising solutions for marketers and Web publishers.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or

helpchinwag [dot] com