RSS Home Newsletter Advertising
Visit Twellow.com

Search Or Content Ads? A Marketer's Dilemma


Or: Good branding is like being a ninja

One of the issues presenting itself after Google's new focus on quality search ads—CPC inflation, expected higher conversions, reported lower publisher payouts—is the question of which gets more bang for the buck, search or content ads?

Well, Google certainly seems to be leaning one way, at least in the strictest of monetary senses. The answer may not be a simple matter of numbers, but some numbers make the issue appear pretty lopsided, as though branding online is playing second fiddle to search.

The last half of Q4 2007 and first half of Q1 2008 (that's one whole quarter, I suppose) have been good for CheapFlights.com, which announced a sudden spike in unique visitors beginning in November. In the US, visits to the website increased from 1.5 million to 3.5 million by February. In the UK, 4.5 million were attracted.

Search Or Content Ads? A Marketer's Dilemma

This (8 million unique visitors) was an all-time high, the company announced, and attributed its rocketing success, of course, to strong internal efforts and product strength.

"We like to attribute our continued success to our providing consumers on both sides of the Atlantic with a user-friendly product allowing them rapidly to search and conclude terrific flight deals for their chosen destinations. At the same time, we are also giving our small as well as large-sized travel industry advertisers equal access to literally millions of would-be travelers intending to fly," said CheapFlights.com's Chris Cuddy, group managing director, in a press release.

He likes to attribute success to that also because that is the corporate line; Cuddy's remarks are pretty standard PR-sanitized, talking-point-centric, generally-useless-for-reporting shtick.

Compete.com's Mike Redbord, understandably impressed by the numbers, wanted to find out the referral details of CheapFlights' meteoric surge, instead of relying on the old "we're better than everybody" pitch most executives put out there.

CheapFlights seems to have enjoyed a winter spike, especially due to referrals from search and portal sites. Referrals from search and portal sites went up from 600,000 visitors in November to over 1 million in January, quite a nice increase.

Search Or Content Ads? A Marketer's Dilemma

These referral numbers dwarf referrals from straight content sites, the big online travel agencies like Orbitz, the highest number coming from an assortment of travel sites, perhaps around 500,000 across four of them in January, if I'm reading between the graph-lines right.

"Tweaks to the Cheapflights site, SEO, and increased SEM spend could all drive an increase like this in Search & Portal traffic," Redbord writes.

A subsequent graph for CheapFlights shows that a trouncing majority of referrals that went on to partner sites came from Google, as might be expected. But in January*, Google referrals spiked from under 20,000 to over 40,000, a 119% increase. Despite numbers already much, much lower, Yahoo and MSN did not come even close to keeping pace with the sudden spike.

That indicates a couple of things about search, at least in the travel sector: Google's referrals in January stomped (stampeded) the competition; search is much more directly effective at generating referrals than ads on content sites.

Emphasis, as you can see, is on the word "directly." While every marketer has the judgment to decide which kind of campaign is right for his or her brand (indeed, in some cases a search campaign will be more appropriate than a contextual campaign, just like direct mail is sometimes more appropriate than a broadcast campaign), I think it might be tempting to abandon the branding concept altogether, just based on numbers like these.

You gotta admit, the numbers are pretty lopsided, and pretty lopsided in one search engine's favor. Nobody's unaware, either, of the concept of ad-blindness, which most certainly exists in seemingly greater supply the more savvy users become.

However – and I understand that smaller businesses have to put their money where it's most likely to bring back results and do not have the branding luxuries of big names – it seems to me a wise thing to take a cue from the big names when possible. Branding is not a direct marketing thing. It is an awareness thing. The big marketers know that awareness, eventually, drives sales.

Ask Coca-Cola, Intel, Microsoft, any company that has made sure their brand was ubiquitous in the world, if all that branding effort was in vain. They'll most likely think you're nuts. Admittedly, it could be a different animal altogether when we talk about online marketing – but I doubt it.

In conclusion, then, I say focus on your direct referrals via search, where customers are actively seeking you out and therefore more likely to buy, but don't forget about branding via content sites that takes your message and logo and implants it into the back of the customer's mind so that when they search later with the intention to buy, they already remember and recognize your brand instead of the competitor's.

 

**It seems to me difficult to attribute a direct cause of the spike because there are too many unknown variables, seasonality, Google's focus on ad quality scores, and possible offline promotions being three of them.
 

Digg This! StumbleUpon This!
AddThis Social Bookmark Widget

About the author:
Jason Lee Miller is a WebProNews editor and writer covering business and technology.

Comments

Content wins hands down

Content ads win hands-down over search. However, search is quickly becoming a very powerful part of usability in terms of monetization.

Content beats search

To me, content ads beats search everytime, since the content and ads are right in front of the user, allowing the number of clicks required to be reduced.

useful info

it'a useful informatiln for me,thank you

Better Success with Content Sites

Actually, I have found that for me in-content ads convert the best, more than search ads. This is simply due to the fact that actual content can also be written around smart search prhases which the user finds inevitably anyway if they are roaming around your website.

Both items work, and one is really more around the methodology of getting a visitor to the website, ready to the make the purchase, and the other is about converting for visitors that arrive to the website from non-converting (or less converting) phrases

Content Surprise

Our orginal test of various content search programs (Yahoo & Google) resulted in the same poor results as found by earlier posters, but a new trial of Google's content network starting last summer really had some surprising results.  In a straght comparison of Cost Per Conversion, our standard search was at $25 and content at $11!

For roughly the same amount of money we had double the conversions. True, we could go with ONLY those search keys that had the lower cost per conversion, but because branding dictates that we spend money on our main keywords for visibility, this is not really an option.

Basically, you just need to find the best CPA and dump most of your ad spend there - the rest for branding...

NOT BAD!

CERY GOOD!

THANKS!

http://www.shenzhenseo.org.cn/

Content is Crap!

We tried Google's new "optimizer" which throws a bunch of content garbage into your campaign. After three days it cost an extra two grand and our sales dropped by 50%. Then, the "optimizer" said we had to increase our daily budget to keep up!

This is basically a vicious circle and a place for the big boys to play who have money to burn for "image" but don't live on real clicks or sales. The problem with the content is not just that it's crap, it also COMPETES with your keyword budget, lowering sales and clicks while increasing budget. What a lousy combination!

Needless to say, we turned off content and are way back up in sales, what a waste! Optimization? Try dilution.

Content Network did not work for me...

From my own experience over the past 6 months, the google content network sent me much more traffic. But most of the traffic lasted less than 1 second and then left my website. (about 90% of the content network traffic did this meaning 10% were real visitors). I realized better results (albeit less total number of visitors) through the search network. Visitors stayed on my site longer and visited more than one page (about 70-80% were one page visits, meaning 20-30% were real, qualified visitors).

Now my product is very broad and may attract a wide range of uninterested viewers, but as for content network, it was garbage and a total waste of money. Some of the site sending me visitors, that I was paying up to $.50 for, were complete garbage and created just for ad words, no content and spammer sites.

Just my own experience.

I have completely shut off the content network from my campaigns.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
7 + 3 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.