The Think eBiz Blog

To #Bing or not to Bing: Initial Reactions

Is Microsoft's revamped MSN Live Search engine, named Bing - a Google killer? Does Bing push the search game to a new level? Will Bing eat into the huge marketshare that is Google's?

We will admit, it took us a few weeks before we gave Bing a try. What we like is the very calm, easy on the eye results display. And we like the "related searches" that  is well presented on the top left of the page. However - these can be easily managed by Google, so no real news here. We can give or take on the images presented on the main Bing page.

When testing for relevancy, which we believe is the most important deliverable from a search engine - we don't see much different. In many Google searches, the related Wkipedia entry is often top ranked, yet it is 2nd or 3rd in Bing. And the actual returned results, in our limited (and unscientific test) was similar. However, we noted that Bing returned many more total results. For instance:

• Internet Marketing Executive - Bing returned 81 Million (now down to 36 million) results to Google's 20 Million (now 44 million).  
• Hawaiian Resorts - Bing presented 42 Million to Google 283,000. 
• Web 2.0 Technology - Bing returned 119 Million (now 147 million!) to Google's 5.8 Million (now 196 million)

The question we ask - is this is a better search experience? Has Bing delivered on the promise to deliver results that lead to a better decision (aka decision engine). At this early stage, we do not think so. In fact, we believe the results are similar to what we observed from Google 2-3 years back.

No doubt, in some instances, the results from Bing could be stated as superior - however in our limited and random checks, we haven't see this yet.

Our initial reaction, especially to the news that Bing has increased it's marketshare, could be accounted for because of it's strong publicity and marketing efforts. Do they stay and sustain Bing's marketshare - for now yes. Until Google reacts and provides added value to return to the dominant search player.

The last two thoughts: we like that "some" twitter feeds are being added to Bing, however it is limited and for now you need to include "twitter" into the search query. And, how does Bing affect the Search Engine Optimization (SEO) world. We want to understand Bing and SEO (and will report on this later), as our own professional website took a ranking hit on this Microsoft search platform:

• "Stephen Harris"  (Google #1, Bing #10)
• "internet marketing executive" (Google #1, Bing - Page 3)
• "online marketing executive"  (Google #2, Bing #4)

Super Bowl: Search / Brand Strategy

Last year we discussed how some companies won big by leveraging search marketing in conjunction with their Super Bowl ads. And how some leveraged their competitors big budget advertisting for their own success, and some advertisers that fumbled. This year, more than ever, it is critically important to integrate on and offline marketing campaigns. Consumers use the web for research, to learn more and be better informed before they make a purchase. Even if that purchase is offline.

The question then - Will Super Bowl advertisers learn from the successes and mistakes from last years campaign? Think-ebiz will report on the results and observations.

This is a reprint of my article on Effective Search Marketing and Branding, which appeared in MediaPost Search Insider:

Online Marketing For Brand Building

Originally Pubished by Stephen Harris on Friday, May 26, 2006

WHEN YOU THINK OF SEARCH marketing, most of us consider conversions as the true metric of success, driving actual leads and sales through the web site. However, in a recent Radar Research Study, over 62 percent of executive respondents said that building brand awareness was their top objective. Online marketing and brand building are not mutually exclusive ideas. In today's marketplace, consumers no longer distinguish between off and online channels, so it stands to reason that brand building would be top of mind in both of these areas. For an example, consider the past Super Bowl--which showcased integrated off and online brand building successes and failures. In some cases, advertisers leveraged the search channels along with their television and print media--and in other cases, totally missed this opportunity. Still others saw an opportunity to extend their brand at the expense of a competitor. A successful multi-channel advertiser Honda's Ridgeline Truck Super Bowl ad integrated an online experience where people could search for Honda Ridgeline on Google and Yahoo and be taken to a well-branded and on-message landing page. This is a good example of tight brand integration of the off- and online channels. A failure to leverage online American Home Products' new PS Cleaners paid $2.5 million for its on-air spot without an online component. Interested consumers were unable to locate anything about this product when the games were over (a search marketing ad is now online). Without an after-game presence, this became a once-and-only advertisement at a very heavy cost. Seizing the opportunity Then there was a very opportunistic General Motors, which co-opted a Ford advertisement featuring Kermit the Frog by purchasing "Live Green" and "Kermit" on the search engines. People that searched for these "Ford" keywords were presented with GM's online ad, "Live Green, Go Yellow", along with a branded landing page. GM's online brand building benefited at the expense of Ford's Super Bowl advertising dollars. Multi-channel brand strategy The lesson is clear; leveraging an integrated off and online strategy is critical to enhancing overall brand awareness and relationships. To be successful, advertisers need to build landing pages that reflect the message of off-line promotions, and purchase the keywords that people would most likely enter in the search engines. When an off-line ad is integrated with a cohesive online presence, brand awareness and interest is clearly extended, which will lead to more conversions. Postscript - 2007: Reprise Media conducted a study of this years Super Bowl (Da Bears vs Payton's Colts) and found that 3/4 of all advertisers did NOT leverage search into their strategy. Further, 70% of these top advertisers did NOT have an integrated messaging on their landing pages or web sites. Reprise pointe to both SalesGenie and GoDaddy as companies that were successful offline, and on. More on this in a upcoming Think-eBiz entry.

The High Cost Per Click Keywords on Google

Cyberwire has an interesting post about the high CPC keywords on Google Adwords. Imagine the metrics for $54.33 mesothelioma lawyers or $47.16 refinancing mortgage. Many of the keywords are for legal or financial terms. Some surprise me, as they are very generic (shopper) terms. Refinancing Mortgage or just refinancing ($37) is extremely expensive and with the potential of very few conversions. As a reader of Think-ebiz, we prefer specific keywords that represent searches closer to making a purchase decision. One example of a keyword phrase that has a likelihood of conversion is $27.38 "how to register a domain name", except with domains costing between $3-$10, I cannot see how this works out financially. View CyberWires list of high cost keywords.

Brand Matters; Brand Building with Online Marketing

Online Marketing is more than a vehicle for producing leads and sales - it's now a major driver for brand building. Companies that traditionally advertise on television or print publications are learning that they need an integrated online marketing component to be successful. There were great integrated promotions during the recent Super Bowl. There were also companies that paid big-bucks for Super Bowl ads and failed to capitalize online. Then there was one company that was very opportunistic, leveraging it's competitors very expensive Super Bowl ad for its own gain.

PS: I am no longer associated with Trajectory Brand marketing. Please contact me to discuss online marketing, including search, online brand marketing and business effectiveness online. I am in a position to recommend other branding, marketing and communications companies other than Trajectory at this time. thank you.

KinderStart attacks Google 4 Secret Sauce

KinderStart, a Silver Lake Ca., web company that provides parents with child care advice via their own search engine (www.kinderstart.com), is suing Google. The claim is that Google has punished KinderStart and dropped their rankings, enough so that traffic has been greatly reduced at this portal. This allegedly occurred in March 2005.

Currently KinderStart has no page ranking, and the complaint was not specific as to what keywords were vital to this business. Although a search for the word "Kinderstart" found one deep-link occurrence (ranked #4).

Unfortunately we do not know the details of this complaint. Was Kinderstart.com doing some "black-hat" SEO that put them into the sandbox or was it just poor technique? I doubt it was a personal vendetta.

I cannot see this being a very fruitful lawsuit. This suit follows the de-listing of BMW and others; a tough stance for rooting out black-hat gamers. And also a rash of bad news for the Googler's (fraudulent click payout, financial errors, a few extra PowerPoint slides in the deck, China, Privacy ...). No wonder Google's stock is now on taking the down elevator.

We'll watch the KinderCare suit with interest; but doubt we'll learn much from this legal course.

Offline and Online Marketing; the live blurs.

In the beginning (before 1994), it was called Marketing. Simply put, it was offline - since online did not exist. Maybe there was a distinction between print and television/radio marketing campaigns. Then Al Gore created the internet (ok maybe not Al) and there became two marketing worlds, each so dissimilar. Now offline and online are blurring; into integrated marketing. That's a good thing.

Think about it; create an advertisement for a print magazine and include a URL for more information. That's a loose integration. However, when the person views the online ad and it is reflective of the print ad - the branded experience is extended. This is a good thing.

And when you ask your readers and television viewers to Google; this simply becomes marketing, with no distinction between the off and online marketing worlds. Pontiac's latest television ad invites you to "Google" Pontiac, while displaying the Google homepage. Why not simply ask the viewer to type www.pontiac.com? Simple - Pontiac is leveraging the action verb - "To Google". This is a clever thing.

The lesson is quite clear; marketing is once again firing on all cylinders to extend their branding and experience across multiple channels. Google agrees (from a quote on Danny Sullivan's Search Engine Watch); "We are happy that Pontiac has featured Google search in their television ad campaign. This is evidence that mainstream brand advertisers are increasingly realizing the close relationship between broadcast advertising and search usage."

The lines are blurring and once again it simply is called... marketing.

Defensive Search Engine Marketing

Pontiac launches their new sports car, the Solstice, on well placed television ads, and Mazda is right there waiting for the online search population with a competing paid click ad:

Miata vs Pontiac Solstice
Exclusive test-drive invitation for
a New MX-5 Miata. Sign up now!
MX5NoComparison.com

Defensive Search Engine Marketing is taking the online game to a higher level. Go ahead and spend millions on the Super Bowl, we'll be there to collect brand exposure at your expense; when the TV viewer searches for your promotion on Google or Yahoo. And they will.

Naturally, you include your URL in the TV ad, but the Pittsburgh fans are watching their team with a terrible towel, not a pen, in hand. So the viewers "Google" to learn more about GM's "Kermit inspired" hybrid car and find GM with their "Live Green - Go Yellow" online ad, extending the GM brand at Ford's expense.

For off-line advertisers, be aware that your competitors will be waiting for you online. And for the companies that are not paying the off-line fare, be ready with a strong online presence, to take some of the brand exposure ... that your competitor is serving up for you. Defensive Search Engine Marketing can be an effective online strategy. Thank you very much.

Side Note: And some Super Bowl advertisers totally flunk the course by not extending their online brand building opportunity, including Productive Solutions Cleaner "PS Cleaner". A $2.5 Million Super Bowl one shot wonder - with no online search program for interested buyers to find online.  And there was no sponsored ads ready for Diet Pepsi' “Bown & Bubbly” promotion (although their site is organically ranked #1), nor a defensive search ad from Coke - a missed opportunity.

Click Fraud, search marketings downfall?

Wired Magazine recent reported on a potential online marketing industry black-eye; click fraud. This is where someone clicks on an paid click sponsored advertisement repeatedly causing the advertiser to lose money by paying for these bogus clicks. There are generally two forms of this fraud; one engaged by a competitor (or someone with a grudge against the advertiser), the other by a website owner that hopes to reap financial gains from the contectual ad clicks on their site.

Effective advertisers watch their paid click programs carefully and should be able to quickly identify potential fraudulent clicks through tracking and reporting. Keywords that have historically nomimal click rates that jump up quickly may be a sign of fraudulent activity. Most tracking software provides for IP Address analysis; identifying where the clicks are coming from. If the clicks are from the same IP; pause your search program and report the IP to the search channel. Google, Yahoo and others have methods for reporting fraudulent activity. By providing this information timely and in detail; you stand a good chance of a refund. And maybe win a lawsuit if necessary.

However, don't toss the baby out with the bathwater (what a weird expression); Search remains a very effective channel for building awareness and generating leads and sales. I have been asked about click fraud on sales calls; to which I reply, that we'll always monitor this situation however the value of search out-weighs the risks of click fraud.

The rascals that conduct click fraud will not cause the downfall of search marketing. Read the wired article.

Safe Landings; Landing Page Your Way to Online Marketing Success

The eagle has landed. You typed in Eagle Preservation Funds into your favorites search box and clicked on the Save the Animal foundation; and the website speaks to you about...   the Save the Animal foundation. What about saving the Eagle?

As an online marketer, you know how important it is to get your visitor to their destination on your web page with a minimal number of clicks. What would make a better experience for this person? Same search; however now the first page they view is about the Eagle Preservation Fund, a division of the same Animal foundation. This visitor will be more likely to make a donation; you saved them time and proved that you are in-touch with your customer.

The answer is to build landing pages that closely match the keywords identified for your product. Unlike your main website; a landing page is a specialized page that is specific in addressing the selected keyword or a specific offer. The objective is to create a seamless experience between the search (or the banner or email creative) and the web site. Some best practices to keep in mind as you develop a landing page based campaign:

Simplicity: Keep it simple smarty; the landing page must be on topic relating to the keyword (or keyword group). Present the person with a clear call to action; contact me or buy now. Or in the case of the Eagle Fund; Donate to the Save the Eagle Foundation Today!

Self-Contained: Build a closed or self-contained landing page; limiting the number of external links. In other words, keep the visitor on the landing page, to prevent them from drifting off and then disappearing. Limit the navigation, and with each page; display the call to action prominently.

Dynamic Landing Page: the ultimate solution is to build one template; and modify the content based on the specific keyword used. Include the exact keyword the person entered in the search box on the landing page. A proficient Internet programmer can build this easily giving you a higher degree of integration with the visitors search intention.

Conclusion: The Eagle Foundation will experience a higher return, increased conversion rates by creating an intuitive and seamless experience for the visitor. You saved the visitor time and addressed his requirements effectively, and he will show his appreciation by converting at a higher rate.

Microsoft's Search Strategy; up close and realistic?

I recently returned from an interview with MSN for a position within their new search marketing organization. It was an intense but also interesting (positive) experience being in the Redmond MSN facility. In fact, the day before was their official product launch (see photo below). You cannot leave their office without feeling a degree of awe to the intelligent people that roam the halls. Seeing the Northwest's snow cap mountain ranges from their office window's ain't bad either.

Using Alpaca's (think Llama's), Miscrosoft introduces their search marketing on MSN at their Redmond, Wa headquarters. Ironically, no one I spoke with understood the tie in with the Alpaca's. They were cute however. Click for larger image.

Naturally they did not share their inner-secrets and strategy, and yet I was left wondering - what is it they intend to do? Where's the beef? Do they even know?

Currently, MSN uses Overture for their sponsored advertising (organic is now 100% MSN). The question is - for how long will they continue to use Overture. The answers to this specific question varied from: "We do not know yet". "No specific sponsored P4P strategy has been defined", "We will use Overture for some sponsored links and others will be from MSN". "It will be launched in the UK by the end of the year and then migrated domestically." Finally, I was told - "I wasn't sure myself, but after meeting with the product engineers, all I can tell you Stephen, it's really going to be good." I left wondering, do they really know what they want to do?

I can understand their rationale for entering the search arena. They fear that by not having a strong search component on MSN, that visitors will drop off this asset and eventually wind up on something similar offered by Google. They feel they need to support the MSN brand in a holistic manner.

Personally, I think they are in a billionaire-ego-war with Google. Wow that was a strong statement.

However, I do not think Google is clean either, taking their own planned shots at Microsoft (hiring the top FireFox programmer for instance). The bottom line, in my book, is that both companies will damage themselves as they stray away from what should be their respective core-competencies. Let's review:

Microsoft should focus on the software that drives the technology. They should continue to advance their operating systems (and fix the bugs & security issues too) - and be all about software. Their core competency should be all about enabling the technology and providing a platform for search (I didn't say, develop search).

Google should focus on information, being the accumulator of this important asset. They should enable information - easily accessed with enhanced highly relevant search capabilities. They should work with Microsoft, not against them, to enable this search on Microsoft (*and others*) operating system & software foundations.

Naturally, the Dell's & IBM own the PC hardware space, which is enabled by the software, which in turn, enables search and business.

Sure you say, competition is good. And it is! But the competitors should be in the same realm. For instance, Yahoo/Overture should focus their guns on Google, etc, Microsoft on Linux...   just as General Foods takes on Kellogg's.

In the end, by working cooperatively rather than taking shots across each others ego-bows, the end user would benefit. I just do not see how anyone will benefit from a Google vs Microsoft strategy.