SEM: Firms
SEM: The View Beyond the Search Engine Marketing Navel
|
Written By Noah Mallin | August 25, 2008 | Share This
|
|
I’m not the first and I won’t be the last to suggest that there is a tendency in the world of search marketing - in which I and probably you dwell – to get caught up in the common knowledge and language of our industry to the detriment of communicating with the outside world. There is a whole universe out there of marketers, PR people, industry executives and others who don’t know enough about search engine marketing yet to really understand how powerful it is. There are also plenty of folks who know just enough to be dangerous. Part of the job of a search marketer is to evangelize in a way laypeople can understand.
Will Google Dump Performics?
|
Written By Sepideh Saremi | March 12, 2008 | Share This
|
|
The Google-DoubleClick merger got the green-light from the EU this week, but Danny Sullivan reminds us - and Google - that as part of the deal, the search giant now also owns Performics, a search engine marketing agency. This presents a conflict of interest, as well as ticking off SEOs. Writes Sullivan:
Even if Performics is kept completely separate from the Google search team, there’s the impression that Performics might have some special “in” with Google’s non-paid search results. After all, Google owns it! It’s also not hard to imagine that despite all the best intentions, some new sales rep might pitch that Performics has some type of in. That [sic] a bad thing. FYI, Performics already touts its relationship on the paid side, as do many other search marketing firms.
TechCrunch’s Duncan Riley agrees that Google should sell off Performics. Both Sullivan and Riley are right - though Google is huge and could conceivably keep Performics away from the rest of its operations, it can’t avoid the appearance of impropriety. And that doesn’t jibe well with the whole “Don’t Be Evil” company motto.
Wal-Mart: Now Offering SEM
|
Written By Sepideh Saremi | December 28, 2007 | Share This
|
|
Wal-Mart-owned, big-box warehouse retailer Sam’s Club has added PPC services to its wares, targeting small-business owners with its $50/month packages. The news has largely been met with surprise because this clearly isn’t an area of Wal-Mart/Sam’s Club known expertise; Mark Hopkins at Mashable wonders:
Then there is the issue of trust - despite the fact that they may be qualified to do an adequate job, when I think of internet marketing expertise, the first name that springs to mind isn’t WalMart.
Though the news is somewhat surprising, maybe it shouldn’t be: Sam’s Club has offered web design services for some time, so internet marketing is a natural extension. And for mom and pop shops that have small marketing budgets, this is likely an attractive service that Google can’t really provide because it’s gotten so big. Ashkan Karbasfrooshan at HipMojo writes:
As Google becomes bigger and bigger, it will turn its attention to Fortune 500 advertisers and global agencies, and many of the S&M sized businesses will continue to become increasingly disillusioned with Google. I am not saying Walmart will succeed, but I am saying that it makes sense to offer Sam Club’s mainly small business clients SEM services.
Though it didn’t do such a good job with blogging, Wal-Mart has been fairly forward-thinking when it comes to technology distribution: this year they signed a deals to sell Skype hardware in stores and to offer digital movie downloads on their site. We’ll have to wait and see what they do for small businesses when it comes to SEM.
In Good Company at SMX
|
Written By Joshua Stylman | June 7, 2007 | Share This
|
|
Yesterday, I returned to New York after spending a couple of days at the inaugural Search Marketing Expo, hosted by Danny Sullivan and Chris Sherman. I wasn’t going to attempt to blog the individual sessions because no one could have done a better job than Barry in doing so at Search Engine Roundtable.
As Danny’s first hosted conference since his breakup with Search Engine Watch, SMX was expected to run like a repeat of its predecessor event, Search Engine Strategies. Though SMX definitely had a “getting the band back together” feel, the event was surprisingly different from recent Search Engine Strategies shows. Like SES, the conference featured excellent content and a strong range of speakers, but the dialogue was noticeably more sophisticated. Whether talking about strategic issues (e.g.: privacy or industry concerns) or tactical methods (quality score, spam penalties, etc), the attendees exemplified a level of passion that has long been lacking from SES. I had equally outstanding conversations with in-house marketers from Fortune 500’s like Time, Inc and CondeNast to more niche companies, but equally savvy folks from organizations such as PlasticSurgery.com. It was very reminiscent of search shows from the early part of the decade, when the audience was familiar and the attendees seemed truly excited about the industry.
As such, the hallways conversations were less about lead generation for exhibiting companies, and more about actual innovations in search. Granted, the competitive lead-driven atmosphere of SES isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it is perhaps the inevitable result of industry maturation. Nevertheless, I really appreciated the grass-roots feeling that resonated throughout SMX - if for nothing other than to exemplify that, though the industry is growing, search events don’t have to be corporate.
On that note, I’d like to say Congratulations to Danny, Chris and the rest of the SMX team for a phenomenal debut. And, yes Danny, you can lose the suit…we’re all more comfortable when you’ve got your Vans on.
Microsoft Rumored to Buy 24/7 Real Media
|
Written By Kate Zimmermann | May 1, 2007 | Share This
|
|
Microsoft, feeling left out after Google bought Doubleclick and Yahoo picked up Right Media, is reportedly “in talks” to purchase 24/7 Real Media. The New York Post says that Microsoft is considering an acquisition price of $1 billion for the ad management firm, an over-valuation of at least $400 million. A little nervous perhaps that they’ll be out-bid (again) by a close competitor? WPP Group is also reportedly eyeing 24/7 Real Media, though it seems less likely that they’ll win out.
24/7 stock has in the meantime soared 33.3% since the rumors broke. There’s been a significant amount of speculation, however, on the likelihood of this acquisition. Some analysts suspect that Microsoft is eying alternative ad firms like aQuantive or AvenueA|Razorfish. Others, most significantly Search Engine Land’s Danny Sullivan, have been outspoken about the conflict of interest for a search engine that’s operating simultaneously as a search marketer. Sullivan writes,
“You simply cannot — cannot! — have your own in-house division designed to help people rank well on your own search engine. It means the entire third party search marketing industry, which already has some mistrust of search engines, is going to lose whatever faith they have left.”
Follow the development of this story on Techmeme. Or check out…
Further Reading
- Report: Microsoft to buy 24/7 Real Media for $1 billion (Between the Lines)
- Which Market is More Rational: Public or Private? (HipMojo)
- Microsoft and WPP weigh $1b bid for 24/7 Real Media (Times Online)
SES NY: Search Ad Buyers Forum
|
Written By Kate Zimmermann | April 12, 2007 | Share This
|
|
“How many hangovers?!” asked Moderator Dana Todd, and so began the self-dubbed Angry Ad Buyers Session. She introduced with her customary run down of What Dana Todd is Thinking about search, the internet, etc. From her presentation,
“Stop developing half-assed products every 20 minutes and really improve what we have”
Are we killing […]
“How many hangovers?!” asked Moderator Dana Todd, and so began the self-dubbed Angry Ad Buyers Session. She introduced with her customary run down of What Dana Todd is Thinking about search, the internet, etc. From her presentation,
- “Stop developing half-assed products every 20 minutes and really improve what we have”
- Are we killing the efficiency of search media by giving up control? Maybe not… should we embrace inefficiency in order to sustain the market?
- PPC Tech - relevant? effective? overpriced?
- Mobile search is still 2 years from traction
- Money this year is on Local (said that last year, but…)
- Industry is feeling “bubble-y”
- Yahoo is not dead yet!
- Google increasing “frienemy” behavior
- All other search engines are too boring to talk about
And with a plea to Ask.com to “stop breaking my heart”, Todd turned the mic over to Joel Lapp from Reprise Media. Lapp discussed how the search industry is slowly becoming standardized, largely thanks to Yahoo’s introduction of Panama. Standardization is a good thing, he said, because it makes it easier to manage bigger campaigns, will encourage more advertisers to run across multiple engines, requires less internal training, and of course, makes everyone more money. Three of the most helpful standards created by panama are terminology, structure, and handling of contextual search. Two areas still desperately in need of standardization, however, are query display and production sheets. Finally, he says, don’t believe everything the engines claim is “standard”, because minor differences can cause huge disruptions when translating a campaign in bulk.
Philip Stelter from Range spoke next on quality score. As of Week 10 following the Panama update, he reports that CPCs are higher but gradually dropping, that conversion rates are stable and CTR remains higher. Range has seen, however, quite a bit of “reactive bid activity” - causing erratic results for many clients. Panama displays some of the positive and negatives of adopting quality score - on the positive end, gaming is gone, advertisers get better qualified leads (maybe), and brand owners have a bidding advantage; on the negative end, quality score gives marketers less control, tries to standardize a value (”quality”) that should be relative to a campaign, and testing can be costly. All in all, advertisers can adapt to quality score by tracking and testing on a regular basis, focusing on landing page optimization, leveraging match types, and taking an “integrated campaign approach”.
Stephanie Krebs, Director of Online & Search Marketing for Dominion Enterprises, followed Stelter. As a publishing company that does search in house, Dominion Enterprises approached search as a way to boost revenue for traditional media. In her own experience with panama, volume and performance are up, but budgeting tools aren’t yet reliable and the system has NOT stabilized. Krebs presents two thoughts on how traditional media and search can be used in coordination:
- Idea One: Publish specialized newsletters based on search term research, infuse publications with ads that encourage readers to go online.
- Idea Two: Re-evaluate your Ad Outlets - she found in testing that using Google and other search syndicates was more effective than Google alone. Bottom line - spread out your budget (duh)
Matt Greitzer, Director of Search Marketing from Avenue A | Razorfish is last to present. He gives an overview of their Panama results - Search Impressions, CTR, and overall CPA is up, while CPC and conversion rates are down. Considering the wide variation of results across clients, however, he feels that the increase in click rate is the only really significant statistic. Greitzer then launched into a discussion of what industry trends are all hype, and which actually deliver results. In descending order from “Results” to “Hype”, he ordered: Contextual Search, Search Related Media Opportunities (behavioral targeting, etc), Vertical Search, Mobile Search. Mobile, specifically, he labeled “all Hype” - reiterating Todd’s initial speculation that mobile is still 2 years away from traction.
Last but not least, Q & A… Here are a few highlights:
Q: What are some tips for running contextual as opposed to search, and what’s unique about running a contextual campaign?
A: Panelists advise breaking contextual and search into separate campaigns, because you need to group keywords differently. Keywords have to be better defined in contextual to avoid embarrassing errors. Contextual is also challenging because you have to by trial and error find the right keyword groupings - as a result, hands-on management is key in contextual. Lapp suggests putting heavy emphasis on the search creative in contextual, because you’re dealing with a much more passive audience.Q: One of our major advertisers recently moved their site over to flash - any tips on how to optimize the site so that it doesn’t affect quality score?
A: Joel says the best approach there is to manage the landing page in the same way that you manage your site SEO. Dana Todd suggests cloaking - ha ha ha - or, better yet, ask your client to do AB testing until they get rid of the flash.Q: Is old bid management technology still helpful for campaigns with Google or Yahoo?
A: Philip says that Range is “technology agnostic” - they use third party technology in conjunction with an in-house program to maximize bidding efficiency. Stephanie says, they’ve tested every tool out there and what they keep coming back to is “being good marketers”. Matt says that the real value of bid management tools is purely to save time - but, bid management absolutely has to be considered in context of other tools that enable whole “campaign management”. Joel says that at Reprise we work with a bunch of third party tools along with our in house tools, but our philosophy is to focus on marketing before bid management - so that marketing expertise ties together the campaign that’s run on technology.Q: Beyond the bid, landing page, ad copy and click through rate, what other factors affect quality score?
A: Session - if a user clicks through, and immediately hits the back button or returns to a search engine, it’ll hurt quality ratings. Dana Todd says, they’re most concerned with revenue - Philip corrects, “You mean relevance”, “same thing” says Dana.Q: Have you heard of Yahoo or MSN creating a bulk editing tool like google?
A: Joel says, it makes perfect sense to us, though we haven’t heard anything yet. Though Yahoo has a bulk uploading tool with Panama, it doesn’t work very well. Philip reports that MSN sent him a survey about bulk editing and uploading tools, so he thinks its in the works from Microsoft.
The Digital Advertising Industry’s HR Debacle
|
Written By Kate Zimmermann | February 28, 2007 | Share This
|
|
“Huge gaps exist between marketer and agency perceptions of ability to deal with changes in TV, Internet, and consumer-generated media,” writes Peter Kim in a recent Forrester study on marketing agencies (via MediaPost). Despite the growing demand for cross-media advertising, traditional agencies are still largely incapable of producing sophisticated interactive campaigns. We witnessed this in our Search Marketing Scorecard of Super Bowl advertisers; it was certainly no coincidence that an online direct marketing firm, not a multi-billion dollar brand, produced the best cross-media campaign.
Because of this rift, most companies spread their online marketing budget across multiple specialized firms - one house for paid search, another for creative, another for social media, etc. Says Kim,
“Marketers are increasingly calling on specialists to fill skill gaps. Marketers first turned to digital specialists to build Web sites during the dot-com bubble. Now, the specialist trend has expanded as marketers seek fresh approaches from digital shops.”
The problem may not be, however, that large agencies are too slow to keep up with digital media. The digital advertising industry has grown faster than the talent pool, and though agencies may be trying to expand their digital offerings, the lack of qualified management-level candidates has created a ceiling on growth. As ClickZ analyst Tessa Wegert writes, “If you’re an interactive planner, buyer, or account manager with more than five years of online experience, you’re one of the most wanted employees in America.” Everyone in this industry - from “client-centric” startups to the Fortune 500s - is feeling an HR pinch.
Rather than build specialized departments from the ground up, many agencies are buying out smaller firms to stay competitive. On Monday Kim blogged about TNS Media Intelligence’s acquisition of Cymfony, an online brand monitoring company. Kim writes, “Expect additional activity in the brand monitoring market,” such that, “Agencies will boost their market research capabilities” and “PR services agencies [will] upgrade their offerings.” Peter Hershberg blogged about this in December after the Chicago SES conference. He wrote,
“In just a few years, ’search marketing’ has from gone from the bid management of text ads, to running campaigns across multiple ad networks - content pages, display ads, even radio. Search marketing spend grew 44% between 2004 and 2005, and will likely accelerate as the search engines develop new ad channels (print, audio, mobile, etc). Naturally, the number of agencies offering search services has also grown. Today - in addition to traditional SEM firms - interactive agencies, direct marketers, analytics companies, independent consultants, ad networks, and the engines themselves all claim to “do search”…
“It seems that some of the trends we saw in Chicago last week should give us some insight into where the industry stands as a whole. It appears as though search is moving in two different directions at the same time…Mergers & Acquisitions [and] Greater Niche Focus… The search marketing world will soon be made up of a smaller number of large full service shops, and a greater number of small niche players. If executed properly, both strategies could prove to be extremely profitable.”
Until a new wave of qualified job candidates arise - either from graduate programs focused on interactive marketing, from small niche companies, or middle-management at full-service agencies - expect the Big Fish eats Small Fish cycle of talent acquisition to lead marketplace transformation in the digital advertising industry.
AskX Impressive for Approximately Five Minutes
|
Written By Kate Zimmermann | December 21, 2006 | Share This
|
|
Ask.com is rolling one punch after the other as they wrap up the year with two, possibly three, new major services. AskCity debuted last month as a roll-up of IAC’s local properties - Citysearch, Ticketmaster and Evite (basically a glorified version of Maps). AskX came out yesterday, Ask’s new search portal, and today Barry Diller announced that Ask News is due out “very soon”, following the buzz around AskX. The goal behind the IAC’s whirl of new services, according to Diller, is to double Ask’s search market share “within the next few years”. AskX, specifically, is meant to “change people’s habits” by offering a superior product to Google (and other search engines). Says Diller, “The roadmap for ask is fairly deliberate. What we think we’ll have is a good search engine, but unique…value added services. Ask will become a virtuous circle of information and commerce.”
AskX, like Live.com, has redesigned its SERPs as a point of differentiation. For example, the query “cars” generates three columns of nice boxes that show images of “cars”, “cars” the movie, shopping for “cars”, the definition of “car”, and a search box for “car” business listings. The boxes are handy, but SERPs are still slower, inconsistent and no more relevant than google. In his review of AskX, Larry Dignan sums it up, ” I gave AskX a spin and came away impressed. But five minutes later I was back to Google.”
Ask only needs 2.5% more of the search market to double its traffic - but even so, it’s dubious whether or not introducing a “superior search” product will have a lasting impact on users’ fundamental behavior. Ask is certainly not the first engine to re-vamp its homepage in an attempt to steal single percentage points from Google. Microsoft recently launched their own “superior search” portal with Live.com - and yet, in that time period, Google traffic went up from 60% to 70%.
SEM Agency Differentiation (or the Lack Thereof)
|
Written By Peter Hershberg | December 12, 2006 | Share This
|
|
I had the opportunity to share some thoughts on Business Issues for the Big SEM Shop at last week’s Search Engine Strategies conference in Chicago. While other panelists discussed pricing models and human resource challenges, I chose to focus on SEM agency differentiation - or the current lack thereof.
In just a few years, ’search marketing’ has from gone from the bid management of text ads, to running campaigns across multiple ad networks - content pages, display ads, even radio. Search marketing spend grew 44% between 2004 and 2005, and will likely accelerate as the search engines develop new ad channels (print, audio, mobile, etc). Naturally, the number of agencies offering search services has also grown. Today - in addition to traditional SEM firms - interactive agencies, direct marketers, analytics companies, independent consultants, ad networks, and the engines themselves all claim to “do search”.
Recently, a friend asked me for advice on choosing a search marketing solution. He asked specifically about the search capabilities of company called Eyeblaster , to which I was fairly taken aback. ” Do they have a core competency in search engine marketing?” I told him, “Absolutely not. Is Eyeblaster a leader in the area of rich media advertising? Perhaps, but I know far too little about that market to say they are with any degree of certainty.”
It struck me, though, that if the customers cannot make the distinction for themselves, then perhaps these questions are irrelevant. As a founding partner of one of the largest SEM firms in the market today, I (like my colleagues) have experienced first hand the difficulty of describing my company amongst the clutter of ’search’ options. There are three real reasons why search marketers have a hard time differentiating themselves.
- Quality of work isn’t obvious
Generally speaking, we’re talking about three lines of text - 25 characters in the title and 70 characters in the description. Paid search ads are not designed to make consumers laugh or cry - they’re meant as a bridge between a search term and a related landing page. Thus, search ads don’t strive for difference, they strive for relevancy and similarity to other key terms on the page. While some ads will undoubtedly outperform others, advertisers may not be able to identify the quality of work without seeing backend performance metrics. - Search is used in Combination
Search is often only one part of a cross-media campaign. As a result, most companies dealing with online marketing offer “search”, though few specialize in SEM. Eyeblaster, for example, is known for rich media, but describes itself online as a “one-stop shop for all aspects of paid search marketing.” - The Search Market is Young
Lastly, because search is a young market, there’s an excess of parity. The industry is wrought with buzzwords – “full service,” “integrated solution,” “proprietary technology,” “campaign management,” “best-of-breed,” and “portfolio management.” SEM’s use the same vacant terms to describe what makes them different from their competitors and in the process of doing so, they’re all saying the same thing. As Forrester wrote in their recent WAVE report, “Search Agencies are immature overall.”
How Can SEM’s Differentiate Themselves?
Despite the challenges highlighted above, there are a variety of approaches search marketing firms can take to set themselves apart.
- Take a vertical approach
Rather than trying to be all things to all people, SEMs can choose to focus on a specific industry. Page 1 Solutions, for instance, targets lawyers, plastic surgeons, dentists, and lasik practices. It’s presumably easier for them to establish credibility within these categories because they position themselves as specialists. - Focus on a specific market segment
There are millions of businesses in need of search marketing services. Pursuing a smaller segment of the broader market can create differentiation. WebVisible, for instance, has created a set of solutions exclusively for the “local” market. - Create a partnership or become part of a larger entity
A good partnership can lead to an incremental sales channel for the search marketing firm. For example, in addition to servicing a variety of direct clients, Outrider - Focus on a limited geographic region
While this strategy would never work in major cities like New York and San Francisco, many SEMs have benefited from servicing the businesses in their specific regions. - Work in Emerging Markets
In addition to developing a more specific focus, search companies need to give consideration to how they can continue to stay ahead of the curve. As mentioned earlier, the definition of “search” has expanded over the past few years. Companies that develop a competency in some of the “emerging” ad formats, including mobile, print, video, and audio are likely to stand out from their competitors. - Promote depth of expertise, not breadth of service
With Yahoo’s expected launch of Panama in Q1, the search marketing platforms offered by all 3 major search engines will cease to be completely transparent. Successful search marketing campaigns will be less about “bid management” and more about “campaign management.” SEM’s that understand the strategies required to effectively optimize all variables involved in the search marketing process (keyword identification, creative copywriting, landing page optimization, etc) will be rewarded with lower minimum cost-per-clicks. And the results they subsequently produce on behalf of their clients should help them prove that they have been able to evolve with the market while some of their competitors can’t.
*Disclaimer: I am not endorsing the above companies in any way, but merely using them as examples for this post.
Where is it all headed?
There’s no question that by the time the next SES show rolls around in 4 months, much will have changed. It seems that some of the trends we saw in Chicago last week should give us some insight into where the industry stands as a whole. It appears as though search is moving in two different directions at the same time.
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- Greater Niche Focus
SEMs will offer increasingly niche-focused services. Already at SES Chicago, we saw numerous firms exclusively focused on keyword generation, creative optimization, competitive intelligence reports, and landing page optimization. As I mentioned above, look for Geo-specific, vertical, and emerging market search agencies as well.
Because the search industry lacks a clear category leader, and because an increasing number of ad agencies want to become competent in search, there will be more company acquisitions in the months ahead. I predicted that this would happen around the time isobar acquired iProspect (December, 2004). This past week, iCrossing’s bought out Newgate - a signal of more to come.
In sum, the search marketing world will soon be made up of a smaller number of large full service shops, and a greater number of small niche players. If executed properly, both strategies could prove to be extremely profitable.
Review of Search Marketing Agencies, Q4 2006
|
Written By Anthony Iaffaldano | November 29, 2006 | Share This
|
|
Last Tuesday, Forrester Research released their annual WAVE report of Search Engine Marketing Agencies. Of the 56 companies invited to participate, only six made it through the final review. As Forrester writes, they focused on “Search Marketing Agencies that provide a balance of paid and natural search services (and service integration) and that serve enterprise clients.” As one of the fortunate six, Reprise Media spent several months working with Forrester to provide a comprehensive overview of our company. The report included a review of 56 criteria, conversations with our executives, conversations with customer references, technology demonstrations, evaluations of natural search results and paid search ads for our reference accounts, and an analysis of supporting documents.
Okay, so “comprehensive” may be an understatement, but the survey really forced us to reflect on what we do (and don’t) offer as a Search Marketing agency. While it was a lot of work to participate, it’s fascinating to see your entire company reduced to a graph that so plainly states “current offering” over “strategy” - kind of like watching your own autopsy and thinking, “when did I eat that?” We’d like to commend Forrester for conducting such a thorough and informative survey. It certainly helped Reprise Media clarify our own business development, and will hopefully shed some light onto the vastly difficult task of differentiating search marketing agencies.
That being said, here’s a sample of Forrester’s review of Reprise Media:
“Reprise Media is search marketing’s biggest breakout star. Its paid search bests others due to its strong testing and QA capabilities, as well as its ability to deliver distinguished paid search ads. The open architecture of its PROSuite search management platform makes Reprise Media a valid solution for marketers seeking to integrate their paid search programs with other marketing efforts… Reprise Media is innovative, profitable, and strategically focused, making it the biggest competitive threat and the best-kept secret in our study.”
(patting ourselves soundly on the back) Forrester continued a more detailed assessment in a vendor-specific analysis report. You can read the whole thing here, but in sum, it elaborated on:
Our evaluation found this relative newcomer to be a Strong Performer that fits innovative marketers - or other agencies - seeking an avantgarde paid search partner that:
- Integrates with third-party data and applications
- Flexes to meet marketer and agency clients
- Focuses its strategic vision on search
- Has an understated market presence
Forrester finished with their opinion,
“The company’s “garage band” feel may be off-putting to some conservative companies expecting a highly traditional approach, but client references tell us that larger vendors focus too much on the “polish,” while Reprise listens to their needs and delivers solutions… Reprise will be incumbents’ biggest competitive threat and the best integrated search solution as it beefs up its business development and SEO capabilities.”
Even though “garage band” may be a subtle reference to our t-shirts and tennis shoes at work, we’re really happy with the results. When you’re mired in the day-to-day, it’s hard to objectively measure strengths and weaknesses. Looking at our company laid out so plainly on Forrester’s proverbial operating table, it’s clear that we’ve got a lot going for us - and a lot to live up to.
The full Forrester report is available to Forrester subscribers on their website. The Reprise Media review and press release, in the meantime, can be downloaded from THIS PAGE of our website.