| 7:08 pm on Oct 13, 2000 (gmt 0)|
BT, you're ever the optimist re net advertising, but it's going belly-up.
| 7:36 pm on Oct 13, 2000 (gmt 0)|
I was talking to a potential client a few days ago about starting an SEO campaign and was told that they weren't interested in it since the CPC for SEO didn't compare to the CPC they get with banner ads. I guess she had taken the Goto data I gave her and extrapolated from there...kinda silly - but regardless, it confirmed for me that many dotcom advertising people don't seem to understand the benefits of SEO over banner ads and continue to buy ad space since its what they know.
Brett, I'm guessing you were concerned about the Doubleclick slip for what it means for the Internet as a whole - but do you think it might also be a boon for SEO and other web marketing techniques?
| 8:33 pm on Oct 13, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Let me sweeten the pot:
RealNetworks Plunges, Tarred by Advertising Fears [dailynews.yahoo.com]
| 9:11 pm on Oct 13, 2000 (gmt 0)|
A couple comments, and they are contradictory...
I've been following the AMD vs Intel struggle for years, both build good products, but one spends a good deal more on brand recognition. In the past few months, everytime an announcement is made that should strenghten one stock against the other, the stocks do the opposite of what you would expect. My conclusion is that the analysists are way "behind the curve" and this is only one of many examples... Unfortunately, they hold significant sway over how the market perceives a company.
A lesson I learned years ago, "When you're not sure what's going on, follow the money." I've said it elsewhere, with VC money drying up for dotcoms, the extravagent spending we've seen in the past (including advertising) will dry up with it.
I agree with Marshall, it's a good time to be an SEO for those dotcoms that are going to move to a more realistic business plan.
| 9:22 pm on Oct 13, 2000 (gmt 0)|
>dotcoms that are going to move to a more realistic business plan.
Ah! he says as he quickly slips into his devil's advocate costume But Dave, the dotcoms have been doing all the dotcom advertising. And, it's fair to say that the 'brick and mortar' crowd (B+M) just hasn't dumped the ad dollars into banners. So, while SEO may be up for the B+M sites, is traditional web advertising going to take it on the chin?
| 9:45 pm on Oct 13, 2000 (gmt 0)|
There are only good things ahead for SEO Marshall. Who they gonna run to for help when the sales dry up? They come to us.
I'm concerned about the downturn in advertising more from my own sites standpoint than from seo. I was expecting the 4th quarter to be excellent. Hopefully Nov will see an upturn. Sept was very good, but Oct has been so-so.
| 1:17 am on Oct 14, 2000 (gmt 0)|
> the dotcoms have been doing all the dotcom advertising
My point, admittedly poorly made, was that the boom in advertising was based on VC money and unrealistic business plans. When a dotcom begins to be managed on a P/L basis the advertising budget will be based on revenue, not speculative investment money, and less extravagent as a result. SEOs will benefit as dotcoms realize that there are other ways to generate the needed revenues besides throwing money into ads.
Don't confuse "more realistic business plan" and "Brick and Mortar biz." NO biz can spend more then it makes for very long and remain in business. A "more realistic business plan" to me is simply one based on the business's revenue instead of investment money.
>the dotcoms have been doing all the dotcom advertising
>is traditional web advertising going to take it on the chin?
Absolutely! If dotcoms been buyin' and dotcoms are dyin', who's gonna buy the ads?
Brett - FWIW, Sept was a slow month for affiliate sales as well, Oct looks better...
| 1:42 am on Oct 14, 2000 (gmt 0)|
>Don't confuse "more realistic business plan" and "Brick and Mortar biz."
No, I didn't confuse them, I see it more as a condensing or migratory process, with "realistic business plan" and "bricks and mortar" becoming somewhat synonymous. With the attrition rate of pure dotcoms in the stratosphere, funding rounds gone, and the stock market wiping out the 'funny money' of options and equity-based incentives, web bolt-ons for B+M may be all that are likely to be left standing for the coming year. Their reluctance to advertise, as noted in the analysts' statements re Yahoo means tough times for Doubleclick, Engage, etc.
| 2:08 am on Oct 14, 2000 (gmt 0)|
littleman and I touched on this in another thread a few weeks ago in the "Good News About DotComs Thread" (Can't find the durn thing now!). There are millions (?) of little entreprenarial (can't spell either) dotcoms that are producing steady income by being run on a sound business basis.
You might enjoy this Register article [theregister.co.uk]. It reenforces what I've already said, but much more colorfully. :)
Whether you're a Brick and Mortar or a dotcom, you have income and expenses, and hopefully a profit when all is said and done... And I welcome the common sense approach of the B+M crowd to the web in place of the glitzy, get rich quick crowd. I don't see them having a reluctance to advertise per se, more likely just a more conservative (reasonable biz plan) approach to "web promotion," which includes advertising.
| 2:47 am on Oct 14, 2000 (gmt 0)|
>reinforces what I've said
Oh, you and I are in total agreement Dave... have been from the git-go, but you presented a different path to the conclusion; banners are going to go hurtin' for awhile.
>There are millions of little.....dotcoms that are producing steady income by being run on a sound business basis.
Unfortunately, they don't buy banners, or at least not through the likes of Doubleclick.
>There are only good things ahead for SEO Marshall. Who they gonna run to for help when the sales dry up? They come to us.
The larger ones, yes. I don't see the "smalls" as being particularly fertile ground for contract SEO work.
I also wonder how many of these affiliate web sites are producing income based on programs that are flawed. They may be representing a vendor that is selling at a loss (Amazon comes to mind here, but there are many) and ultimately will be forced to close shop, shutting off the affiliate's revenue stream a little upstream.
I see several domino effects happening here.
| 3:18 am on Oct 14, 2000 (gmt 0)|
>shutting off the affiliate's revenue stream a little upstream
No doubt about this whole paragraph either, except, carefully chosen programs will survive. I have two that provide 70% of my income and both seem to be based on "realistic business plans." Hopefully, these will get me through but tough times are ahead for affiliates too. Gotta go work on my SEO site ;)
BTW, that devil's advocate costume just doesn't work with the southern drawl...
| 3:38 am on Oct 14, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Southern pronouncement on whether sites should spend time/money on ads vs SEO:
|Kissin' don't last, cookin' do. |
| 9:45 pm on Oct 15, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Actually Dave, Sept was our best month ever due to some targeted ad sales. We did more in Sept than the previous six months combined. Oct has been slow. If it weren't for direct targeted ad sales, we'd be hurting like everyone else.
| 10:19 pm on Oct 15, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Brett - I'm pleased to hear that, means WmW.com won't appear in the dotcom morgue for another month or two at least! :) ;)