randle - 3:13 pm on Apr 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
@randle / netmeg - How do the pages you render for paid v organic differ for the same subject?
The paid page is stripped way down, the less distraction the better - but there has to be enough relevant material to satisfy the Quality Score gods (who dont need nearly as much as the organic ranking gods).
Are the organic landing pages filled with relative optimization excess compared to paid, which could explain part of the success of paid.
Definitely, and "excess" is a good description for it.
Generally the chase to convert in the organic space is driven by efforts to rank. So most (well, I know we do) have trouble keeping ourselves from over optimizing the pages because if it doesn't rank, its never going to convert. This is so much at the core of the "new ranking" world we live in; the post "Penguin/Panda/EMD" influenced algorithm. What does the visitor want vs. what needs to be on the page to have a fighting chance for the visitor to find the page.
The conversion rates for the paid space (at least for us) are way higher than in the organic. We attribute that to both the nature of the visitor (organic visitors can be more toward the research mode in the sales cycle spectrum), and the amount of distracting material on the respective organic landing pages.
Now, of course it all comes down to the bottom line - each has its own ROI - some days one looks like the prettiest girl in class, and the next day its the other way around.
If brands with their organic bias can render simpler pages without excess copy, surely they are at an advantage with conversion rates. What do you think?
I think thats a very good point -
Wether its the paid space, or the organic, it all comes down to the same old formula:
Total Impressions - Click through rate - Conversion rate
If you can rank well enough to keep the impressions high, and at the same time deliver a very targeted landing page, you gotta believe life would be good.