Forum Moderators: open
I think you really have to test it for your specific situation.
The next few weeks will see changes that will drive many an advertiser to drink. The only certainty there is......... is uncertainty.
It will be interesting to see how Overture actually defines "broad match" and "keyphrase" match. It appears to me..given their recent announcement...that they are continuing the MatchDriver keyphrase matching process as their version of Google's exact match..when, in fact, they use very different matching processes.
If Overture's new "broad match" matching scheme works similarly to Google's, the "noise word" blocking used by MatchDriver will become redundant when these words are compensated for under their version of "broad match." Also, since MatchDriver considers misspelling variations which none of Google's matching processes do(well, apparently there have been a handful of very recent reports, but I have never seen any), these will still be very different matching processes...which will require some strategizing on the part of SEM's to use each to its full potential.
So does Google or Overture have better matching processes? From what we know at this point, after this weekend, Overture will still have a solid tool for compensating for mispellings(1 point for Overture), but Google will be the only one with a truly exact "exact matching" tool(1 point for Google)..allowing for SEMarketer to work on the most granular level.
...oops...had no intention of spending this much time on this. thoughts anyone?
So, what did the past weekend show? Just curious.
My thought -- for commercial sites -- is that Google is better, but maybe at times appears more expensive. Without an accurate ROI tracking tool, however, you cannot be sure, and I do not have one.
But on Google you can limit your campaign to certain languages, and maybe countries (will have to double check that). Google also appears to be much more selective and rigorous in who it uses as advertising "partners," than Overture is.
In Overture you also have no choice where your ads appear as far as language/country. Your ads are all over the world. If you do not sell/ship to all over the world, you have (a lot or some) useless traffic from places you will not sell/ship to.
I also, over the past 3 years have gotten a lot more "questionable" "spiked" traffic from Overture than from Google.
Rogerd's comment may not say it all, but is probably close :
< I'm tracking ROI on a consumer product site and, for whatever reason, Google clicks are converting more profitably than Overture's for similar keywords.<
Also, when asked about what percentage of clicks and/or traffic is from Gator, no answer is given.
My clients want to know where their ads are being shown.
Is this too much to ask, Overture?
Over the last 1½ yrs. we have gone from 80% / 20% Over / AdWords to 30% / 70%. We continue to get great results and feel much more comfortable dealing with Google. Over seem to go out of their way to make things difficult, slow and just a touch dishonest.
Adwords lets you choose your country, which to me is a big factor.
OvertureGuy are you listening?
with Overture, you're paying for clicks worldwide
Not true. There are several markets that Overture operate in and in the absence of being in those market you won't get traffic from those countries.
By default Google is all countries/all languages and you opt out if you don't want it.
Depending on your sector I'd say it's a big positive for you not to receive traffic from some countries.
I once spoke with an Adwords sales manager about how inferior their format is compared to Overture's set-up. In fairness to Google I believe there may be some Patent infringement issues with Overture if they were to adopt a similar format. After all, only a complete idiot would voluntarily design a PPC format using small shaded boxes on the far right side of the screen. It's common knowledge that people start reading from the top left.
However, you can use Google's disastrous PPC format to your advantage. The PPC listings on Google are so impotent that they offer little competition to the web generated results. Therefore, if you focus on optimizing your website for Google web generated results you can obliterate your competitors who are fixated on PPC. (To add insult to injury, Google originally billed for page views rather than clicks so you paid to have people miss your ad!)
Overture's system on Yahoo is more effective, the "Sponsor Results" look identical to the "Web Results"
Therefore, PPC's on Yahoo are much more formidable competition to Web results. However, the absurd bid prices for most useful terms make Overture too expensive.
Almost a year ago I looked at my PPC costs (28K in a year) on Overture and said "screw-it." I optimized my website for Google and have achieved great positioning. Under Google's current format, I'll take a web generated top position any day over the top PPC Sponsor position. I'm doing more business than ever and keeping it instead of putting the bulk of it in Overture's pocket.
Overture PPC is useful in two areas. The first is secrecy. I have a fantastic search term that none of my competitors have thought of yet. If I were to optimize a page for this keyword I could easily get a first position ranking for free web generated results from Google / Yahoo. However, it's likely that one of my competitors would browse my website and discover it.
I inserted the keyword on a page just long enough to keyword, I immediately deleted that particular word from the page. Secondly, Overture can also be cost effective for low volume keywords and phrases.
Later, Cheapskate
So, I guess you consider all the millions of AOL subscribers that Google AdWords serves useless?
I like the fact that people DO know they are clicking on an ad. (Although, AOL is pretty sublime...)
And I really despise Gator at Overture. If Overture let me opt-out of Gator,
I would happily spend the over $50K I was spending with clients last year.
Believe me, our sites are optimized quite well in Google, MSN, Ask and others but
PPC offers the fastest way to get into a search engine (I have clients with lots of
"last minute" promotional ideas tied to news events, etc.) so I cannot wait for the
google dance or an alltheweb crawl or, god forbid, an open directory editor to update a
section. I have clients who want a traffic and sales NOW, and PPC works.
But never with deceptive Gator. Never.
This is my prediction:
MSN starts their own PPC and displays boxes to the side right next to there own algo search.
Yahoo completes overture takeover, no more text link sponser results, moves them to the right, and stats their enhanced inktomi algo search.
ISPs such as earthlink or AOL may continue to display text links, but for myself, I consider their traffic to be kind of junkie. Anyone who pays more than $10 for dial-up Internet access is not the smartest shopper in the world.
Dates and times may vary - jd
If more of us did that, it might make a difference.
I think you'd be surprised...
That's the point...you CAN opt out of it with Google Adwords...you're stuck with it in Overture.
If you're a US business selling only in the US, you can burn a lot of dollars fast.
Sorry it's taken so long to respond but, believe me, I HAVE had
a number of e-mail exchanges with Overture about Gator. At the beginning
when they announced the deal and just recently when a sales rep called
to ask "hey - where have you been?" Overture does NOT want my clients to be
able to opt out of Gator. Period. And that means my loyal clients do not have
control over where their ads are being shown so that means these media-savvy clients
do not want to be a part of that sort of media buy. It just shows me how this thing
called the "Web" is still developing its true business standards. To think you can
TELL a client where their ad will be show as opposed to asking them where they would
like it to be shown. It's just basic, basic stuff.
Thus LUDICROUS. I have doing media buying for over 20 years and this is the first
time I have been told "sorry, if you spend $$ with us, we decide where your ads are shown."
This says to me that Overture (and now Yahoo!) care more about Gator than they do the clients
who buy the ads. A BAD way to run a media company. They will learn -- oh yes -- they
will learn. And perhaps they are because, Google AdWords (and other PPC channels, MSN mentioned
above) are giving media buyers the one option they are always needing to control: who
is seeing the ad!
Thanks for letting me vent...
-Babsie
Just not true. Select a country and off you go... Geotargeting is excellent on Overture.
We have found Espotting to convert better than EITHER Overture or Espotting - my guess is that Webdiversity finds the same (?). Not much help for American markets, but good for Europe. Since Espotting uses a picture as well, I bet MSN will incorporate pictures in a PPC search system if they come out with their own.
They are ALL starting to suffer under the strain of strong growth though... any could fall apart at any time.
Dixon.
Overture are incompetent, deliberately obstructive, and return poor results at a high price.
Make your choice!
Neil
I don't think so, but it would all be possible.
As soon as you make it a complete chose your poison then we'll have people opting for, Yahoo, Google, MSN and AOL and that will be the end of PPC.
If you drill deep, you'll strike oil, some of the second and third division publishers will give good results, if you let them.
To my surprise, the conversion trackers seems to suggest that Overture is more cost-effective than Google Adwords. However, the google tracker excludes conversion from content sites (we do get good conversions from content sites)
What is clear though is that irrespective of the ROI, adwords will give several times more traffic and conversions with Overture.
