-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: Google Hits 2006 High Mark
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #093
"The latest search market share numbers from Hitwise show Google has hit a high point so far during 2006."
From: Michael Zerman <publisher@zerman.net>
Hi Detlev
I presume these figures, following, refer to US based searches.
Si/no?
Perhaps when reporting results like these, it's worthwhile noting the markets being referred to, to avoid the presumption that "only the USA" matters.
Cheers and thanks,
Michael
Moderator Comment: Excellent question. The answer lies in how they track users. Hitwise collects its information from ISPs they have data agreements with, and they track 25 million users, 10 million of which are data they gather from US ISPs. This means the statistics are disproportionately American, but the data is significant enough to draw some pretty good conclusions about market share.
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: Google Hits 2006 High Mark
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #092
New Discussion
From: SearchReturn <digest@searchreturn.com>
http://www.netb2b.com/article.cms?articleId=29263
Essentials: The latest search market share numbers from Hitwise show Google has hit a high point so far during 2006. The numbers are 60.29% Google, 22.58% Yahoo!, 11.56% MSN and 3.63% Ask.
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: Yahoo! Mobile Ad Deal
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #091
New Discussion
From: SearchReturn <digest@searchreturn.com>
http://www.imediaconnection.com/news/11191.asp
Essentials: Bango, a company that offers mobile analytics for advertisers, announced a distribution deal with Yahoo!. Bango is to offer Yahoo! to content providers and track performance through its mobile analytics tools. Yahoo! Search Marketing will also make Bango analytics available through their platform. Mobile is a serious growth area for the search industry, and it's only a matter of time before its popularity reaches critical mass.
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: AOL Art
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #043
"How many folks out there made modern art with their AOL mailers?"
From: Jennifer Laycock <jennifer@searchengineguide.com>
If you put a CD in the microwave for a few seconds, the skin sort of cracks and you get this awesome lightening effect (on the surface of the CD, not in the microwave). Hanging up a couple dozen of those in a dorm room makes for interesting décor.
Ahh the things you learn in college with unlimited AOL CD's at your disposal.
Jennifer Laycock
Editor-in-Chief (and once bored college student)
Search Engine Guide
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: WebSideStory Release
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #042
"My calculator is telling me that, in the same amount of elapsed time, Google sent 400 buyers and AOL sent 6 buyers."
From: Andrew Goodman <agoodman@gmail.com>
Classic post Mike! And so true! We I-Search (Return)'ers have been debating these kinds of stats for years now. The 6 buyers you received from AOL aren't going to buy you that 10,000-acre ranch anytime soon. It won't even get you to Disney World. Conversion rates matter, but a pristine conversion rate at extremely low volume just "looks pretty." If you ask a guy on the street if he'd like to buy a hot stereo, and he says "yes," that's 100% conversion.
Another very important point to make here is that the more scrupulously a search company or media company weeds out "non-buyers," the more they weed out *users* and *searchers.* Their overall influence declines, while people turn to (eg.) Google as their trusted solution for finding information. That's how you build 60%+ market share.
Just imagine a phone system that whenever you picked up, it would be a telemarketer, and only people who wanted sales calls from telemarketers would subscribe to the service. The conversion rate would be super high, but you probably wouldn't sell many phones and you certainly wouldn't grow into a "global telecommunications giant." I'm not sure you could even give those "phones" away. Unless maybe you mailed them to every household for a few years to the point where people began gluing them together and creating modern art with them. But that would create a sizeable loss for your company, and potentially annoy a lot of people who didn't want to receive free phones in the mail.
Moderator Comment: How many folks out there made modern art with their AOL mailers?
--
Andrew Goodman
www.page-zero.com
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: Websidestory Release
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #040
"Search engine referrals convert at a rate twice that of other sources."
From: Mike Banks Valentine <search@website101.com>
http://www.searchreturn.com/digest/refs040.shtml
Here we go again with bogus numbers and so-called "conversion rates" studies without looking at ROI. In a laughable footnote, WebSideStory notes quietly:
Study examines only the conversion rate, not the ROI generated by each major search engine
So why is conversion percentage relevant when total numbers of search engine *referred* visitors is not included in the calculations of conversion percentages? The entire thing becomes absurd once total numbers of referrals *within specific time frames* are known.
I'm horrible at math, but fortunately I have a calculator on my computer here. It tells me that if Google sends 100 visitors to those sites in this study, almost 4 of them buy something. Whereas AOL gets more than 6 people buying something for every 100 that come from that search engine.
We'll forget for a moment that those searches are actually still done on Google servers.
Now those 6 AOL visitors took about 10 times as long to show up on the retailers sites from AOL searches because Google sends easily ten times the referred traffic as AOL. My calculator is telling me that, in the same amount of elapsed time, Google sent 400 buyers and AOL sent 6 buyers.
Hmmm, I think the conversion percentage is kinda irrelevant once the time factor is considered. It would take AOL referred visitors about 66 times as long to convert at that better rate - *once they show up*. They trickle in from AOL at a rate equivalent to a faucet drip, while Google sends a blast of visitors at a full flow rate.
It makes me crazy each time these "studies" are done which measure things nearly superfluous to ROI and the bottom line. I believe WebSideStory is looking for a little favor from AOL - or perhaps a little cash? MSN is right behind AOL as usual, in this silly "study" which has no concept of time or volume, and purposely ignores ROI by their own admission.
Mike Banks Valentine
http://RealitySEO.com
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: Search Conversion Rate High
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #036
"I've asked them if they understand that they're going to lose the client when the client realizes that their half a million dollar web site doesn't show up in the search engines. Their response? 'Oh, they won't notice.'"
From: David Temple <info@chinasearchmarketingtour.com>
Jennifer,
I really enjoyed your post about FTD. I can't believe it. Do you think this story will get enough notice to make a difference? All I know is this is the most misunderstood industry in the world. He probably figured he could do it himself, you know, put in a few meta tags here and there and sprinkle some keywords about, yeah anybody can do that. Anyway I ramble. Keep on postin'
David
David Temple
Chairman
China Search Marketing Tour
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: Search Referrals
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #035
New Discussion
From: SearchReturn <digest@searchreturn.com>
Hello everyone,
Queries you will find analyzing log entries can be quite perplexing. If you wonder how someone came to your site using a peculiar query, and you know you aren't in the result set for that query, then don't worry about it. When you have no matching content, it is not always a search referral just because it looks like one.
Your visitor could have typed in the address field while having a result page loaded, visiting your site directly. This referrer looks like it came from search, but it didn't. Avoid being obsessive about search referrals that are way off topic.
If you've got tracking stories, advice or insight to share with the group, we're starting a thread dedicated to tracking. Maybe you have a tracking question to ask. Ask it now. The convenient comment link makes it easy to post.
Thanks!
Stay tuned.
-SearchReturn
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: Search Conversion Rate High
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #034
New Discussion
From: SearchReturn <digest@searchreturn.com>
http://www.searchreturn.com/digest/refs034.shtml
Essentials: The firm known for tracking finds that search engine referrals convert at a rate twice that of other sources. This comes fast on the heels of news about the head of marketing for FTD that was replaced because of 2005 decisions to forego search marketing, missing sales expectations as a result.
http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060127-000657
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
-----------------------------------------------------------------
==> TOPIC: Google Analytics Restart
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted in SearchReturn #029
New Discussion
From: SearchReturn <digest@searchreturn.com>
http://www.google.com/analytics/progress.html
Essentials: Google Analytics (formerly Urchin) was deluged with requests after announcing it is available completely free. They had to stop accepting new users over the last 5 weeks to better prepare for the situation. In the meantime, many have complained that trust is too serious a factor, and it is why they will pass on using the tracking tool when they advertise with AdWords. Still, it is wise to become familiar with Google Analytics while many will use it simply because it is available without cost.
Comment? mailto:digest@searchreturn.com?subject=Tracking
Back | Top |
"I also like SearchReturn℠, with its old-school look and feel, and the intelligent posts." -Andrew Goodman
SearchReturn readers get carefully selected search engine news and information, actionable marketing tips and expert advice with site owner Detlev Johnson.
"During SES Toronto I was discussing the early days of SEO with Jim Hedger and told him how much I missed I-search."
-Terry Van Horne