Yahoo! 'Instant' Search (beta version)

Another utility to make searching the web more efficient (or make us more lazy)

Will I use it on a regular basis...probably not. I don't use Google's 'Im Feeling Lucky' button which is basically what Yahoo! Instant Search is. Only major difference between the two...Yahoo! Instant Search pops up a bubble with the most popular related search term in Yahoo!'s data base (in relation to the search query entered)

I like my search engine like I like my coffee...without cream and sugar. You get my point?! : )

Truveo to battle with the big boys (Google and Yahoo!) in the video search arena!

Very clean format and easy to use. Another new "search toy" to add to my favorites.

Thoughts/opinions?

Truveo Launches Video Search Engine

Joining in on what Mayer at Yahoo has been doing for a while, Matt Cutts has agreed to give Google weather reports when a major update is blowing through.

Current Conditions: Just a PR / Backlink update.

Oh yeah...happy birthday Google. You're the largest seven year-old I know (but still crawling ;-).

Man there's some good topics out this morning...another day to be thankful to work in a dynamic industry that's always fresh (sorry to Jeese and his fellow accounting friends).

Microsoft unveiled the new start.com page today, and I've just spent about 30 minutes playing with it. Very cool...I'm giving it 3 stars. I only have one major complaint, and I've already seen others say the same: Make the article title a link so I don't have to find the tiny "more >>" link at the end.

Check it out for yourself.

Earlier this month, Tony commented briefly on a news tidbit that there is a class action suit against Google for overcharging the daily budgets. (Original article here.)

Now, I know this is a shock – but I’m gonna come to Google’s defense on this one.

Yes, at first, for a few minutes, I found it a little confusing. But it took about five minutes to understand that the daily budget is an average. That during the course of a month, there will be some days a little over and some a little under. That if there is significant overspending, Google will refund the charges – which means the client has gotten free clicks, since it’s not like they can take back the traffic.

The suit alleges that there are instances when campaigns have spent as much as 160% of the daily budget and not gotten a refund. I’d venture to guess that these same people had days that ran underbudget – and they are expecting a refund for each day they go over, when that’s just not how it works.

Google does a much better job of keeping the daily spend close to the daily budget than Yahoo. You can set an average daily budget on Yahoo and still get days when it spends 3x that amount, and as a result shuts the campaign off completely on other days. Though really, that just seems like poor management to me. It would be in the search engine’s interest to keep those ads running a bit every day, at the very least because this would make the clients happier and more secure.

I’d guess that there may be technical limitations to how accurately the engines can keep a campaign under a specific budget… how fast is the data processed, the costs updated, and then the campaign shut off? In the time it takes for that to happen, how many more clicks will be incurred?

It’s not like Google make a secret of how the budget works. If I advertise with a newspaper and don’t understand their written policies – can I sue them? Seriously – do people get to win a lawsuit just because they’re dumb? Oh, wait… (remembers McDonald’s hot coffee warning) sometimes they do.

Ask Jeeves or should I say Ask is 86'ing the Butler icon.

IMO...I don't see the value in doing away with an icon that is synonymous with this engine from it's inception. I like Jeeves (fat or thin Jeeves...no preference here). Could it be that Ask "bit" on a rebranding pitch from the agencies - TBWA/Chiat/Day or Hanft Unlimited????

Here is an idea...take the money that you have budgeted to spend on your new branding initiative and put that money into improving your search technology!

Just stumbled across this a minute ago...

All I want to know is, how long until you're able to choose your own background color?

Your thoughts??

Interesting article in ClickZ News - -> http://www.clickz.com/news/article.php/3528611

It appears that Google is doing some heavy testing on mixing commercial results in with organic results in the SERPs. From what Google is saying...,"the results are not paid listings, saying the demarcated results are a search relevancy experiment."

OK...to see what we are talking about...

Perform a search on "on demand" (without the quotes) in Google and you will see that positions #6 - #8 are segmented out and show pages from Comcast.com (Google deems these as "commercial results"). However, Comcast.com also appears in the organic listings in the #30 postion...oops...the #31 position...oops...the #29 position. Ah...the ever-flux...Jeff and I are comparing our results from two different machines and it seems to vary (I am sure that we are querying different data centers)

This is totally boggling our minds! How does Google determine that Comcast.net should be served up in the "commercial" results and not network websites like Starz!, Cinemax, TMC, etc.? Jeff and I believe that it must be based on Comcast.net's impressions to click-through rates for that keyword phrase. That is IF Google is trying to serve those results based on relevancy.

We know that these listings aren't paid...unless Google is breaking the US FTC's guidelines on disclosure of paid content in SERPs

We agree with Levin and Lee...this could have a major impact on the way we optimize websites.

Eager to see how this unfolds!

Search engine market shares in July 2005: Google - 59.2%, Yahoo! - 28.8%, MSN - 5.5% by ZDNet's ZDNet Research -- HitWise says Google, Yahoo! Search and MSN Search accounted for 93.5% of US searches in July 2005. Google garnered 59.2% of searches. Yahoo! Search and MSN Search captured 28.8% and 5.5% shares, respectively.

Google Software Engineer, Matt Cutts, has launched his own blog. He is sharing valuable information, suggestions, and insight on Google indexing and SEO in general.

Pretty good stuff!

That's right...Danny is wielding his power to promote Search Marketing Day. I don't care who you are, please go and vote for this holiday. Myself and zunchers like me work countless hours, 364 days a year to promote other people's websites (we do get Columbus day off). We slave over keyword research, competitve analysis and website analytics day in and day out for mere pennies on the dollar, while the lion's share of the profit goes to support John's Starbucks addiction. Please...from the bottom of my heart I'm pleading for you to help make this dream become reality. We need a day for ourselves!

Just a little fun on this slow Thursday. Back to the foosball table...

New music search utility provided by Yahoo! Search - Yahoo! Audio Search

Not really SEO/SEM related but a pretty cool way to search your favorite music, interviews, podcasts, speeches, etc.

I guess if you are looking for a podcasts on SEO/SEM this could be a good place to start!

There's a very interesting thread over at SEW that discusses how search engine's should handle redirects. As anyone in the industry knows, the search engines have been giving SEM professionals headaches for years now on this issue. The main problem is that Google behaves differently than Yahoo, and MSN differently then Ask...you get the picture. No standards.

Fact is, URLs change. Just this week one of my accounts (large e-commerce site) converted to a completely new backend system, totally changing every URL on the site. We're doing our best to use 301 redirects in order to match the old URLs with the corresponding new URLs, but there will be a fallout. To them, the benefits of the bew backend were worth the loss of traffic for a time.

Tony and I are already preparing for another battle (read: headache) later this year when a client (a nationwide bank) will change domains. We've delivered to them a risk assesment regarding the potential negative impact to their SEM program, as well as recommendations for making the transition as smooth as possible. Do we blame them for wanting to change domains? Absolutely not. By all accounts, in the long run they will be much better off for changing. We just wish it weren't so difficult for the search engines to recognize and adjust accordingly.

Hopefully Danny and his crew will spark major progress in this regard. I'd love to be able to throw away the bottle of Aspirin that sits on my desk labelled "redirection painkiller".

Microsoft Virtual Earth launched this week...very similar application to Google Earth but with a few added features...

Pretty cool application...a lot of the same basic features as Google Earth...what and where search fields, ability to scroll on the map, lables with address/landmark information, aerial images or road map images...all very useful stuff!

The only minor issue that I have with Virtual Earth (and Google Earth for that matter) is the aerial images are outdated. I searched my home address and the aerial image only shows my sub-division which tells me that the image is over 5 years old.

Still...both are very cool tools and it just shows how far technology has come with mapping software.

It looks like we will be seeing a lot more of Virtual Earth in the future...Microsoft is going to open the source code to developers in order to integrate the application into Web site / Web pages.

E-Commerce Solution, Other Wares to Be Shown in San Jose

Zunch Communications, Inc. is once again a premier sponsor of JupiterMedia's Search Engine Strategies conference being held in San Jose, California August 8-11. Zunch has sponsored similar JupiterMedia events in New York City and Chicago. According to JupiterMedia, “Search Engine Strategies is the premier conference series that keeps you informed about search engine marketing and optimization issues. Because this industry keeps reinventing itself at an amazing pace, we assure you that the content will be cutting-edge.”

Dallas, TX (PRWEB) July 19, 2005 -- Zunch Communications, Inc. is once again a premier sponsor of JupiterMedia's Search Engine Strategies conference being held in San Jose, California August 8-11. Zunch has sponsored similar JupiterMedia events in New York City and Chicago. According to JupiterMedia, “Search Engine Strategies is the premier conference series that keeps you informed about search engine marketing and optimization issues. Because this industry keeps reinventing itself at an amazing pace, we assure you that the content will be cutting-edge.”

John Sanchez, Chairman and CEO of Zunch and also the Vice-President of the Search Engine Marketers Professional Organization (SEMPO), says that the Search Engine Strategies conferences have been excellent showcases for the growing line of Zunch services and products. “We've got some incredible new tools that we like to demo at these shows, and the value to us as premier sponsors is immeasurable,” said Sanchez, “The opportunities to meet with others in the industry, while always enjoyable and informative, is second to meeting with companies that have real interactive issues that we hope to help them solve.”

The conference features workshops, lectures and roundtable discussions aimed at educating the business community as a whole and the Search Engine Optimization (SEO) community in particular. Conference attendees visit exhibitor booths before and after sessions and during breaks. Manning the Zunch booth (#501) and demonstrating Zunch products will be Giovanni Gallucci, Zunch's President and COO.

“Gio is a real trooper,” offers Sanchez, “He's usually the first guy on the floor and the last one to leave. He's really the best one to demo our search engine friendly e-commerce solution, zWebCommurce. Since he helped design and build it, he’s very effective at communicating its unique features. At the risk of wearing him out, I'm inviting everyone to stop by booth #501 in San Jose to ask Gio to show you how zWebCommurce works.”

Gallucci says it is the constant problem-solving and unique challenges that make this industry exciting, “As JupiterMedia says, the industry is indeed changing and reinventing itself, and we believe that Zunch is right at the edge of those reinventions, helping pave the way. I really do get a kick out of helping our clients tackle their unique interactive problems and ultimately, grow their businesses,” said Gallucci.

Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, Zunch Communications, Inc. (http://www.zunch.com) is a search engine optimization, website design and Microsoft Certified application development company dedicated to achieving measurable results for its clients. Top-ranked worldwide in search engine optimization; Zunch Communications is a member of DFWIMA, SEO Consultants, seopros, DFWSEM, topseos and a Circle Member of SEMPO. Zunch also maintains offices in New York City, Orlando and Mumbai.

I was reminded of the benefits of both types of marketing earlier this month while composing a monthly summary report for a client. My jaw dropped as I viewed the analytics report that showed a significant decrease in organic traffic from Google, AOL and Ask Jeeves. This was after 6 straight months of solid increases, with no hints of looking back. I then suspected, and after talking with Laura, confirmed that this client had begun a PPC campaign (managed with expertise by Zunch, of course).

Based on our recommendations, the PPC campaign included very specific, branding keywords which were ranking #1 in the organic listings already (ex. "company name store"). As expected, some visitors clicked on the paid result who would have otherwise clicked on the natual result. So now we have a huge, inter-departmental feud because the PPC team stole traffic from the SEO team, right? Not quite. You see, overall traffic for those keywords were up across the board. And the low cost made it a no-brainer to bid on, even if some visitors would find the site organically anyways. The extra sales far outweigh the pennies it took to acquire them.

In the end, this client ends up on top because of their willingness to use as much real estate as possible in the SERPs.

To compliment Google Maps and "Google Earth" ...Google launches "Google Moon"

In honor of the first manned Moon landing, which took place on July 20, 1969, we’ve added some NASA imagery to the Google Maps interface to help you pay your own visit to our celestial neighbor. Happy lunar surfing. More about Google Moon

* Zoom in to find the lunar secret!

So it's been a little over a month now since Google launched "Google Sitemaps" - the program that allows webmasters, site owners, and SEO professionals to submit an XML feed of their Web pages to Google in order to expedite the crawl-and-index process.

From talking with Tyson and Dan as well as reading SEO blogs and other SEO related newsletters, there isn't a whole lot to be said about the program. In fact, Tyson mentioned that he submitted a feed for his blog three weeks ago and Google is still showing some of the pages in their 'supplemental' results.

Do I believe that Google Sitemaps has inherent value? My answer is yes...IF you have a large dynamic site with hard to reach pages AND updates often. i.e. Target.com, Amazon.com, Wal-Mart.com, etc. If you are faced with this dilemma...give Google Sitemaps a shot...it's free...for now : )

Now, if you have submitted a feed to Google and are looking for this program to boost your rankings...forget about it! This program simply helps Google index pages of your site more efficiently. Improving your rankings in Google and the other search engines takes a lot more than an XML feed. If that's what you are looking for...let Zunch help you with search engine optimization.

I see it all the time… especially with retail sites. Landing pages that may be optimized for the keyword, but are not thought through as entry pages to the site. That is, the product is there, with an engaging, keyword-rich description. The price is there, and a button to click to buy the product. But the page is missing the incentives that are advertised on the index page.

Incentives – whether free shipping, or a sale, or a free gift with purchase – often make the difference between a conversion and a bounce. When I was at Yahoo!, they presented us a study that showed free shipping as the number one reason why a customer would choose one online retailer over another. But it’s not enough to put the offer in the PPC copy.

Some sites bury their incentives, mentioning free shipping only on the shipping info page. Or mentioning a sale only on a category page. But most of our clients do better than that… even if it’s only at our recommendation… and make special offers a bold presence on their index page. This does no good, however, when the potential customer is entering on a product page.

If you have an incentive – make sure it’s visible on every page of the site. Look at every possible landing page as the entryway to your site, and remember most people will not go any further than that page. Keep those incentives in front of your visitors, no matter where they go on your site. Catch ‘em, convert ‘em and keep ‘em – even if they walk in through a side door.

According to InsideGoogle, Google is set to release its Toolbar for the Firefox browser. While I know this will warm the heart of a few of my Toolbar-lovin' colleagues, I really question the motives of this move for the following reasons:

First, aren't toolbars a thing of the past already? Firefox already has an integrated search bar and popup blocking. IE7 is bound to have the same. The Google Toolbar wouldn't bring an enhanced browser experience to Firefox.

Oh yeah...that little green bar. But do people really care about PageRank as much now as they used to (please say no)? Besides, there are several extensions available for Firefox that display PageRank already. Was there a huge outcry for Google to deliver a Toolbar for Firefox?

We all know that Firefox is a growing phenomenon. Latest statistics show the browser almost to the 10% mark in saturation, and increasing every month. Could it be that Google wants the click-thru data from FireFox users just as it is "possibly" using Toolbar data now from IE users?

OK...we want to believe that several SEO/SEM writers are visiting ZEN-SEM as a source of inspiration / information. Reason for our belief - there have been several articles written in the past month on "How to Not Work With an SEO/SEM Firm", "Why You Don't Rank on Search Engines", and "More Ways to Not Work With an SEO/SEM Firm" - all of these were written after I blogged on, "What Makes a Good SEO Client?".

Are we complaining? Absolutely not!  Zunch welcomes all of our SEO/SEM brothers and sisters and encourage you to visit ZEN-SEM anytime you like. Hey...if any of you are ever in Dallas...feel free to stop by Zunch corporate headquarters for a game of foozball, dartz, or XBox.

Seriously, get back to work. Six new products in one week, is that all you got?

OK...maybe I'm the one who needs to get back to work after being distracted all week by Google Earth, the Google Maps API, the Google Personalized Search, Yahoo's MyWeb2, Google Earth, Google Video, A9's maps, oh and did I mention Google Earth. Yeah...I love it (and so does my space-loving, science-teaching wife).

So while the big news from Zunch might get overlooked this week, it appears that we're not the only ones traveling "full speed ahead".

Yahoo! Search's second algorithm update has come and gone like the spring rains here in Texas. Much like a summer afternoon rain shower on the Texas prairies, we haven't seen any significant impact - positive or negative, in terms of client's search engine rankings resulting from this algorithm update.

IMO...Yahoo! Search is seeking publicity knowing that Google's recent algorithm update (code name: Bourbon) created a significant buzz in the SEO world. Both updates conveniently made before the WebmasterWorld conference in New Orleans. Strategic PR at it's finest!

I just returned from New Orleans where I was able to attend the "Meet the Google Engineers" mixer. First, thanks to the management at Zunch for the opportunity to attend. While I certainly didn't learn anything earth-shattering, I believe it was a worthwhile trip. Here's a rundown...

The engineers were obviously briefed like covert agents beforehand on what to say, what not to say and how to dodge questions. To be fair, I did feel like a majority of the questions were handled pretty well, although some questions were answered with a redundant "google uses over 100 factors in its algorithm...".

They pushed using the new Google Sitemap program and stressed that new features were going to be added in the future for better communication between webmasters. They also stressed reading the "webmaster guidelines" before developing a site.

Of course everyone and their mother asked one question: "Is there a sandbox?" Here's the answer: "There is no official Google Sandbox. There are many forms of data that cycle at different times, which may lead to the assumption of a sandbox. "

When asked about the recent patent that made news a few months ago, Google said: "Back at the time of that patent, our competitors were patenting everything. It was more of a defensive move than anything. We were told to go out and find anything and everything that could be used for historical information in order to patent it. We have many technologies which we have chosen not to patent for the sake of secrecy. We just hope that no one else discovers the same methods and tries to sue us!".

It was also interesting to note that the engineer that I spoke to claimed he had never heard of SEOInc, or what has happened to them recently. Yeah...

As expected, the session ended with the admonishon to create sites for users, not search engines. Words which fall on deaf ears at this geek-fest.

I have a radical proposition: Get rid of insertion orders for PPC advertising.

Do IOs really serve a purpose? Or are they simply an extraneous carry-over from print advertising? Someone in an accounting department would probably be able to explain to my why this document is necessary… but from the point of view of a pay-per-click advertiser, they are a nuisance and a potential liability.

What information is in the IO? The length of the campaign, the budget, the client info, and the payment method. All of these are defined when you set up an advertising account online. Perhaps this is seen as a kind of protection for the advertiser, to make sure that they do not keep their ads up longer than intended or spend more than intended… but defining and changing the date or budget parameters is simple online. Even setting a max spend not to be exceeded, or an end date…

If it were not so simple to control these factors, or if, as in print advertising, there were a long lead time – so that you can’t cancel an ad at the last minute – then insertion orders would make sense.

OK – so yes, it’s another piece of paper that requires a few e-mails back and forth to obtain and get signed. One more thing to fax back. Pretty minor nuisance. How can it be a liability?

It becomes a liability when the Insertion Order runs out, and the campaign stops – and the advertiser does not realize it immediately.

Oh, wait – maybe that’s more a customer service issue. Maybe the real problem is that customer service reps do not send out notices that an account is about to be shut off because the IO budget or end date is reaching an end. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. Or the customer service rep does not assure that a new IO is prepared in a way that will leave the account with no downtime.

Uh-oh. Is this turning into another Google rant?

Yes and no. Neither Google nor Yahoo has been consistent about keeping me apprised of IOs reaching either budget or time limits.

Yahoo has been better about letting me know when one is going to end and needs to be renewed, but not so good about noticing that an account had nearly spent its limit, or was spending too fast.

Google has been wildly inconsistent.

For example. One client has three accounts. The IOs are all set to end on the same day, but they are burning through their budget at different speeds. The rep I work with lets me know, about a month in advance, that this is happening… and that one of the accounts will reach the budget limit early.

I am happy they have done this, and ask that we go ahead and complete new IOs.

I hear nothing back for a week. I am told there’s no rush. I get passed between two account reps, who do not share all of the information I communicate. One IO gets completed, but with a start date that leaves the account with a day of downtime. The others get extended – so that now, instead of three accounts with a single end date, I have three with three different end dates.

I hear nothing further, until I notice that one of the accounts is not running. My client loses money. Google loses money. Why did I not get a call or an e-mail? And why, when I did hear back (two days later, after I followed up again, from a *third* rep), did they act surprised that I wanted a new IO?

This is not the first time Google has allowed a campaign to simply end without following up.

Oh, wait… I guess it did turn into another Google rant. (Hey, don’t get me wrong. The folks at Google are really quite nice. Just not so well organized.)

But seriously, why is all of this needed in the first place? If an insertion order really is a necessity, why can it not be generated easily, by the advertiser, online? If an electronic contract is insufficient, the info could be autofilled from information already in the account, printed, faxed back… Take out a few steps and simplify everyone’s lives.

So Google has yet another new feature that has created a buzz in the SEO world..."Google Sitemaps"

In short...

Webmasters, site owners, SEO specialists, etc. now have the ability to "feed" Google web pages they would like to have included in Google's indices. It's free to submit but not guranteed. Pretty simple!?

Here is how it works...

You create an XML feed of URL's you want indexed along with details such as when the page(s) was/were last updated and how often the page(s) change and you tell the Googlebot where to find the XML file. NOTE: The XML file (Sitemap) must be hosted on the web server. Pretty simple!?

This is great news for large dynamic sites that have issues being "deep crawled". However, there has already been a report from someone stating that they installed "Sitemap" on their beefy 3200MHz Pentium 4 running Debian Linux and 2 GB of RAM and it caused the server to crash.

I look forward to reading more reports on this when I get back into the office on Monday morning.

Search Engine Watch Blog - Google Sitemaps

Have you ever wondered who those “editors” are at Overture/Yahoo? What exactly do they do? Why do their decisions seem to be inconsistent.

Well, I can tell you. I used to be one of those editors.

Here’s the basics:

An editor receives a full week of training when they start, mostly on the guidelines and interpretation thereof. Some of them are cut and dry, and any editor will make the same decision (unless they are just being sloppy.) Like the back button. It’s got to work. If someone goes to your site from a PPC ad, and sees that it’s not what they are looking for – they must be able to easily return to the listings using the back button.

Some of the rules require interpretation. This most often is an issue with content. Let’s say you want the keyword “tire” and your site sells rims. Is a rim a tire? Is it a tire part? The editor gets this in front of them, and they make a judgment call. My judgment call may be different from the editor sitting next to me. Is someone who types the word tire into an engine looking for rims? In fact, might decide one way today… and (having forgotten about seeing the listing before) reverse my decision a month later when presented with the same scenario.

Now, here’s where it gets fun… The editor may turn to their neighbors and get an opinion from one, two or three others sitting nearby. We did that all the time. Some editors more than others. Some editors are inclined to be more lenient. Some are more strict to the letter of the guideline. Some think more like the advertiser, some more like the searcher. And sometimes, at the end of a long week, when we are rushing to meet our quota (yes, they have quotas for the number of listings an editor must process) – we get sloppy and don’t pay as close attention. We miss content, we forget to check the back button. Listings get declined when they shouldn’t or approved when they shouldn’t. Not often, but they do. (I prided myself on my exceptionally high quality scores, with a less than 2% error rate.)

The most common reason to decline a listing is probably obvious path. You have a lovely home page, and want all visitors to your site to go there – but how do they find the exact thing they were searching for from there? If it’s obvious (shown on that page, or listed in a menu), then you’re good to go. If the editor doesn’t see how to find it, then a searcher is unlikely to as well. Unless of course, the editor doesn’t know that the keyword you want, “dubs,” are large rims, and thinks it has something to do with voiceovers… and then, even though you have 22” rims listed in the menu, they might decline. I’d hope that they’d take a moment to figure out why you want the term (asking, doing a web search) first, but – sometimes that quota looms and finding answers takes time.

Here’s the thing about editors. They’re only people. People are inconsistent, though we do our best to be otherwise.

That is, when your listing is reviewed by a person, and not a program.

Another source of inconsistency is a little thing which editors aren’t supposed to talk about called “E2.” These are listings that are deemed “low risk” and processed automatically. Low risk listings meet the following criteria: they are low-volume, they do not contain any brand names (at least none that are in the database), possible drug or medical terms, gambling, or adult. Sometimes a listing can be flagged because there is a word in the description that the system can’t interpret according to context… like “bet” and then it will be routed to an editor.

You see, the volume of listings has increased so rapidly that there is no way for editors to keep up with them all… so E2 processes many of them. And, being a program, it has limited capacity for interpretation. What’s more, when things get really busy and the editors are all working overtime, the E2 program might get tweaked to be less sensitive, and allow more terms through.

But call me biased (OK, yes, I admit it) I prefer this system, even with its flaws, to Google’s… Because I know when my listing is submitted that it’s either online or not. If it’s declined, I can make a change and resubmit. With Google, I may have a listing live for months, only to one day get an e-mail saying that the ad has been shut off because of a guideline violation… You get a higher quality ad, most of the time, when it’s been proofed by an editor before it goes live. (Some of the ads on Google are such a mess, I’d be embarrassed to use them to represent my business.)

So if you get something declined and don’t understand why, maybe it went through E2. Maybe it went to an editor who was tired. Most likely, on the other hand, it simply didn’t meet the requirements. Keep in mind, most of them are there to improve your click through and ROI – because doing so is in Yahoo’s best interest. You getting traffic is what makes them money. You making money is what keeps them making money. The better you know the guidelines, the better you can make your ads work for you.

I had a client forward an email he received from a company (let’s call them Company X) wanting to place a link on his site and in return they would pay him .60 every time someone clicked on the link. Since I am not familiar with this type of link request / linking strategy, I immediately forwarded the email on to John and Tony asking if they have ever heard of this type of linking strategy and if we should recommend it to our client.

After discussing this internally (with some debate), we came to the conclusion that we wouldn’t recommend this type of linking program because it’s a way of creating artificial links for clients of Company X which in no way benefits our client’s website from a linking stand-point.

Is this the “get new backlinks quick” strategy that will replace the three-way linking strategy?

Ask Jeeves continues to solidify its stance as a legitimate contender with two new features this week. Here's my thoughts on "Focus" and "Web Answers"...

First, I must say that I like Focus. Frequently when I search unseccessfully, I change one word in the query to try and adjust my angle. Focus goes a step further and peaks my interest with queries that I otherwise would not have thought of. For instance, I've been looking recently for a very particular set of golf irons. The Focus feature helps me use the engine's full potential by suggestion queries related to 'Cobra SS-I Oversized Irons'.

Now...Web Answers. First, let me say that the technology behind it is impressive. Give credit to the scientists and engineers at AJ who have compiled such a strong product. However, I do see Web Answers causing more problems that it solves.

First and foremost, there is a legitimate possibility that the Web Answer given back may be inaccurate. I was reminded of my friends remark many years ago, noting that the Internet is about as reliable as the "men's room wall". While things have improved, web sources are still regarded as inferior to paper or quoted sources. AJ does no verification of the accuracy of each Web Answer, so please corroborate your answers. I can just envision a bunch of 7th grade Michael Isokoffs typing in a question and then quoting the answer in their papers as "anonymous Internet source". As a veteran print journalist told me on Monday, "reporters are lazy". Hey dude...it's not just reporters.

Secondly, this continues to transform search engines into super-membranes, satisfying every need of the searcher instead of being a gateway between the searcher and web publisher. This is destined to continue as new mediums like blackberrys and mobile phones become standard equipment. Future users will not want to click-thru to a publisher's site, and so the 'Web Answers' phenomenon will grow. Before long, web publishers (and I am one) will just be used by the engines for the information they provide, and less and less visitors will be forwarded through. Not that I'm pessimistic or anything...

There you go...two new features to play with. Your thoughts are welcome, as always.

Came across the recently launched SEM resource Search Brains this afternoon. It is basically an online source for keeping up to date with the Search Engine industry.

My .02...

Good SEM related information including articles, blog posts, resources, etc. that updates every 15 minutes but the format is a bit cumbersome. I would like to see the font size increased and a link to "archived" articles/posts so that you don't have to scroll so much.

I really like their call-out on "roll" of Bloggers so that you can directly access an individuals blog...Tony is working on getting ZEN-SEM on their roll as we speak. : )

I am going to bookmark this one and see how it develops.

You know...Iron Butterfly, the '97 Marlins, Right Said Fred...and Google?

Yep. Atleast according to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, speaking at Stanford last week. Ballmer, whose search engine is fresh out of spring training, told students the fall of rival Google is no more than 5 years away.

Is this just more marketing hype from Gates and crew, or does Microsoft truly have what it takes to topple the search leader? Merely one year after the famous "Google kicked out butts" statement from Gates, team butterfly seems as proud as ever. With $100 million less and 1 percent more (market share since Jan 05), there's no question Microsoft is embracing the long road ahead.

Maybe Longhorn will revolutionize the way we search. I doubt it, but I've doubted Microsoft before. They certainly don't lack the resouces or talent. Or attitude, for that matter.

Can Google hang on over time to hit for the cycle? Only time will tell. For now, they have earned the right to bat clean-up.

Google’s Smart Keyword Evaluation Tool – what exactly are the advantages, to the advertiser, to Google, to the consumer? It’s supposed to disable terms that are underperforming, so that they are taken out of the rankings to improve the user experience. I’m simply not convinced it’s working at all as intended. I don’t even think anyone at Google really understands how their own tool works.

We recently had a client who was offering an online broadcast of March Madness college basketball games. It was approved by the NCAA, and, in fact, the URL was on their site. Can’t get much more relevant. This was an unusual PPC campaign, as there was a very narrow window of consumer interest. We started off with a test campaign using a core of college basketball and March Madness related terms, and then expanded to specific team and school names as the brackets were announced.

Traffic was slow on the test campaign… and some of the key terms got disabled. Quickly. Terms like “march madness basketball” – which were getting an acceptable clickthrough rate according to Google’s own definition. Look in the FAQ, and it says .5% for first position. Of course, part of the problem there may be that the numbers you see in the client center, and the numbers Google uses to determine a keyword’s status are not the same pool of data. You are looking at the total, including performance on partner sites. They are using Google-only search numbers. Why, if they are able to separate these numbers for their own use, and they are making decisions which effect your campaign, can’t the data be displayed separately for the advertiser as well? And how does it help Google, the advertiser, or the user if terms that are performing well on partner sites are not allowed to continue to be displayed on those sites?

There was a huge spike in March Madness-related search terms once the games got underway. Pre-season there was very little. So, by starting the campaign early, we ended up being penalized for an early lack of interest and were allowed to use some terms which had a high degree of relevancy and for which there was a great deal more traffic than when we started the campaign. The “smart” tool is not smart enough to factor in seasonal differences.

Then, as we added terms to the campaign, we encountered another problem. Terms were put on hold or even disabled – with no history whatsoever. How can any algorithm determine that any term will not perform well for any given client if it is never given a chance to be displayed?

During this campaign, I had lunch with a few people I work with at Google, and asked for an explanation. I was told it may be because of the performance of “similar” terms in the campaign, like plural versus singular. Problem was, there were no similar terms to most of the new ones which had any more history for such an evaluation. The Optimizer I spoke with seemed just as baffled and frustrated that accounts she uploaded new terms for often ended up with several ‘on hold’ or disabled from the start. She said, vaguely (something I have heard, in just as vague terms) that the number of terms on hold had to do with the total number in the account. If you upload too many new terms at once, several of them may be inactive. This also makes no sense. Why can I start a campaign with 2000 terms and be fine, but if I start with 200 and add 1000, I have several that are inactive?

The standard advice is to choose terms which are more specific. This, however, does not explain how a term like “gonzaga bulldogs college basketball game” – which is very specific – would be disabled as soon as it’s uploaded. Apparently, the Smart Keyword Evaluation Tool bases some of its decisions on the history of a term across accounts. So, if several other advertisers have not had success with a term, it might be disabled from day one when you upload it. This does not seem to make much sense. There is no way that an algorithm can evaluate relevance without history for the particular client that is advertising… and if a term is disabled for poor performance, a change in ad copy should allow that term another chance.

I think that this is a tool that was created as an attempt to shortcut the time necessary for human review in relevance. It is, however, shortsighted and flawed. It does not take into account conversions – a term with a low click-through but high conversions would seem like a good one. It does not take into account the differences between different advertisers for the same keywords. It does not take into account seasonal spikes in a term’s relevance. The only way to tell whether a term is relevant for the user is to either review it manually (with editors, as Overture does) or – as has been Google’s strength in the past – to allow the users to decide.

And so, I say to you, oh Google-powers-that-be, let the keywords run! Let the people decide!

I have read several articles on "Selecting a Search Engine Optimization (SEO) Agency" but something that we have been talking about in account services is the inverse of that, "What makes a good SEO client?".

Nothing is more perplexing for us as SEO specialists and account managers as a client that...

* Doesn't implement our recommendations for page content, title tags, META tags, alt tags, etc. OR overwrites our recommendations
* Makes changes to their site or site pages without notifying us prior to making the changes
* Doesn't provide access to their site analytics OR doesn't take advantage of our web analytics solution - zWebTulz

Our clients that have the best ROI from SEO take full advantage of our SEO knowledge and proven methodologies. Why wouldn't they?... that's what they pay us for right!?

Google announced last week that pricing for its recently acquired analytics product, Urchin, is being lowered significantly (news release). While lower prices are great for everyone, the real gem for marketers was buried deep in the release and hasn't garnered much attention. Urchin users now have the ability to directly import Adwords data into their Urchin reports, revealing true ROI metrics within the reporting interface.

"So what? Can't you import that data already with others solutions like ClickTracks?" Yes. But in the time it takes you to login to Adwords, select the reporting period, export the data to a CSV file, log back in to ClickTracks, upload the file...you see my point.

To my knowledge, Urchin is now the only full analytics suite that provides this seamless integration to PPC data. Login, see you visitor stats, take a look at your current PPC ROI, grab a cup of coffee and get back to work.

Myself and others at Zunch have been working on this exact integration for zWebTulz, our analytics solution, for some time now. If Google doesn't beat us to it, we hope to be the first with seamless PPC integration to Google Adwords and Yahoo SM (the artist formerly known as Overture). This capability will allow online marketers to spend more time making decisions and less time pulling data, and that's a good thing.