Forum Moderators: open
The better performing keywords in terms of clicks and conversions were often very different on Google and GoTo. Google got much more, better quality traffic from more specific terms that almost noone used to search GoTo and it's partners.
Moving on to YAHOO! and LookSmart/MSN do you go more towards the Google keyword set or those that were succesful on GoTo. Intuition suggests MSN and YAHOO! searchers would more closely resemble those on GoTo, however if there are a sufficient number of queries on more specific terms, as was the case with Google, then the gold is there. Any thoughts?
If you focus on improving positions for the phrases that tested well with AdWords in Google's main SERPS, you'll pick up the Yahoo visitors anyway. Plus, now that Yahoo uses Goto as well, you could maintain bids on GoTo for the AdWord terms just to make sure you have some coverage for Yahoo searchers.
My guess would be that the terms that did well with GoTo were probably much broader and less specific. I've always found that the same trend (less search savvy users) tends to hold true across MSN, Yahoo and AOL, so I've always taken the approach of targeteting broad, competive terms with Goto/Directories and going after more specific (and better quality) terms using Google/Ink.
By the way, I'd be interested in knowing how long you tested AdWords. Also, how many competing ads were there? 10.4% is an outstanding click thru rate. We only have seen numbers like that when there are only a few advertisers and the ads are consistantly being displayed in the top 3 spots.
Some ads on Google ran with a full load of ad slots and others only ran with one. It wasn't a 10% click through rate (though it might have been - haven't seen that data) but a 10% conversion rate. For every 10 people that clicked through the ad we got one to land on the confirmation page. The confirmation page was served up after the visitor provided contact info so they could access additional information, studies, white papers or whatever.
That was about 6 weeks worth of data
It wasn't a 10% click through rate (though it might have been - haven't seen that data) but a 10% conversion rate.
O.K., that makes more sense. I guess I should finish all the coffee before I try and read new posts... :)
This should mean your words/phrases choice should be very product or service specific for Google, to make the click throughs to generate sales economically.
The audience knows what it is looking for and not just browsing.. as few are fed pure Google by their ISP homepage.
Google told me that the average click through rate for their side banner is 2.5% and 3% for the sponsored listings.
At a $15CPM, a 10% conversion rate is a cost of sale of $6 per sale. Opt in email has an average CPS of $2. Am I wrong?
A 10% conversion rate is great, but doesn't really tell me anything. 10% of 10 is only 1 sale!
The chunks of the equation that are missing is the dollar value of the conversion and the speed at which the impressions take place.
It doesn't really matter if you're paying $6 per sale and only getting 3 sales per 1000 views, if you're selling big ticket item, and the number of views in a day is sufficent.
I think that trying to compare averages between a paid search engine listing and email is a difficult thing to do because there are far to many variables to consider. 2.5 to 3.0 percent might be the average for all of Google's ads, but that doesn't have much bearing on your individual project.
If you purchase keywords that have less than 4 advertisiers your ad will always be displayed in the prime real estate, so your click thru rates will tend to be much higher than the average. On the otherhand, if you purchase keywords that have many advertisers, a much smaller percentage of your ad placements will be in the top spots. That will cause your click thrus to be much lower than average.
This morning I spent time reviewing all the data. What didn't suprise me was the difference in click thrus. The standard search listing (#5) dramatically out-performed the AdWord listing. What was somewhat suprising was the difference in conversion rates. The normal search listing consistently pulled a 60% conversion rate, while the AdWords was only 30%.
Now this is on the same engine, and the same search phrase. The presentation on the site was also the same.
So te end result is that the small chunk of Google users that are willing to click on an clearly marked, paid advertisment, turn out to be the least likely to actually be interested in the related product or service.
If anyone else has run Adwords for terms that you also show up on the first page for, I'd be interested in hearing if you have experienced similar differences in conversion rates.
