[Ed. note: This article originally set to post on 4/28]

Google and Yahoo sitting in a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G…well, that possibility could be a reality in the near future. Let it be known that Yahoo is currently seeking a business partnership with Google.

As of April 28, 2008, Google and Yahoo are in the middle of a two-week alpha test. This test is primarily composed of both Search Engines combining and “testing” specific search functionalities to improve Yahoo’s Online search and advertising platform. Simply put, Yahoo Is using Google’s search query and selected algorithmic components to generate and display ads to Yahoo users based upon their searches.

For those that are not familiar with Search Engine market share break down; Google controls roughly 60% of the U.S. Web search market and Yahoo owns roughly 20%. The remaining percentages are comprised of lonely MSN with about 10% market share and the remaining numbers being divided amongst smaller search engines such as Ask.com and aol.com.

The coalition of these two search engines, Google and Yahoo, could dramatically change the world of online search and advertising. In theory, this merger could eliminate all competition within this industry. Why would any business or online surfer want to use a different channel? Google and Yahoo already utilize the most advanced algorithms within the industry and retain the highest levels of user loyalty.

Due to this potential merger, the “Google/Yahoo” test is under investigation by the U.S. Justice Department and other competition regulators for possibly violating antitrust implications. Nothing of note or credible importance has yet to be quoted or released pertaining to this investigation.

I believe Yahoo is taking the right approach to test Google’s applications, strategies and brand name to improve upon their current search operations. Also, this is a slap in the face to MSN as Yahoo recently rejected their (MSN) $44 billion buy out offer. By rejecting MSN and now “working” with Google, I feel that Yahoo is moving in the right direction to improve their search functionality. If this merger happens, I believe this will be a win-win for the Google and Yahoo, but a major lose for all competing search engines.

One step at a time though, lets see what type of reports and feedback are released once the test is complete and their data is viewable. I am very interested to see what their “test” findings show and what the next steps are, if any.

Addendum:

Generally, my addenda are long and make several sub points on what I write about. However this addendum is quite the opposite. I wanted to point out that I am biased towards Google. My tone in writing this blog may not show it, but I respect Google too much and want them to succeeded and fully control this market. Google is simply a great brand with a great product, which I want to see get better. By Google helping/working with Yahoo I only see future benefits and improvement in this youthful world of Search Engine Marketing. In my eyes, I see Google as the older brother, helping his younger sibling, Yahoo.

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

Yesterday Google announced the public launch of Google TV Ads, which is now available to all US-Based advertisers.

Google TV Ads works for both advertisers with existing commercials and ones without. For those without ads Google has setup an Ad Creation Marketplace (ACM) where advertisers can send in project bids to industry professionals to take care of the entire Ad creation process. To sweeten this deal, for a limited time Google is offering to cover up to $2,000 of the ad creation cost made through their ACM.

Ad Pricing

Ad pricing is based on the maximum cost-per-thousand impressions users are willing to pay to have their ads run and advertisers only pay when the ad airs.

Ad Targetting

Google is letting users target ads to run on specific TV programs, but also has advanced features to hone in on program descriptions, cast, genre, titles, and more.

The Small Business Gap

While it’s unlikely that large companies like Nike or McDonalds will ever set foot into Google’s ACM, ACM provides a great starting point for small and local businesses looking to advertise on TV. By offering traditional mediums of advertising together with online advertising, Google has closed the loop and essentially created a one-stop for business advertising needs.

Google Now Offers:

• Text Ads
• Image Ads
• Local Business Ads
• Mobile Ads
• Radio/Audio Ads
• Newspaper/Print Ads
• TV Ads

Will their next step be into magazines, podcasting or billboards? Or are park benches and bus stops more likely?

Only time will tell, and we can only hope ads that come out of the ACM will be as funny as this one.

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

We have all done it. Searched the pages of Google Images to find that perfect picture for… your blog. Well it seems like it may get even easier to find that instant gratification… for your blog. Google has done it again. They have come up with a new way to give you the results you want called VisualRank. The scientists over at Google have designed an algorithm that combines image-recognition software with classic Google ranking.

Image search results are currently determined through basic image tagging. This definitely hinders the results as it relies on webmaster’s content and alt-image tags, and we all know people aren’t perfect. So when you search one thing, you may end up with something completely different, especially when you turn filtering off. But you already knew that didn’t you?

As it stands now Google uses employees to rank the images that they store. There is a team of 150 employees who are using the most popular searches to find images and rank them accordingly. The Google staff estimates that 83% of the results are less relevant images.

With the release of this technology, Image search may become as highly prized as the organic results. So not only will Google require better content for higher ranking websites, but better image relevance and quality too. Better upgrade that 2 megapixel cam to a 12 Mp SLR!

A Google Prototype for a Precision Image Search

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

On April 17th, Google once again prevailed on Wall Street, releasing earnings reports that beat analyst’s estimates with force. Despite growing concern over the impact of the slowing economy on Google’s revenues & reports released by comScore indicating Google’s clicks were down for the fourth quarter of 2007, Google managed to increase revenues over 20% compared to the first quarter of 2007. Since analysts on Wall Street have become obsessed with Google, their success is worthy of brief examination.

Investor fears that online advertising revenues would fall are justified in the sense that advertising is usually one of the first expenses businesses cut out in times of economic woe. In addition, this is the first major economic crisis the engine has faced since its induction. You would think a business facing such a crisis would opt to bring in as much cash as possible. Not so. Instead of milking their advertisers for all they could, Google instituted stricter text ad policies that ensured search results were more relevant for the end user. By doing this, they decreased their potential customer base by barring bogus advertisers using irrelevant (or simply bad) web sites from advertising on their engine. On the surface, this is negative news for investors.

To make things worse, in February of 2008 comScore released a report citing Google’s paid clicks were down for the 4th quarter of 2007. The release successfully scared analysts & investors. Then, comScore came back out and said that the trend had continued into the 1st quarter of ‘08. These two reports combined with fears about the impact of the economy on the engine’s revenues resulted in a 40% drop in Google’s share value from its peak in November 2007. In my humble opinion, these negative numbers only serve to glorify how successful Google really is.

Numbers can be manipulated to to dupe the unsuspecting observer. While I wouldn’t go so far as to say the analysts were duped, I would argue Google knew what it was doing the whole time. Despite losing a share of its customer base, the improvement in search quality allowed them to raise prices on worthy advertisers. In addition, Google’s expansion outside the U.S. has offset potential losses due to the slowdown here at home. As for the decreased number of clicks, a decline in growth does not mean loss. It simply means they weren’t growing ‘as fast’ as they did last quarter. There is a huge difference. While the long term effects of the economy, the DoubleClick acquisition and other affairs are yet to be seen; I think it’s safe to say there is no recession at Google so far.

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

Google was just named the world’s top global brand for the second year in a row, topping such recognizable companies such as GE, Coca Cola, McDonald’s and Microsoft.

Google’s success goes without saying, however, when placed alongside such other giants as these, it is all the more impressive that Google has done so well in such a short amount of time.  The other companies on the list, especially those not related to technology, are more than mere household names; they are institutions.  To think that Google was founded less than ten years ago and has risen to such great heights already is astounding.  Just about everyone posited that Google could be “the next Microsoft,” but with it’s brand worth an estimated $16 billion more than Microsoft, it’s a wonder that we aren’t on the lookout for “the next Google” at this point.

As far as I’m concerned, Google’s success is due in large part to its overwhelming investment in its own human capital.  With more employed Ph.D.’s than any other corporation, Google is one of, if not the smartest company in the world.  Although it is a bit cliché to say that a company is only as good as its employees, in Google’s case, it couldn’t be more true.

So, congratulations to Google for their success and for this most recent acknowledgment thereof.  I’m sure we’ll see Wpromote climbing in the ranks soon enough, but give us a break… Google is three years older than we are!

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

If you’ve messed around with creating a web page, odds are you’ve used tables. Tables are a great way for someone who is new to web design to start laying out their HTML. I know that’s where I started. While they can get the job done, tables were not designed to be the backbone of web page layout. The table element is meant to be used for displaying tabular data (hence the name). Time to learn some CSS!

What is CSS?

CSS stands for “cascading style sheet.” Think of it like this . . . there are two main properties to your web page. On one hand you have the HTML. Your HTML is responsible for the content of your website and has NOTHING to do with the visual representation. On the other hand you have your CSS file which tells your web browser how to display the content. Check out csszengarden for an excellent visual representation of this idea. Here you can see the work of advanced web designers applying unique CSS files to one common HTML document. Notice how each example contains the exact same content, but is displayed in a vastly different manner through the use of CSS.

Separating content and design is extremely important. One of the most frustrating things on the web is waiting for a web site to load. If I’m browsing the web and find myself stuck loading a page, chances are I close the window and find someplace else to go. So if you want to drive traffic to your site, you want to make it load as quickly as possible. This is where using CSS really shines! Browsers are much quicker at applying CSS properties to an HTML document then reading through HUGE table layouts. CSS files are also cached (stored) on the user’s computer which means it only has to be downloaded once. So if your web site has more than one page that references the same CSS file, load time is almost instantaneous.

Using CSS also addresses the issue of getting listed in search engines. The cleaner and more organized your web page is, the easier it is for search-engines to read and rank your site. If you have completely identical sites, in terms of content, where one is designed using a bulky table-based layout and the other using CSS, search-engines can make a more educated guess as to what the CSS based web page is about, and thus will receive a higher ranking and more search traffic.

Switching over to CSS layouts is a very important step in website optimization. While it can be pretty intimidating at first, it is a giant leap in the right direction. I highly recommend checking out the web tutorials found at Lynda.com to get started. If you’re more advanced with CSS, alistapart.com is a great site to learn more about professional techniques and web standards.

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

The ongoing performance of a campaign is often determined in the long run by the landing page quality.

Google has three main factors in determining an advertiser’s positioning within their algorithm: bid, historical click through rate and quality score. From an account manager’s perspective, there are various factors on our end that contribute to the success of a campaign, however, most reside in the landing page quality. The most common issue we run into is inadequate websites as far as relevant content, navigable links and load time to name a few. Google created these guidelines to make the user experience as amiable as possible. Therefore, the most important ways to improve your landing page quality and in turn, decrease your minimum bids, increase your positioning and quality score, is to take the following into consideration on your website:

1. Relevant and Original Content
2. Transparency
3. Navigability

As a search engine user, I am often deterred when I enter a website and one or more of these factors are not in place. This is directly related to the bounce rate seen across most websites, which could be drastically reduced with simple yet effective changes.

An example that we have recently experienced involving landing page quality was with affiliate websites on Google. Google is now cracking down on all affiliate sites due to their poor landing page quality and undifferentiated traits on their sites. Consequently, these sites are being given a low quality score which is the direct cause of poor performance and high minimum bids. To alleviate this issue, advertisers can create a unique website with unique content or turn completely to Yahoo and MSN to meet their advertising needs.

Clearly, the integrity of the user experience is what is at stake in this ever-changing form of advertising, and having reputable advertisers only creates a sound experience overall. Landing page quality is a win-win for all parties involved, and can only enhance campaign performance making a solid long-term investment. Advertisers who wish to succeed in paid search should make sure to pay as much attention to the destination of the paid search traffic as to the placement and quality of the ads sending it.

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

I’ve been asked this question by several friends and colleagues as well as by several clients who own numerous domains and don’t understand what is the smartest way to utilize them.

First off, it is generally best to take the oldest domain you can find (based on its ‘creation date’ in WHOIS or from the Wayback.org results) that FITS with your site’s keyword targeting.

For example, if you have a great old domain, say runningshoes.com that was registered in 1994 and you also have woodenbarrels.com that was registered in 2005 it really depends on WHAT you are selling.

The goal is to rank high for things that your target consumer is already typing into Google now.

So if you are selling ‘Wooden Barrels’, then the choice domain to build around has got to be woodenbarrels.com.

Okay, so with that said, if you still own the runningshoes.com site and can’t do anything with it, simply 301 the site to woodenbarrels.com and forget about it until Nike offers you thousands to buy it.

Onto your barrels now - here is the question: Should I buy woodenbarrels.net, woodenbarrels.org, barrelswooden.com, thewoodenbarrel.com, woodenbarrel.com, woodenbarrel.net, woodenbarrel.org?

Are you ready for the real answer here?

Here is the catch:

If you really want to rank first for “wooden barrels” and drive traffic to www.woodenbarrels.com, it isn’t buying the domains and forwarding them that is the key here. The real key is your competitors and preventing them from owning domains with the keywords you want to rank for.

So, go ahead and buy any domains that a competitor could potentially purchase and compete against you with, especially if your main keyword phrase is in it.

Initially you may think, “I don’t have to worry, I have woodenbarrels.com”. Then when you see Pay-Per-Click ads for ‘woodenbarrel.com’ coming up for searches on “Wooden Barrels” you’ll kick yourself for saving the $9.99 in the decision not to buy the domain when it was available.

Another alternative(which you should be doing anyways):

Build a really really great site, with awesome content, updated daily with meaningful information related to your topic and become the authority on Wooden Barrels. In conjunction with SERIOUS link-building, that’s the secret to ranking.

Your friendly neighborhood Rockstar SEO

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

Being new to the SEM industry, I was intrigued to learn Pay Per Click has a sister, Pay Per Call, who is attracting a great deal of attention within the mobile advertising industry. Whether the younger sister proves to be the more attractive one is yet to be seen.

In short, Pay Per Call is self-explanatory: advertisers pay for phone leads instead of click leads. On March 19th, 2007, mobile advertising giant Medio announced a partnership with Ingenio, a major leader in the Pay Per Call market. As of now Medio has inked deals with cellular carriers T-Mobile & Amp’d for their mobile pay per click services. As the two coalesce, they will offer Pay Per Call advertising on a mobile level. While this all sounds exciting, in my humble opinion, the partners are facing huge obstacles in tapping into this market.

As is with Pay Per Click, the idea is to use highly targeted keywords to reach as specific of an audience as possible. With PPC II, users will be delivered text ads that contain a title, description (sound familiar?) and a phone number. When the user calls the number Ingenio has provided them with, the advertiser is charged a bid rate for the call. While this is a GREAT solution for small business owners without a website, I see three main problems with this strategy.

Number one: when that water pipe burst in your house last night, did you hop on your Amp’d cell phone, get online, and search for a plumber? I think not. If you did, aside from being a huge dork, you probably hopped on your Blackberry or I-phone and searched Google. Let’s see: Medio vs. Google? Number two: the bid rates per call make your neighbor’s home business keyword bids look like chump change. At $2 - $20 per call, those leads better be converting. Number three: PEOPLE DON’T LIKE MOBILE ADS. Released in 2007, ‘Universal McCann conducted a survey among 9,500 people and found that 61% of respondents rejected ads on mobile TV & Internet services.’

While I am in no way, shape, or form opposed to serving niche markets through innovative technology; I do not see PPC II stealing the Beauty Pageant crown from her sexy older sister anytime soon.

Save this Post!

Hide Sites

SEOmoz, one of the best resources for general advice and expert opinions on all things SEO, featured an enraged article yesterday regarding the low priority that startups are advised to put on SEO in relation to their other advertising ventures. Rand, SEOmoz’s esteemed CEO, focused not on the idea that startups are ignoring SEO–although, for all intents and purposes, many do–but that they are being advise by so-called and often self-proclaimed “startup experts” that this behavior is right and justified.

Three things compelled me about this article:

1. The colloquial and comedic way in which it was written,
2. The conversation it sparked in the comments below,
3. The fact that Rand is completely right; everyone should be engaging in SEO, most of all startups.

Here is an excerpt from the article that I found particularly engaging:

Let’s imagine you’ve just dreamed up some brilliant new web startup company that’s going to change the world and fill this great unfulfilled need. Now, if only there were some way to figure out if other people were interested in solving the same problem. If only we had access to some sort of a repository of human queries that would tell us how popular and worthwhile our idea might be… Gee, that would be great…

For f***’s sake, people - get a clue.

Rand is, of course, talking about Google. When put into language like this, it sure makes a compelling case to engage the search engines, doesn’t it? Google, boiled down to its most basic function, is the world’s biggest forum for getting X to people who are trying to get X. If you’re looking for X, Google doesn’t give you Y or Z, it gives you X. If you are a vendor of X, you should probably be interested in a forum that does the qualification for you.

I can only imagine that the experts that Rand describes in his article–the ones continue to dole out SEO-free startup advice–were either lucky to have succeeded sans SEO in the first place or succeeded before SEO in its current form existed. Either way, an ignorance of SEO may be a decent enough excuse to ignore it on an individual level, but to advise others against a medium that could be so potentially helpful is just unscrupulous, especially when considering that even great startups need all the help they can get.

Save this Post!

Hide Sites