Forum Moderators: open
the payoff is for 2nd tier terms and specific products (like product inventory, for example). Ink will tell you that point blank.
if you are optimizing for less competitive terms, your odds of showing up on the first SERP among their distribution partners is much better - though you'll get less traffic on a per-listing basis.
here's the difference between Site Submit and IndexConnect: paying per-URL for the Site Submit program is less useful if you're going for 2nd tier terms, and you've got a lot of them, because the cost-to-traffic benefits are low on a per-URL basis. in other words, to rank well you still need to submit a lot of pages fine-tuned per-keyword, but you'll pay for each of those pages and they will pay off less. its not like the good ole days in excite or ink, where we could just optimize for the top 10 terms, nail the algorithm, and JAM traffic out of AOL for "free" from those 10 pages... :(
IndexConnect is better because, in the same ballgame of 2nd tier traffic potential, bigger is better. and with IC you generally dont pay PER-URL for page inclusion (depends on the partner you work with - Ink themselves don't charge), so going big doesnt cost you a lot of money up front. 1000 URLs with IC costs ZERO to start - you only pay for traffic down the line. meanwhile, 1000 URLs for Site Submit costs - GASP! - about $25k!
now, consider that we used to do BIG strategies for clients with a lot of content...we're talking hundreds if not thousands of pages per client. it's just not practical under Site Submit. so instead we can turn to IC to avoid upfronts, but then we effectively "share the returns" with Ink.
bottom line is that its a fairly intelligent "if you can't beat them, join them" strategy on Inks part, for addressing the SEO market. bummer for all of us, though.
one last note about IC: not everyone can join the party (yet, anyway). they only want "big" partners with "big" clients. part of this is to centralize the work, and to minimize "abuse", i'd think. sample clients include amazon and ebay; you get the idea.
oh, and lastly, optimization still does matter with IC. you're still building and submitting pages the same as before, the specifications are just a bit different for inclusion. you have a bit more flexibility, because the IC pages are "for the spider's eyes only"...meaning that they are basically cloaked pages, with official sanction. that said, Ink will discipline partners who abuse this opportunity.
seoboy
so its basically sanctioned cloaking: same algorithm applies, but you only have to focus on content without the shackle of the visuals.
Most of the people here are 'little guys' who don't have a huge budget - and ink is fast raising the price of their offering for them to be out of reach for most people.
So, what value is Index connect for my small clients? I don't work for large corporations...and I don't feel like paying per click for something that at Overture would give far better ROI.
In the end, I think Ink should stick to selling Ink.
and a low CPC does not necessarily translate to a low ROI; that has been proven time and time again.
i agree with you jeremy, its a bad deal for the small guy. but, unfortunately, small guys don't help Ink pay the bills and they aren't a charity.
what i really see with IndexConnect is Ink attempting to cut in on the SEO business; keep in mind, WE were the first folks to make money from their search listings...
i'm curious as to whether they will eventually let resellers aggregate "little guy" traffic into IndexConnect accounts - ie. open it up to smaller players willing to pay PPC, managed through a 3rd party service provider like PT.
one argument i can see against this is that it opens the door for massive abuse - imagine Ink sanctioning cloaking to anyone who wants to do it... could be tough to police. then again, stranger things have happened...
