| 7:47 pm on Jul 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I generally do about 60% Google, 30% Overture, and 10% MSN
| 8:41 pm on Jul 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
MSN - 0%
Very low search volume and very low conversion rate. Basically, competitors clicking on each others ads.
Yahoo - 0%
Good volume but low conversion rate, mainly because there are too many fraudulent clicks coming from Yahoo search partners.
Google - 100%
Undoubtedly they are the PPC monopolist.
| 11:29 pm on Jul 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Hands down Google will bring in the bulk of your traffic thus the resulting number of conversions (if your site is converting that is . . .). Overture/Yahoo will be your second and MSN adcenter third, again due to the amount of traffic they will bring in through the PPC ads - in my opinion this is due to the design layout on the respective search pages (but I digress . . .). It would be an interesting exercise to note that even if you have an equal dollar value allocated to all three ad-platform campaigns, and use the same keywords/ads on all 3 engines you will see your spend split - that will essentially be your optimum allocation. Thus I would start with keywords focused toward your site strength or highest converting keywords to determine your spend ratio, I would then expand on my keywords and test secondary keyword campaigns on each engine while maintaining your budget allocation accordingly.
| 5:46 pm on Jul 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My current spend:
Google and MSN convert at about the same rate, Yahoo a little bit lower.
| 2:34 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Based in the UK, I am running Yahoo! & google, is it worth running on MSN also? Sometimes my ads appear to show on msn, but I'm thinking that maybe if I sign up and set them up on msn also I'll get more frequency and better placement?
| 7:11 pm on Aug 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My CPC is extremely low for my keywords on MSN.
So even given the lower conversion, ROI is still good.
At the end of the day, it's all about ROI
I would say its well worth it, if there is not a lot of competition for your terms, and you can afford a lower conversion rate.
My cost per conversion in MSN is so good I'm thankful for the switch over from them displaying Overture ads (yahoo! whatever the hell they want to call themselves now)
In my opinion, its well worth a test run.
I am pretty happy.
The reporting, and campaign management sucks...but ROI is good, so I'm happy :)
| 7:13 pm on Aug 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Ooops, didnt see you are based in the UK.
I think its only US at the moment.
So maybe you are seeing your MSN Ads ocassionally, because ocassionally you are searching .com?
| 4:14 am on Aug 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My ads cost a lot more on MSN than either Yahoo or Google, and the traffic from MSN is miniscule, and I am top #2 or 3, on paid ads for major keywords there. I just cannot figure that out, given MSN is the opening page on the Internet everytime most people in the world open their Internet Explorer browser.
Guess most people know to go to Google for good search results, because MSN Search sure does not deliver on just plain search.
| 2:08 pm on Aug 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The thing I'm not sure about is even though Overture place on MSN in the UK, it might be worth putting my ads on MSN also just to boost them, get a little bit more placement as I'm not sure Overture ads will show as frequently?
Or am I possibly making work for myself (transferring all my ads) for what it a pittance ROI?
| 11:31 am on Aug 22, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The Google/Yahoo split is very much dependent upon what market (geo and type of terms) you are targeting. In on-line dating, I saw 60-70% of the traffic come from Yahoo. We weren't able to get the same click or sub volume via Google, partly because we couldn't force-bid, like you can on Yahoo. Generally, you can get more traffic on Google.
| 7:01 pm on Aug 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Y. 0% (we tried it recently after a 1 year hiatus. 80% of clicks came from adfarms, originating in Uruguay, Jordan, Ukraine etc.. Conversion: 0%. Go figure)
M. 0% (fairly easy to get a reasonable position in the SERPS)