Wordtracker "count" figures

just doesn't look right

[bonniebrook]

Ok, in WordTracker, I have done some searches for broad popular keywords. I will use "email" and cellphone" as examples.
The "count" figures returned are:
email 5,332
cellphone 540

the count column is described as the # of times the keyword has been searched for in the last 60 days. These numbers look very, very low to me. I know that I must be mis-understandign SOMETHING. Any help would be appreciated.

[specter]

Hi,

You aren't missing nothing.Word Tracker, as well as all the other keyword tools is often unreliable. Try other methods to pick the best keywords...

[caveman]

bonniebrook, actually, you are missing something:

email: 5322
cellphone: 540
cell phone: 3667

:)

[mrhazelj]

Pm me if you want to use a tool that i found two months ago. it's free and looks to be more acurate than ones I've seen.

[sugarrae]

I was noticing the same as caveman - cell phone is actually two words. However, I wouldn't depend on any of the keyword tools for accuracy. However, what I have found #*$! to be useful for is knowing if the singular or a plural version on a term is more popular.

[Illah]

You also have to realize WordTracker only 'counts' Dogpile results. In fact, according to the WT documentation they have full access to the Dogpile weblogs, thus it IS accurate...for Dogpile. Whether or not Dogpile is representative of other engines is open to debate.

For example, MSN has more older women using its service, and as the stock homepage to every IE user on the planet the majority of MSN searchers are probably users who never bother to change it (i.e. novice users).

Dogpile is a niche metacrawler engine and most of its users are probably more advanced, and thus not looking for 'email' and 'cell phone'. 'linux' returns 4832 hits on WordTracker, and I highly doubt more people care about linux than cell phones in the overall internet world.

So part of our research should be on the use of engines and not just numbers of searches (which, theoretically, could change dramatically overnight anyway). MSN is more of the layman engine, Google is a little more techie, and Yahoo is in the middle of the two. Engines like Vivisimo likely have a very techie/advanced userbase.

--Illah