Forum Moderators: open
>based on search user input
Anyone know what that means?
I would guess that it is some sort of voting system where people who are searching can let Overture know if the site is a quality site or not. How would they do this? I have no idea. That would be my first instinct anyway.
At least, as far as I know.
Imagine though, if a lot of people click two listings before being done with a set of search results from Overture.
The possibility for getting delisted (because lucky for you, your listing(s) don't get clicked twice) is pretty significant...and it could also mean a much lower ROI.
Why is it that every time they announce an 'upgrade' it seems to cost advertisers more $$$ and cause a bigger headache?
This seems to be just another example of Overture layering their ad index with something designed to confuse their advertisers and neglecting to give any meaningful explanation. Adding a feature without a complete explanation can only make advertisers wonder if these new features are for the benefit of Overture or the advertiser.
Does anyone have a senior source at Overture who might shed some light on these resent thingies:
Cadabra
MatchDriver2
Click Index?
I'm getting the runaround lately.
Adding a feature without a complete explanation can only make advertisers wonder if these new features are for the benefit of Overture or the advertiser.
My take on it is that they need more $$$, after I compared their Q2 to their Q3 filings, their cost per click (one can only assume, the amount of $ they give to the portals) went up by 6%. That is pretty huge, in only 3 months.
Add to that the Lycos launch of their own deal with Findwhat, using their infrastructure, etc., and Infospace not only going with Google on Webcrawler, but launching their own version of PFI, and Overture has to wonder:
where does their compelling value come from?
Simple answer to that question: they were there first. The problem then is that since they were there 1st, everybody else that wants in on their pie, is going to put Over :) between the cross hairs of their marketing strategy and positioning...then fire away.
Considering the number of spots Overture lost to Google:
Add that all up, and the enhancement list that Mr. Mackin posted, you have to wonder: is Goto really OVER as in, game over?
I think Google needs to refocus their energies on relevant results. I no longer use Google for my searching needs. (will expand)
I see the upcoming star as Lycos.
InfoSpace, good try but.....
Overture move over, retire, or something.
I'm increasingly frustrated with Overture's phony baloney, which they compound by sending emails to us that insult our intelligence. Overture is taking several turns for the worst and I hope the other PPCs take them to school.
There are enough pay per clicks out there now. Any thoughts on creating a group of these guys to act as arbitration to these engines. Hey I'm not saying lets join the Union but who is the person that acts as the filter between corporate and small business.
I think we need some group to oversee the advertisers prefs.
This may also be a tactic to eliminate all those
grandfathered 1 cents bid.
Perhaps they should rename the program:
Overture Profit Assurance Measures or
Overture Keep Our Shareholders Happy Measures.
Since Overture will not give us an answer to
what is acceptable, maybe we can get an answer
if we poll the group.
I may hold the minority opinion, but I think Overture's search engine quality algorithm can be of benefit to it's customers. Keep in mind that they invite you to resubmit search terms with updated descriptions. If you resubmit the term with an updated title and description, and your click-through ratio is increased, then you benefit by obtaining more traffic over the long term. In addition, if the most you can afford is 4th place, and the listing in 2nd place with an inneffective title and description gets removed, then your listing will appear 3rd without a bid increase. I for one welcome the challenge to craft a compelling title and description that generates a higher CTR. So far, only one of my terms have been removed under this guideline, fewer than 0.00005%.
My experience with both of Google's programs, the original CPM program and the new CPC program, are:
Cost per click is MUCH higher on Google, even for obscure search terms. This seems to be because their engine groups generic and specific searches together. For example, a national company paying $2.00 per click for any term with the phrase "car parts" means that you're going to have to pay close to $2.00 per click for "car parts in florida". As far as I'm concerned, it's a ploy to ramp up CPC to their older CPM rates, which were ridiculous given the lack of visibility and performance.
Google unpaid search engine results are my site's single largest source of traffic, although on the whole the value of a Google visitor is lower than other search engine originating visitors. I suspect this is because Google is used by a greater percentage of consumers and my web site is primarily b2b. Google's AdWords program, by contrast, generates little traffic and I pay roughly $1.00 per visitor, or about $20/lead. At $20/lead my profit is nearly zero. Compare that to Overture's $0.15-$0.20 per visitor average, or $2-3/lead.
Just some thoughts.
Sean.
[edited by: engine at 5:25 pm (utc) on Sep. 23, 2002]
[edit reason] no sigs, thanks [/edit]
Those are some interesting stats. I am consumer oriented on my site, and about 65% of my traffic comes from Google. After that Yahoo, AOL and MSN. Almost none from Lycos, though my position is about the same there as on Google and Yahoo.
>or about $20/lead. At $20/lead my profit is nearly zero. Compare that to Overture's $0.15-$0.20 per visitor average, or $2-3/lead.
These things are industry, product / service specific and vary all over the place.
An exact opposite example we have is $1.05 on Overture and $0.11 at adwords AND adwords converts better cause of AOL persons. Go figure :)
