Forum Moderators: open
I entered into a bid war with one of our competitors. The keywords we are bidding on are not traffic heavy but are very targeted to our services. This war has gotten to a point, where I am bidding $1.00 and the only other bid (our competitor) overbids me with a $1.01 bid! This is totally ridiculous!
I don’t know what to do. I don’t want to stay in the first position for $1.00 because I am afraid our competitor will just click us out of our budget. I don’t want to drop out either.
What to do? Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
Yup....you sure are. WebWoman...think "directory"....Golden opportunity being wasted here;) I doubt the legalities will ever come back to bite you in the butt, however the "directory" solution solves those and makes money for everyone but Overture. Who really wants to pay another middleman anyways?
Dmitri010....your enemy is not your competitor(s) it is Overture. Maybe you can't do a WebWoman type deal if the competitor is hostile, but you could try an alternative strategy not related to Overture that would surely put several nails in their coffin;)
In my tests Overture Sponsorship captures less than 5% of seaches verses regular SERP's. Fighting over the 5% is really pointless, aim at the other 95%+.
OR you could quit being a silly little numbskull yourself and just focus on finding profitable keywords your competitor is too busy congratulating himself to ever think of. ;-)
I suspect games are being played either by competitors or Looksmart itself. I know that the clicks are supposed to be IP-specific to allow only one click per use, but something is not adding up (no pun intended) with Looksmart.
Anyone else notice anything similar in their campaigns?
You don't specify what action you would take against "intruders" but the anti-trust laws are specifically written to protect new entrants from being locked out of a market by the established players. If you're going to continue to do this, you ought to stop talking about it.
It is a price fixing situation because the person we are discussing has a
client who has gotten together with his 2 main competitors on some agreed upon bidding strategies. We have an understanding that keeps our 3 sites at the top without the silliness of bidding wars. It's all very civilized...until an intruder shows up - but we have a plan for those too :)
price fixing? Where do you get that?
Three competitors discussing what they will pay for a given service - in this case, a listing on Overture - and conspiring to limit that payment to a certain maximum amount - is not a "gentlemen's agreement," as the participant wrote - it is price fixing. In the US, at least, this is clearly illegal.
until an intruder shows up - but we have a plan for those too
So they are also conspiring to keep other competitors - who don't have the good fortune to be a part of this fine little gentlemen's club - from actively participating in the free-market Overture system by, apparently, coordinating bids to force the interlopers out of the competition...amazing.
Another non-lawyerly opinion.
What if three companies decided not to use a certain adv. option at all? Would that be price fixing
Yes - it would be a conspiracy to restrain trade. Competitors in the US cannot get together and agree to not use a particular service or medium. It is illegal. Likewise, those same competitors cannot get together and conspire to set a maximum price they are willing to pay a vendor.
Do what it takes to stay in the top three as long as your ROI is good. Write the best darn ad copy you can, and make it better than your competitors. The BEST answer is to seek to improve your "natural" position in the engine through good SEO. What's better than a FREE first place listing?!?!
Also what happens when new competitors enter the mix, which they will. What you are talking about is not a solid bidding strategy at all.
Oh for chrise sake. Communicating with a competitor about 'pricing' isn't even vaguely 'illegal' unless those conspiring/colluding are in a position to 'restrain trade'.
If Microsoft and Sun and SBD and Apple *and* Linux get together and agree not to sell their OS' for less than $3,000; now *that* would be illegal...
Unless a big chunk of the market was run by DR, with a competitive product, in which case the market would probably shift in their favor.
This whole argument, however, has been silly, since the only restraint has been on how much *customers* are willing to pay for Overture services. There is and never has been any discussion of preventing some wacko from bidding more than the 'cartel'.
It's like arguing that suicide bombers have no right to demand 13 virgins in the afterlife rather than the offered 12.
Silly silly silly
Az
I'm not saying stuff like this doesn't happen all the time... But I do think that arguments that it's an appropriate business practice are specious.
Oh, and welcome, Azrael! :)
There is and never has been any discussion of preventing some wacko from bidding more than the 'cartel'.
I guess you missed this part:
until an intruder shows up - but we have a plan for those too
Trust me, a group of competitors geting together to fix a maximum price they will pay a vendor for services - and conspiring to keep other competitors from exceeding their maximum bids - is very illegal.
There are tools that now exist to let you manage your keyword portfolio as just that - a portfolio. Figure out your business success metrics, and let a smart algorithm do the rest.