Halloween.  What a holiday!  We aren’t celebrating the life or accomplishments of anyone, there is no major historical event that happened on October 31st, no celebration of a flag, no country gaining its independence, etc.  At one time, I’m sure you would have easily called it the scariest of holidays.  Nothing even comes in a close second.  Arbor Day? Cinco de Mayo?  Get real.  The Halloween holiday has its historical roots in pagan rituals, harvest celebrations and protection against the souls of the dead coming back to earth.  That was some freaky stuff to be “celebrating.”

Not anymore though.  Nope, Halloween is not really that scary.   How about this for self-administered therapy?  You get to dress up and pretend to be someone or something else. Plus, you get to flat out go door to door and beg for food (albeit candy), and people willingly give it to you.  I bet if you asked 100 people, half couldn’t tell you why we celebrate Halloween anymore (I’m not even completely sure I know and I looked it up).

According to the 2009 Halloween Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey, total spending on the holiday this year is expected to reach $4.75 billion, including $2.23 billion on candy alone.  That is not spending on bonfire materials to keep the evil spirits away.  That is buying little Buffy her princess costume and little Billy his ninja costume.  Halloween has become the informal holiday of the National Confectioners Association.

You want to know what is really scary?  Real life.  Remember all those evil spirits that needed to be staved off?  Well, we live with them.  You want trick or treat?  Well you don’t get a choice, there is a heck of a lot of trick and treat in this world.  I’m sure that you can make up your own lists for each.

This brings me back to candy.  Remember that $2.23 billion we’ll spend this year?  Candy is the great equalizer.  There is a soothing and unifying quality about it.  It is used as a nonverbal invitation to draw people in.  Whenever I have started a new job, my wife sends me off on my first day armed with a candy jar and a bag of chocolate to fill it.  “Candy is a sure way to make friends,” she says.  You know what?  She’s right.  Now two years into my job, I still have co-workers stop by because I have candy on my desk and I like it.

Is there a lesson to learn from this?  Would people be more receptive to requests if candy were to accompany it?  Include some Gummi Bears when I want to leave a little early for a round of golf?  Pass along jelly beans when I ask for that report by the end of the day?  Maybe a couple of chocolate bars escort that promotion and raise request?  Couldn’t hurt, could it?

Maybe we should celebrate Halloween more often.  The world has a lot of…stuff…going on in it right now.  What’s wrong with dressing up, asking someone for some free candy, telling a few cheesy jokes, having them laugh and gratefully give you that candy, and then eating enough sugar to put yourself into an altered state?

Stop on by.  We’ll open that candy jar, relax, and chat for a bit.  I hear the Butterfingers and Snickers are very fresh.

SearchFuel and GroupM Search are doing a blitz giveaway today on Twitter, giving four (4) people a free VIP pass to MediaPost’s OMMA Mobile, a one-day event where advertisers and industry leaders come together to talk all things mobile marketing. This pass covers your registration for the event, plus the breakfast and lunch on-site.

But you have to act quickly! OMMA Mobile is tomorrow, Thursday, October 29 at the Hyatt Regency Century Plaza from 8am til 5:30 or so.

For your chance for a free pass, follow these three simple steps by 3pm CST today:

1. Send a Reply or Direct Message (DM) to @SearchFuel on Twitter
2. Tell us you want to go to OMMA Mobile
   
3. Tell us your company name (Sorry, I do need this. Not for marketing purposes – but when we got these passes I had to agree they’d be used for brand advertisers only, so I need to keep my promise.)
   

We’ll draw 4 names from all of the Tweeps who DM us and I’ll DM you back by 3:30pm CST if you’ve won a pass. From there we’ll connect by email or phone to get you registered.

So why should you see and be seen at OMMA Mobile? For starters, it’s a gathering of more than 200 advertisers and mobile marketing experts which makes for a great day of networking and conversation about where the industry is going. GroupM Search is kicking off the day by hosting the breakfast session, featuring a round table discussion with Google, Microsoft, Joule, Outrider and JumpTap about current challenges and opportunities facing the mobile marketplace today. The day unfolds from there as MediaPost’s mobile columnist Steve Smith emcees the event, and a handful of industry leaders take the stage, including a keynote address by John Zehr, SVP and GM of ESPN Mobile. Other speakers and panelists include Kodak, Paramount, the AP and the Weather Channel, as well as  Google, Microsoft and Yahoo, and many more panelists from across multiple areas of mobile expertise.

You can check out the full agenda here.

SO GET TO IT! Pull up your favorite Twitter client and send us a tweet to enter to win your pass to OMMA Mobile. See you in LA.

Google Local Listing Ads have been launched in Beta for the San Francisco and San Diego areas.  These are not to be confused with Location Extension Ads, formerly known as Google Local Business Ads (LBAs).

Previously, Local Business Ads were managed through the Local Business Center Interface.  Now that LBAs have been converted to Location Extension Ads, they are managed through the AdWords interface.  For more information on Location Extension Ads, click here.

The new product, Local Listing Ads (LLAs), is in Beta, will be managed through the Local Business Center interface, is free only for the first 30 days, and the listings will be shown in Google.com search results as well as Google Map results.  You can view a short LLA tutorial on YouTube here. 

The Questions

The launch of the Local Listing Ads Beta brings two main concerns:  Placement and Pricing (I feel like I’m jumping back to the 4 P’s of Marketing in College.)

Placement:  In the video, the example shown on the Map results page looks exactly like an AdWords Paid Search ad, with the alternative colored background and label of “Sponsored Links.”   Given this, I’m curious to know how they will visually differ from Location Extension, Paid and Organic listings.  If they will indeed serve in this form, there’s not a solid way to differentiate them from Paid or Location Extension Ads.  When the Beta is over, maybe they will be labeled properly?  Back lit in a different color?  Higher character limits than traditional paid ads?

Pricing:  Advertisers using LLAs will be charged a flat monthly fee which Google determines based on what type of business it is and where it’s located.  Um…okay.  I guess?  That sounds a little vague to me.  (Kind of like cost-per-click, but we’ll go there another time.)  How will Seamus McDaniels, a pub in the Dogtown area of St. Louis, know they aren’t being charged more than Nick’s Pub located just down the street?  Same type of business…same area…will they pay exactly the same monthly fee?  What goes into determining an appropriate price?  And as the space and volume changes, how will these factors affect pricing?

The Concerns for Paid Search Advertisers

Now let’s jump into this from a Paid Search Marketer perspective.  In Google’s official statement, they say:

“Local Listing Ads will be displayed in separate ad slots, independent of the AdWords auction.  Due to this separation, Local Listing Ads should not affect the AdWords auction dynamics, ad ranks or quality scores.”

“Auction dynamics” are the important words here. 

I understand LLAs will be managed outside of the AdWords interface and will not directly affect Paid Search ads, however, no one can tell me that putting something new on the Google SERPs isn’t going to impact searcher behavior and take some clicks away from Paid and even Organic listings.  It’s like telling me your Organic listings don’t affect your Paid and vice versa.  Or sticking your logo into your Paid listing isn’t going to get you a few extra clicks.  And so on and so forth.  Therefore, we can assume if searchers click on LLAs, Paid search listings will lose those clicks, resulting in lower CTRs, and on down the hill we roll.  Naturally, this will not be the case for every query, nor every advertiser.  However, you have to admit it’s possible any time you throw something else up there.

When the ads are shown on Google.com SERPs, there can be up to four shown on the top rail and up to four ads shown on the right rail.  When they are on the top rail, they will show below the Paid listings and above the Organic listings.  When on the right rail, they will show above the Paid listings.  What?!  So that means my Paid ads are going to be pushed down up to FOUR places on the right rail?!  What about all those studies that show the impact on placement for Paid search ads?  So instead of being in position 1 on the right rail, I could now be in position 5 on the right rail. Do YOU want to be in position 5 when you’re shooting for 1?  I typically do not.  I’m sure the argument which could be made here is that the LLAs are not going to take ad slots from Paid Search.  Right.  They’re just going to go before the Paid slots.

And let’s also not forget about those Organic listings getting pushed down the page up to four places.  As an advertiser, how will you feel about four more pieces of real estate showing before you can get a word in edge wise?

By setting aside prime positioning for Local Listing Ads, Google is putting an emphasis on the importance of local businesses.  (Economy? Politics? We won’t go there.)  What the searchers want?

Am I totally against Google Local Listing Ads? Nah.  I’m all for whatever makes a better search experience.  After all, I’m still a searcher, too.

If you walked out of your home to find graffiti on the outside, what would you do? If you got to your office building to find more of the same, but from different “artists,” how would you react? Regardless of the quality or spirit of the message, your initial reaction would likely be violent to find your personal property defiled, your professional workplace violated. Now, imagine if the suggested course of response was to not cover it up, but rather to add your own graffiti to the wall.

Your emotions would then be of outrage, right? Well, let me introduce you to the business conundrum that is Google SideWiki.

Debuting to industry fanfare less than a month ago, the toolbar application allows any user to “tag” opinions about any Web site for other toolbar users to see. In one recent case, a pharmaceutical manufacturer witnessed the proclamation that its product made a man’s arm fall off. In other examples, brands have watched competitors attempt to siphon off traffic through covert messaging and mentions of alternatives to such poor products. Many savvy Internet marketing professionals have taken to the Web to show how SideWiki can be gamed by using Google profiles to move comments up and down.

All of this speaks to the perils of putting a product like this out and then taking a very hands-off approach to its implications. This is far from the first effort in this space to do so, but the biggest difference is that it’s coming from Google: the largest publisher on the Web, not some small start-up with no toolbar distribution.

The path Google is taking with SideWiki is interesting. The product, like many at Google, is the brainchild of engineering. In dealing with questions or concerns about the product, Google’s external sales force has been able to provide little insight into the rationale and responsibilities from Google. Ultimately, through ongoing discussions, it has been determined that this product accomplishes what Google hoped it would do. It creates a social conversation around a brand. But it does so directly at the brand site, not on Google’s site.

What SideWiki does not do, and what Google seems to be missing, is adding a brand’s control to its online presence. No different than a brand’s store or corporate headquarters, its Web presence is one of the most important marketing factors existing today. Google has in essence opened a company’s Web site up to anyone for commentary and marking up. Google might make the argument that all a company has to do is respond to a comment within SideWiki with its own comment, or answer the point raised by the poster – thus forcing a dialogue between consumers and corporations, and, in effect, forcing the company into a “de facto” blog.

But, some comments may be unanswerable, especially for the most-regulated industry: pharmaceuticals. Pharma companies are required by law to treat any receipt of information that claims a product has caused an effect not listed on the “prescribing information” as a potential adverse event. This requires a great deal of time and effort, including notifying the FDA. If a comment made through SideWiki is spurious, release of a potentially life-saving drug could be delayed or people who could benefit from the drug may decline to use it, possibly endangering their health. Additionally, a pharma company cannot reply to such a comment without assuming continuing liability over every other comment on SideWiki, now and for eternity. 

So, where does this go from here? For Internet users at large, there now exists the possibility to hear and be heard about experiences with a brand, good, bad or irrelevant. For brands, it may be another way to stay in touch with consumers, but on someone else’s terms. In some cases, there is little that can be done to keep up with comments or even comment oneself without subjecting the brand to further scrutiny and financial implications from alternate sources. Google has stated that a 48-hour review process exists, but when it’s graffiti on the wall, the last thing you want is to wait two days for justice to be served.

Historically, Google has struggled to get the social play right. From YouTube to Orkut to Knol, Google has swung for the fences or come late to the game and failed to deliver to outside expectations, either as a true social platform or financially to market expectations. Rarely has Google deviated from the mantra of working for the most relevant answer for the user, but in the case of SideWiki, the engineering wisdom of Google has led the company down a road that is alienating more and more of its advertising base.

In the original launch of the product, Sundar Pichai, vice president of product management at Google, said, “I think we would have failed if people were using it to say ‘Obama sucks’. If those are the comments we’re surfacing, [Sidewiki] wouldn’t be that much different than much of the web. What we’re really trying to do is add value from people who really know what they’re talking about.”

At present, because there is no brand opt-out feature, the product is a borderline reckless approach to giving the Web user a voice closer to an intended source. It tells brands that their equity is subject to the commentary of the few — a faceless form of speech that is no better, in some cases, than the hooligans who vandalize the side of a wall with spray paint.

The first image is from Google.com/sidewiki. The second image is from cnet.com.

“[Social media] is giving us another way to help influence people’s propensity to search.”

Barbara Basney, Director, Global Advertising, Xerox
Wall Street Journal, 10/22/09

The Wall Street Journal reported today in an article, “Shift in Search-Ad Tactics Seeks More For Less,” a shift in thinking and strategy around search marketing for advertisers as they seek to capture a broader audience online with greater efficiency. The shift, which includes more relevant targeting and the integration of search and social media, is evident in the marketing strategy of three leading advertisers highlighted in the article.

For example, the WSJ reports telecom giant Sprint Nextel is prioritizing keywords based on where the consumer is in the purchase funnel, including tying to “phrases consumers tend to search for when they are close to making a purchase.”

Volkswagen, whose advertising in the few decades of my life has always seemed to capture the essence of the changing generations, is “driving” efficiency by coordinating the brand’s search marketing program with hundreds of dealers at a local level. They’re also using search and social to support the launch of their 2010 GTI hatchback, bringing mobile, Twitter and YouTube together with an innovative racing game for the iPhone and iTouch.

And lastly, Xerox, whose approach to social search is giving their brands new life online with social media campaigns, including a spoof video that generated more than a million hits. Combined with their visibility on other social forums, the buzz from that campaign “translated into a 65 percent surge in searches related to the brand and the subject of the campaign.”

The writer suggests the shift is likely to be more dramatic on the heels of the findings of recent research from GroupM Search, comScore and social media agency M80 revealing the interplay between search marketing and social media. (Whitepaper: “The Influenced: Social Media, Search, and the Interplay of Consumption and Consideration”)

Search marketing continues to prove its undisputed value, but as GroupM Search CEO Chris Copeland (Twitter: @SearchBoss) states in the article, “We can buy all the keywords we want, but for every advertiser that does that, there are at least five others that do the same thing.”

This broader view of the integration of the channels is just one strategy in giving brands a place to live online with relevant visibility. Yet, I sense it’s a strategy of the future that will become critical for advertisers in terms connecting with consumers and maintaining an efficient marketing ROI. With social search, brands become a natural part of the online conversation in forums where consumers are spending time, and can capture the activity that results from that exposure with strategic search execution that delivers greater efficiency.

To access the Wall Street Journal story directly, click here. (Story preview available only; full story available with subscription.)

You can access the full story for free with the help of Google News. Go to Google News and keyword search all or part of the headline (I suggest: “shift in search”). Click on the story from there which will bring you to the full version.

I have never kept it a secret that BlogWorld Expo is one of my favorite conferences. The core messages that we heard throughout wasn’t “use Twitter for content distribution” as all the other conferences I have attended in the past. The panelists and keynotes emphasized the importance of authenticity, credibility and transparency. Although those are common themes, it continues to be in the core foundation of every successful social media program.

Although gaming the system can quickly gain a large follower base, it does not result in long term benefits that can move current and prospective customers closer to the final conversion.  I had the honor of discussing that very topic with Lucretia Pruitt, Jesse Stay, Aaron Strout and Micah Baldwin. My role in the panel was to specifically discuss the importance of brands engaging in Twitter authentically. At the request of the attendees, here are the seven key points I highlighted:

• Social Media is about being social: Brands build awareness and affinity by transparently conversing with their current and prospective customers. They should share information, not push commercial messaging.
• Set user expectations: When a company is setting up a profile, they should let the users know what to expect. If the profile will be dedicated to sharing news releases, promotions and company-related news, let the users know that the updates will be PR-oriented.
• Personal vs. Private: In a conversation with Nicole Simon, we discussed the importance of humanizing a brand’s Twitter profile, without sharing intimate details of the profile manager’s life. Drinking a cup of coffee is meaningless and considered noisy to the audience. They are more interested in valuable information that is customized to their needs and is provided in a personable voice.
• Quality, not Quantity: 20,000 followers that are mainly bots and inactive users provide little value to a brand’s profile.  2,000 active users who share content and connect with the brand have a lot more value. It isn’t about numbers; it is about the multi-directional conversation!
• Direct Marketing tool, not Branding tool: Wendy Piersall and I were discussing how Twitter is being abused by certain brands. Some brands use it as a “push” mechanism, when that gains little traction in the space. The audience is looking to “pull” content that interests them and is relevant to their needs. We are in the business of developing, optimizing and leveraging the right content, to the right people, at the right time, in the right place.
• Holistic Outreach: To avoid the brand’s message drowning in the noisy world of Twitter, it is important to have a holistic process that is supported across all of the brand’s social media outposts and search campaigns. That is the only effective way to connect a current or prospective customer to the branded information.
• Monitor: The focus needs to be shifted from quantitative data, like number of followers, to qualitative data, like conversation, community, sentiment and topics discussed. Essentially, the importance is in the feedback the brand is receiving from its audience.

*Thanks to Renee Blodgett for the image.  In the image from left to right: Lucretia Pruitt, Jesse Stay, Aaron Strout, Micah Baldwin and Reem Abeidoh (in them middle).

Sorry for the reference to apple picking, but here in the Northeast we are smack in the season, and nothing beats a ripe Honeycrisp apple.  The issue at hand is that as an industry we do not have a standard way to compare Search conversions to Display conversions.  There is much digital ink spilt over how Display and Search work in tandem.  There is even a recent study put together by comScore and Starcom showing the lift when Display and Search are ran together.  So, I pose the question will we ever, or even if we should, be putting our energy into finding one?

Search recently has been the darling and did not have to justify conversion cost because we were always the lowest, but the landscape has changed.  Google has seen its CPCs more than double because search was the cheapest.  They also saw an influx of marketing spend due to the economy, which equals more online competition.  Search is measurable, so when a CMO’s rear end is on the line, they need hard facts about their marketing spend, and search can provide that.  Display has been soft.  There are a lot of publishers out there fighting for the dollar, and they are more than willing to negotiate rates.  Google doesn’t negotiate rates.  So with the decrease in a Display CPC and the targeting capabilities that ad networks have, Display conversions have become cheaper to come by.  This then brings up the conversation / question from the client of why are we spending in search when we could be putting our money in Display and getting cheaper conversions.  I don’t even want to go into the conversations we, as search providers, should be having with our client about the beauty of search and that we need to be there when an active hand raiser is requesting us.  They all have been preached and argued more than the DA of NYC has been busting politicians, but when a client becomes locked on a bottom line conversion cost, you need to plead your case the way they want to hear it.  We need to have apples just like Display.

My point of view is obvious, Display just has to place an ad on a page on a web site that the visitor (whether they see the ad or not) then becomes a conversion without doing a search before.  comScore and Starcom’s findings state that 16% of people online click on a Display ad, and that only 8% those make up 85% of those clicks.  Search has it a little harder; we actually need to convert that person as they are viewing our ads.  So by nature, Search is more engaging than display.  I question that comparing Display to Search is even something that we should doing.  Now convincing the client is a whole other issue that makes my brain hurt just thinking about it.  We don’t compare TV to search, even though some clients have tried, so why do we compare Search to Display.  Display is just a targeted TV ad with more interaction if designed right.  I am not here to cause a rift with my brothers and sisters, but to help create a resolution that allows us all to be one big happy family. 

I am curious if we came to a resolution will it actually become standard, or more of those resolutions that seem standard but come with the caveat that needs to be tailored to the client.  Let me explain this better through an example.  I want to keep a conversion a conversion, and still measure revenue that is brought in through that conversion, but I want to increase the “value” of the Search conversion.  Let’s say that since a Search conversion is an actual conversion that happened directly from our ad, that we value it 50% more than a view through conversion.  Should that 50% more value be standard across all clients (I actually don’t believe so)?  We then start treading on the whole argument that each client and each campaign will need to have percentages given out, which then puts us in quicksand.  I have not had a situation where we came to the conclusion of what percentage of value should be attributed to a campaign in a quick manner.  By the time we come to a conclusion, the campaign is over.

There are areas where Search can use a view through, but the bulk of our campaigns are click based.  Google could even one day allow their text ads to become view through based, and this could possibly be the Holy Grail that allows us all to pick apples, but right now Google doesn’t have plans for this, plus I don’t see much incremental value being added to search through view throughs.  Thus, Search is picking bananas (at least we are somewhere tropical) and Display will continue to pick apples, at least while they are still in season.  What are your thoughts?  Or do you hate fruit all together?

*The image accompanying this post is from www.pixelpicks.com.

While out on Search Engine Land yesterday, getting my daily SEO fix, I came across Danny Sullivan’s retort to a post that bad mouthed SEO.  As I was reading the title, my initial thought was, “Why are people always picking on SEO?”  Then, I decided not to play the victim and moved to a more protector frame of mind and asked, “Who is this person and do they even know what they’re talking about?”  So, after reading Danny’s very thought provoking, yet “in your face” comeback with his real-life case studies, I decided to go and read this post for myself….I was left speechless.

There was so much anger and hate and hostility displayed that while reading I grabbed my heart and gasped aloud, startling my other cube-mates.  I mean, after reading this post, you would have thought that SEO was a living, breathing monster who seeks to destroy any website in its path.  Maybe I don’t get out much, but I’ve never come across a more dark depiction of what we SEOers do.

So, before I unleash the wrath of this post, I want to share my top 3 reasons why SEO should be seen as a valuable piece of any marketing strategy:

1. SEO improves a website so that it can have the maximum potential of exposure in the search engines, which will lead to increased traffic and brand awareness.
2. Good SEO position over time will have a positive impact on your paid search quality score making your PPC campaign more cost effective.
3. SEO gives a place for the social conversations about your brand to live. Providing searchers with a wider variety of channels to engage with your brand.

Bonus- Just like anything else, not everyone can do SEO with the proficiency and effectiveness it takes to see the desired results.

Now, because I understand how this whole “SEO” thing works, I’m going to choose to not give any link love to this blog, but I do encourage you all to Google, Yahoo!, or Bing “Spammers, Evildoers, and Opportunists” and read the post for yourself. I look forward to reading your thoughts.

Thanks to snarkerati.com for the photo.

Before you get started, Silverlight must be installed in order to view the visual search galleries.  Microsoft defines Silverlight as a “cross-browser, cross-platform, and cross-device browser plug-in that helps companies design, develop, and deliver applications and experiences on the Web.”  Installing this didn’t take any time at all.

Once installed, you click on the photo album that peaks your interest and it pulls up numerous photos related to the image that you clicked.  You can even narrow your search a little further depending on the topic.  For example, it has been a mystery in my world, what breed of dog my rescued pup named Sophie belongs too.  She’s always been put in the Jack Russell Terrier category, however, Sophie is a 35 pound Jack and with an extremely soft coat.  Having a soft coat is not a typical feature of a Jack Russell Terrier, nor is being 35 pounds.

As I selected the dog breed gallery, 161 different dog breeds were pulled up and sorted alphabetically.  This was still a bit overwhelming since I know that Sophie is some sort of Terrier, I just don’t know what kind or how many types are out there.  On the left hand navigation bar, you can narrow your search even further depending on the topic you select.  By selecting the dog breed gallery I could narrow my search by group, size, exercise needs, temperament, etc.  Perfect!  I selected “group” and it gave me the option of selecting the Terriers group.  Once I clicked this, it pulled out all the images of the other types of dogs and only showed me the various terriers.  Rather than looking at 161 different dogs, I am now only looking at 27 dogs.

Interestingly enough, one of the breeds stuck out compared to all the others and it wasn’t the Jack Russell Terrier.  It was the Smooth Fox Terrier that really caught my attention.  Once I selected the Smooth Fox Terrier image, it pulled up all the relevant text ads.  It doesn’t just stop there!  Not only do you go to a page of text ads, but there are also sub categories to further define your search.  The page was populated with text ads about breeders, puppies for sale, terriers for adoption, terriers to be rescued, as well as images and even videos. 

Overall, Bing’s version of visual search is very organized and really narrows down the way people search to give the searcher a more relevant query result.  Although the galleries are limited at the moment, it will be fascinating to see how they will expand it.  While it isn’t a new idea, Bing is definitely headed in the right direction.  I’m sure there is more to come.  But I ask again…do you think visual search will be the new way to search?

There is No Europe?

This was outlined in a great post by Mikkel de Mib Svendsen on SearchCowboys. I definitely recommend reading it. Among other things he states: “There is a politically united Europe. There is a geographical Europe. But from a marketing point of view the fact remains that there is no Europe and there are no Europeans!”

Mikkel continues: “We (in Europe) don’t speak the same language, we don’t hear the same music, we don’t have the same laws, we don’t follow the same norms, we don’t laugh at the same jokes and we don’t share the same religions.”

Search is Pull Driven

Why is this important? This is important because it outlines the central and key approach of search engine marketing. Search stands out as one of the most pull driven media. Therefore, search engine marketing is most effective when you adapt to your target market in the best possible way.

The people who search have the power. They express their intent and tell you what they want. It doesn’t get easier than that. Adapt to that intent of your target market best, and you’re a winner.

If you want to market your product or service to Europe, and if you approach Europe as one target market, then you will fail. You will fail because you won’t be adapting to local language, culture, law, religion, etc.; and that is exactly what search engine marketing is all about.

Case: SEO in Western Europe

Based at Outrider’s Amsterdam office, where we work for both local and international clients, I am facing this challenge daily. For example, we are doing SEO (Search Engine Optimization) for an international client in Western Europe.

Just like Mikkel describes in his article, there are a couple of countries in Western Europe which are close to each other and seem to be alike. There are even countries like the Netherlands and Belgium or Germany and Austria where people speak the same language. But mind you, there can still be huge cultural differences between those countries, let alone differences in law and religion.

For example, our client wanted to do link building in several countries. While the coordination is done centrally – the clients headquarters are in Amsterdam – we used the local expertise of our SEO consultants in every country. We made each country develop their individual link building strategy to adapt best to the local market. Eventually, this resulted in a successful overall link building strategy with local expertise being key to the success.

Translation is Not Enough

As you might already conclude from the stated differences, translating your web site to the local language is not enough. You need to adapt to the local culture, law, etc. to get the most out of the SEO efforts.

Therefore, we have used our local SEO specialists in the countries. They know their local market best, and combine that with their SEO expertise, aligned with the overall SEO strategy.

The Results

In the end, it’s all about the results. The differentiated approach works best when targeting Europe, because search engine marketing works best when it’s differentiated. And that ensures the best results for our clients.

Is it worth the effort? Definitely! Countries in Europe are among the countries with the highest internet broadband penetration. Therefore, it’s not uncommon to reach 1 million search visitors monthly, even in smaller countries like the Netherlands.

Of course the U.S. cannot be targeted as just 1 market, but the differences in language, culture, law and religion are even bigger in Europe. Do you want to expand your products or services to Europe? Adapt to the local markets as best as possible and you will succeed. You’ll see it’s definitely worth the effort.