Are PPC engines worth their keep?

[Mel]

Hi All:

As the new moderator of the PPC forum, I would like to get a bit of information from the memebers on how they feel PPC engines are contributing to their bottom line.

Since you have to pay to get traffic fro PPC, it follows that mostly commercial enterprises will be using them and that Return on Investment (ROI) will be a major concern.

My question is -

Is your PPC traffic generating real business and not just traffic?

[ihelpyou]

Hey Mel... I gave GoTo $25 about 9 months ago to try, and still working off of it. This was not worth it to me. Do not like at all. I just wanted to see what it was like.

Of course, if clients wish to use PPC they can, but I let them do their own thing. Sometimes they do if they do not wish to wait on the search engines for ranks. Then, when ranked, they quit sticking in money.

[JuniorHarris]

As Mel notes, the MOST important thing when engaging in a PPC campaign is to always consider and calculate the ROI. The return on investment would generally include the cost for bids compared to the revenue generated. However, I would also add, that any complete calculation for ROI should also include any time spent having to manage bids as well as any time spent tracking and/or resolving bogus competitor clicks.

[Hope]

:( I work for a non-profit organization. <read: no budget> We do not use PPC search engines. For that matter we don't use any search engine the requires a fee. My budget is literally non-existant.

[ihelpyou]

This whole problem we are facing with all the ppc's, pay for indexing, pay for listing, etc, are creating a huge problem for the net as a whole.

We all know that the search engines Have to make money, just like other e-businesses have to. The problem is that there is a very fine line they will have to find.

If they step over that line, the net will start to look like nothing but the yellow pages phone book, LEAVING out ALL of the REAL good content and information available out there from all the non-profits, info sites, edu sites, etc.

This was not what the net was about 10 years ago, nor should it be all about "e-Money" today.

[Mel]

HI all;

good to see the pot boiling.

I feel that the purpose of search engines is to deliver to surfers RELEVANT RESULTS for whatever they are looking for.
Without relevant results and given the way the web is growing how are we going to find and reward with either our visits or our business those sites which deserve them?

PPC engines are much worse than just yellow pages, which after all include most everyone and are limited, but with 15 million websites and growing how can we navigate the web if the only results we can see are from those who can afford to pay the most?

Now as Doug points out PPC engines are a good way to get traffic while you wait for the search engines to index you (or for Alta Vista to let your site "age" enough) but other than that and finding the high rollers on the web, what use are they?

Google by contrast offers more and better search results, but can they continue to do so, without support from advertisers which seems to be dropping off. How many of you have actually read a banner ad in the past two weeks?

Maybe the route that WebSeed is taking is a way of the future. They provide the web "infrastructure" and have experts create and maintain each subject site in return for a percentage of the revenue that site generates.

What are your opinions? Where are we going and how are we going to get there? We are the web!

[MazY]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
This whole problem we are facing with all the ppc's, pay for indexing, pay for listing, etc, are creating a huge problem for the net as a whole.

Must be time to throw a little more petrol on this sizzling fire methinks. :nerd:

I confess that I am totally baffled by the whole PPC saga. It seems to go against every logical strength of a good SE.

I will take my Dad as an example, bless him. Almost every time I speak to him on the phone, he will ask, "How can I find x, y, z on the Internet?" I, whilst rolling my eyes at the prospect of going through it all again, then tell him. Now here is the usual response "Yes, I tried that but all I seem to get is like ads and stuff."

And that is what seems to be happening. It has become akin to buying your monthly computer magazine and then before reading it, having to give it a good shake and watch all the trashy advertisement literature fall at your feet. The big difference being of course is that you can't shake the damned advertising out of the SEs.

I agree that they have to make their money but at what cost? As much as I hate to expatiate the virtues of Google, (Yes, I believe that whilst it is good, it is also a tad over-rated in many ways.) at least their ads are nicely tucked away where one can just safely ignore them whilst laughing at those that are laying their faith on the success of them.

Me, I am avoiding payment of any kind, as a matter of principle until such time that there is no other option. Sadly, we do not seem to be too far away from that point.

I fully expect to pop to my local library tomorrow to search for a book only to be told that there are only a few decent ones left as they started charging the authors for holding them!

Anyway - that's me done. Not bad for my first day.

[ihelpyou]

Very good and very articulate post MazY! Hope you enjoyed your first day here. Do hope you continue to stop by and give us more of your incite. ;)

[MazY]

In fact... Looking at the library analogy, I just imagined this. [Can you tell I'm all fired up now?]

Enter library looking for a book on "Scotland Castles".

In fact, I am looking for the book "Scotland Castles" by Jimmy McCastle.

So, knowing that the library is all nicely categorised, I head over to the Architecture section. Then, knowing that the books are all nicely sectioned in alphabetical order by subject, I look under "C" for castles. Hmmm. "Scotland Holidays by Hamish McTavish?" Surely, this should be in the Travel section, I quizzed silently to myself.

So, I head over to the pretty librarian. (Hey, it's my fantasy, I can have her looking as I please.) "Excuse me", I ask.

She flicks her flowing blonde hair and pulls her spectacles down slightly, "Yes, Big Boy?", (OK, I'll stop fantasising now.) she replies.

I place the book on the counter, "Why is this book in the Architecture section?", I quiz with a demanding tone that I hope she finds brutal in a sort of carnal way. (Whoops. Easy tiger.)

"Ah, yes", she retorts. "The author came in this morning and had a look through our library statistics. After seeing that more people read about castles than Scotland, he asked if we would place his book into the castles section." She slides the book back towards me as though to beckon me to return it.

"But listen here, young Lady", I insist. I swear she gave me those 'come to bed eyes' at that point but I could be mistaken. "This book is about Architecture and that shelf is about castles. It doesn't make sense.", I protested.

"Sorry Sir but we do have to make our money."

Puh! The end of the world is nigh if you ask me.

[ihelpyou]

hehe, ... I believe the PPC's could have their place but the search engines have to be very careful, otherwise they will find Google asking them how much they wish to sell for. :D

[Advisor]

I have no problem with PPC's used in the search results as long as they are clearly labeled as such. Right now they are not, and this is a HUGE problem. It is deceiving to the end user. Of course the problem lies in the fact that as soon as they label those results as the sponsor ads that they are, then no one clicks on them. But perhaps that would change? Look at the phone book, I certainly am all for the full page ads and stuff in there. Sure, I know those companies pay big bucks to get in there, but sometimes I want a company like that. But everyone knows that those are ads. The search engines need to learn some ethics and do the right thing. There's got to be *some* business model out there that can work for them. I really find it hard to believe that they can be losing so much money. I wonder what they spend it all on???

Jill

[MazY]

Maybe that is an answer in itself. Why can I not, as a user, determine whether I want the ads displayed or not.

As you so rightly point out, there are times when one may want a company that pays cash to get their name seen. However, there are other times when I may want to get to the small guy with the personal service, so to speak.

Wouldn't it be nice to have a simple check box "Include Paid Ads" or even as part of the Advanced Search facility so that Jo Public, who I don't really believe uses the this feature too much yet, gets to see them, whilst those that are more suited towards drilling down to what they want can get the ads if they want them! Sorted.... Can I have a biscuit now?

[ihelpyou]

Yep. Look at Google. Their paid ads are clearly labeled. Yet, advertisers with them I hear are having real good success.

As you said, if ads are labeled as such, the users would be more apt to click and not feel deceived in any way.

One problem is that the other majors have investors who scream at them for more money. Google is private and protected from all that right now.

Sure do hope they remain private for along time.

[bigDugan]

I posted this in another thread, but figured it applied here:

I agree with you Doug, I do NOT like PPCs either.

As you say, they put all the emphasis on "cash money" and nothing on content.

Goto is your classic example.

They are not a Search Engine, they are an "Ads Engine".

Type in some keywords and display some links. What will you find? Not content! Ads, Ads, and more Ads.

And what about Goto's so called "listing guidelines" concerning spawned/pop-up windows?

It's very ironic for a "Ad Engine" who is supposed to have a "policy" against pop-ups, has more than any other search engine that I know of!!

The other thing that bothers me about Goto, is the amount of fraud going on from paid-to-surfs.

Goto and Jimbo from SEFs will tell you otherwise, but I can tell you from personal experience, it's there and is as rampant as ever.

In March and April of this year, I lost SEVERAL THOUSAND dollars from fraud, and was NEVER refunded for the bogus clicks.

It is VERY SIMPLE to implement a "nickel clicker" simply by using IP cloaking and the META tag "REFRESH" command. Using the two, you can determine who "clicks" on your GOTO links and who doesn't. And since these "clicks" are coming from "normal" users, all appears to be legit, as they are all coming from different IPs.

My personal belief is that PPCs are for people who know nothing about SEO, so they have to pay to get their site listed.

[xmathguy]

I am brand new here...excellent discussion.

I sense an underlying issue: how the web has become commercialized - SE and PPC, just one of the latest issues to surface.

This is not necessarily a personal opinion, but an analogy:

-I am also brand new to Los Angeles
-I believe in public transportation and, damn it, I am going to use the bus (there really is a bus system here)
-"why should anyone drive, the buses go just about everywhere"

BUT

-if we are talking about business, ie someone who is trying to get their business ranked in a SE and get lots of traffic (the click kind)
-given the choice between doing a SEO strategy or just BUYING my way into traffic (today!)

I'm going to BUY my way in; I'll use a PPC....To HELL with the internet, commercialism and so on.....

-just like everyone drives their car in LA, to get the newspaper.



Just 2 cents from a newcomer!

jim

[Mel]

Hi Jim and welcome to the forum:

Thats a very valid opinion, and I am sure, is why the PPc engines are doing so well, It is a "now" thing and also very tangible - you pay for 1000 clicks you get 1000 clicks -

BUT - what about all that other traffic that you will not get throughthe PPC engines - are you willing to get along without it?

[ihelpyou]

Welcome to the forums xmathguy!

You make good points. Some clients I have will do the PPC thing until they start showing ranks and hits. I feel this is just fine.

But when they do see the hits come from their ranks, they do quit. SEO is a long term strategy, while PPC CAN be a long term thing, but one that requires you to keep paying for your positions.

With a well optimized, well positioned site, you could keep that for a very long time, and for no extra money. Or for a set monthly fee. If you drop the SEO, you still keep your positions, and if you can continue on your own, it will continue to be a long term thing.

Mel makes a good point, regular SE traffic is basically a different thing than GoTo traffic. Many different markets make up the search engines.

Very true that you can bid your way to the top with PPC and with money. AND, it is "right now".

[cheche]

Hi Doug, Mel ...Mazy!!!!!!:) and y'all

I have to agree with everything said about PPC SE's - I too do not have a budget - (which actually makes one become very inventive!!! - no budget - a good thing!) but although I don't like the PPC's in principle - Somehow i have managed to get listed (at the top) in Looksmart and Goto without paying a SINGLE penny - how did you do that? you may ask.......the answer....I don't know...but hey! I'm not complaining!

hasta pronto!

Che Che

[glengara]

Strictly IMO, GoTo and Looksmart are different sides of the same coin, worthless in their own right, but very popular with many SEOs for the easy results available. We've made a stick to beat ourselves with.

[ihelpyou]

GOTo might be worth it now, but because of all the sneaky PPC's now, I would be leary of anyone else. Spedia is very busy recruiting all of them to join in with their scum software.

[highman]

Yep, we only use GoTo now, and mostly only on site launch (until the SEO kicks in) unless of course the ROI tracked during that period makes it valid ;)

[markymark]

Personally while I think there are issues to be resolved over how PPC results are labelled in search engines, I have no problem with the concept.

I think what we should really be discussing is how much difference there is between what PPC search results do and what we - as SEOs - do. Let's not kid ourselves, we are not trying to bring the most genuinely relevant, content heavy sites to the top of the search engines. What we are trying to do is get our clients to the top of the rankings. A very different thing altogether.

If clients pay us, then we do the job and the results follow. With PPC, their customers pay them and the results follow. In both cases, sites are paying to get to the top of the rankings.

I have often thought that the anti-PPC stance is a result of a 'if everyone can pay to come top of the rankings, then where does this leave SEO'.

[Advisor]

Personally while I think there are issues to be resolved over how PPC results are labelled in search engines, I have no problem with the concept.

Couldn't agree more! And this is where the real problem lies today. The search engines have found if they label the PPC results as ads, then way less people click on 'em. Which of course tells me that people don't want ads. But as long as they can get away with it, it appears that they're not going to start labeling them as ads until/unless they have to.

Let's not kid ourselves, we are not trying to bring the most genuinely relevant, content heavy sites to the top of the search engines.

Well, here's where I disagree with you. One of my jobs as an SEO is to help my clients create the best content for both the search engines and their prospects. What you suggest above makes it sound like SEOs simply want to trick the engines into thinking that their page is the most relevant. I'm sure that many, many SEOs out there attempt to do exactly that. However, those SEOs like myself that pride themselves on long-term rankings without having to tweak the site for years, do it by writing the most genuinely relevant content to the site.

One can play cat and mouse with the search engines forever if one does SEO any other way, in my opinion.

Jill

[MazY]

I'll second Jill there. (As per usual.)

We most certainly should be trying to bring the most relevant sites to the top.

Where those sites are not relevant then the role of the SEO is to make them relevant.

If I understand you correctly, Mark, you are saying that because the client is paying then we can ignore the content of the site on the premise that it is not really our concern, so long as the client is satisfied with the results? Hmmm. I can't hand on heart say that I would gain much personal pride from that.

So then would you do the same for a porn site? I wouldn't because it is not content that I personally want to help promote. Many clients do already have a reasonable degree of relevant content on their site anyway but just not in a search engine friendly manner.

In my opinion, it is the foolish SEO that forgets there is also a human reader to cater for. If a client is #1 in the rankings but his average readership lasts only a few seconds then I have failed to present his information attractively to both parties concerned.

[markymark]

Mazy and WebWhiz,

As you'll know from my previous posts, I too concentrate on content and not tricking search engines or this week's new fad.

I agree, Mazy, that our job is to make sites relevant and that the visitor is the most important factor (see that Tortoise school of SEO thread for my views on all this). However, I still maintain that the sites we optimize to gain high rankings are not necessarily the most relevant or 'best'.

There are plenty of sites on the web that are very strong in terms of content and relevance and any human visitor can see this. However, if these sites are not my clients, my job is to get a client in the same field higher up in the rankings than them. It is that simple. Now, I approach this from exactly the same perspective as both Mazy and webwhiz and, from the sounds of it, use the same basic techniques. But I am not kidding myself that by some strange coincidence the client paying me has - or even will have - the most relevant and highest quality content about that subject.

One example: I am optimising a web host, with variable results. One of the terms I am targeting is affordable web hosting. There are thousands of web hosts who fall into this category, some more affordable than my client. However, because this host's prices are not expensive compared to the market rate, I feel that affordable web hosting is a term worth targeting.

Nevertheless, it would be foolish to claim that because this host is my client, they really do offer the most affordable web hosting on the net. Now, if www2.google.com holds as the new index, I will have the 4th most affordable web hosting company on the net ;) But I don't believe they are even the 4th most affordable web hosting company on the Net, either.

[MazY]

Ah I see where you are coming from. According to the search engine, your web hosting site is in fact the 4th most relevant. That is fact. How the reader perceives it is, to a degree, pointless in this scenario, surely?

From the reader's perspective, the questions shall remain, I was looking for affordable web hosting, this site turned up at #4, does it give me what I was looking for? If it does then he or she is a happy bunny, your client should be a happy bunny and in fact, you should be a happy bunny too. If, however, it does not offer the visitor what he or she is looking for, by some pretty wild degree then that is another issue completely.

In terms of the search engines, if you are indeed approaching SEO in the same way as Jill and I then your client will indeed have the 4th most relevant content - according to that particular search engine, though perhaps not, as you highlight, the fourth most affordable web hosting on the web. However, that said, I struggle to believe that any search engine user thinks in that linear fashion -- that is listed fourth so it must be the fourth most affordable.

Surely, you look at what your client does offer exactly and then, as indicated by your response, you make a judgement that goes along the lines of "OK, perhaps amongst other things, he offers affordable web hosting, so we will highlight that part of the service."

I really do see the SEO role as very similar to the editor of a book. The author presents their work exactly as they wrote it. There are very few instances where that book will be published exactly as it is presented. It has to be grammar checked, correctly formatted for the particular style of reader and book and so forth. The content will remain essentially the same but with modifications to make it more reader friendly.

Sadly, this is a natural part of book publishing that has not become a natural part of web design. It should. This is certainly the niche that my own company went for and we are seeing a reward from it.

[Advisor]

What Mazy said...

Jill

[ihelpyou]

To me, you all seem to be right according to how each looks at it. I get the feeling that we all pretty much do the same thing. Problem is, the way we get their differs just a tad. Nothing wrong with that, just that we each may get to the same place in different ways.

We all want the visitor to have a good read. We all want the engine to have a good feed. :)

LOL

[Mel]

Hi All:

I have the feeling that this is one of those topics for which there is no 100% cut and dried answer.

The problem as I see lies in defining relevancy.

Relevancy from the search engines point of view is " I have 129 million records in my database and, according to my algorithm, this is how relevant they are for this particular keyword" Lots of qualifications there.

Relevancy from the point of view of the surfer is maybe "I want the site (or a collection of sites for me to choose from) that has the most, best, cheapest, most value (pick one) for this search term."

Relevancy from the point of view of the client is likely to be "I want my site on top"

In real world terms neither the search engine or the surfer is likely to come up with absolutely (say) the best value web hosting.

Even the most ethical SEOs (and we are among them surely?) can only work with the clients he has. Its a bit like being a lawyer (solicitor for those from the other side of the pond) - If you choose to take the work, you do the best for them that you can. It is almost a certainty that somewhere there is a site that is more relevant than the one you just put in the #1 spot, but you and your client are both happy.

It is also true that there is likely more relevancy in traditional SEs than PPC engines, but that's not to say there is no relevancy in PPCs.

If I have a very relevant and highranking site there is nothing to stop me from using PPC if that will improve my bottom line. In fact I have seen several SEOs who use PPC.

So on balance I agree with Marks premise that both SEOs and PPCengines have the same basic job to do, but also agree with Webwhiz and MazY that we have to make the sites we optimize the most relevant that we can.

And Yes if the PPC engines get too popular where will we be???

[Advisor]

What Mel said too...

Jill

[ihelpyou]

LOL. Me three.

[markymark]

Aw..c'mon, I don't want a consensus opinion just yet. Where's your sense of fun. But I agree with Mel, also. Particularly as he pretty much said what I was trying to.

Let's move this on, then. What effect will the continuing success of PPC have on our own industry ?

[Advisor]

I think it's really hard to say at this point, what effect PPC will have. If the engines start getting in trouble for not labeling the PPC ads as ads, it could be a big boon for us SEOs. If that law suit ever pans out, or is settled, that's what will happen. However, there doesn't seem to be much public outcry over this, as I guess most people just assumed top positions were bought from the get go anyway.

Perhaps we need to put Dougie on top of this to cause a big stink and get an MSNBC reporter to write a story??? Nobody seems to listen to Ralph Nader, but maybe they'd listen to Doug? :p

If the paid listings continue to not be labeled as such, we will all probably have to bite the bullet and start getting into that type of work. I personally have resisted it for so long that I feel it would take me forever to get up to speed and do not look forward to getting into it. I think I'd probably subcontract out that work. Anyone here who's really good at it, who'd like to apply to be my subcontractor?

Another thing that we will have to focus more on is Directory submissions. Optimization and rewriting of actual pages will become less necessary between directories and PPC. For now, as long as Google is still around and working like it is, there's still a need for good old-fashioned SEO. It's really up in the air how long it will last!

[Okay, I'm taking out my classified section...oh goodie...there's still jobs available flipping hamburgers at McD's!]

Jill

[ihelpyou]

I feel if the search engines displaying the PPC ads play in a fair way and clearly show visitors that the ad is "paid", then it will have no affect on what we do.

It could not be in the best interest of the major search engines to have only PPC ads in their listings. Would leave a whole lot of content rich sites out in the cold and make the engine not give the true picture of all content on the net. Lots of these content enriched sites are non-profit and would not pay to be listed.

[MazY]

Originally posted by markymark
What effect will the continuing success of PPC have on our own industry ?

<Looks over at Jill> You getting that "Deja Vu" feeling too?

Anyway - on to the question....

I believe quite strongly that PPC, as it stands today at least, cannot be called a success per se. Popular in some quarters perhaps, but not strictly successful.

Even if it did then there will always be an engine that offers an alternative. That is good business - finding a niche that people want to see filled. Internet and seach engine history is full of such alternatives. (Despite the fact that in the long run they always end up going with the others.)

On the other hand, I am starting to feel slightly uncomfortable at not giving the whole issue of PPC the attention that it perhaps warrants in readiness for the day that it does become a success, if indeed it does. I am still not convinced that it will as yet.

If it did, then SEO, as we know it today, and specifically for those that don't work with content as the prime factor, will find themselves struggling to say the least.

However, that said, I believe that content will always have its place, whether that be to a user or to a search engine. It may mean a divergence of skills but I don't think that it strictly means a death as such.

Those are my very loose thoughts on the subject as it stands at present anyway.

[glengara]

What me worry? I will when Y! takes its web page results from GT.

[ihelpyou]

oh, for a second there I could not figure out who GT was...... duh! :D

[Web Witch]

Good thread! PPC should inform that it's paid for advertising. I don't see them surviving, I’ll stick with SEO.

[lance_luke]

(Hi all, I'm new here)

I must take a contrary view on this topic. The PPC engines can be a very good choice for specific applications if - and only if - you keep a solid watch on your ROI.

-GoTo can rocket you to the top of AltaVista merely by getting in the top 5 bids; if you have a business (as I do) that has a large number of relevant search terms, this is often more efficient than optimizing a gateway page (or more difficult, an "excellent content" page) for each search term.
-Sprinks/About can put you in About.com, which can give you a well-qualified audience (although the actual placement on page ****s).
-Want to stay off enemies' fraud radar? Just don't bid outrageous amounts. If you're coming in comfortably in 3rd or 5th place, for a reasonable bid, there is little to lose by the couple of clicks an enemy could register before the antifraud software picks up. OTOH, if you are bidding $5/click, expect there to be a large incentive for unscrupulous competitors to figure how to nuke you.

Although I agree that PPC is less appealing aesthetically, it can be a very practical solution for driving traffic.

-Lance

[ihelpyou]

Welcome to the forums lance_luke! :hi:

As you know I am dead set against PPC engines in their entirety. I tried GoTo a long time ago just to see what I was up against, and hated it. Period. Would never do it again and would never help a site do it nor would I recommend it to a client or a site. Period.

Like you just posted, you talk about ROI which involves money. That is all you need for a PPC. Simply money. Nothing else is needed to be in the top 3 of results. How tough is that skill?

[Mel]

Hi Lance_Luke and welcome to the forums.

I would have to agree that PPc engines are starting to come of age if you use them to search for products. While they have a great following in the porno and gambling areas, I am starting to see more and more SEOs and Webdesigners paying high rates for GoTo especially.

Acutally one of the areas that we haven't discussed here much is which engines are good for what. For instance many feel that Yahoo only generaties traffic from relatively unsophistacated customers. Any Ideas on this gang?

[ihelpyou]

am starting to see more and more SEOs and Webdesigners paying high rates for GoTo
especially.
Gee, makes you wonder how an SEO who promises to get their clients high ranks, cannot get their very own site ranked the right way? How do people think that SEO could possibly help another site? These people have to use GoTo and MONEY because they cannot do it the SEO way. sheesh.

[JuniorHarris]

Welcome lance_luke!~ :hi:

I agree goto is the "poor-mans" optimization tool...as it only requires money!~:rolleyes:

[Web Witch]

:hi: lance_luke, welcome!

[lance_luke]

Hi all, and thanks for the warm welcome.

PPC doesn't require skill per se -- although familiarity and a bit of savvy will go a long way. Let me suggest the following points, based on a fictional business that consults about studio recording equipment:

1. If I bid on a single word that describes my product - let's say, "recording", I would get a huge number of impressions, and a likely large number of "noise" hits eating into my budget. Let's imagine it gets 100,000 impressions/month.
2. If I narrowed it down to "recording studio", I would be better off, and it might even be smart in this case (since people might not be looking directly for my services but they are definitely in the same field). Perhaps this would get only 5,000/month.
3. If I go whole hog, and bid on "recording studio equipment purchasing" or "recording studio equipment selection" or "4 track tape recorder comparisons" or some equally arcane but highly targeted phrases, I may only get 10 or 20 impressions per month on each phrase, but with a solid 10-20% clickthrough ratio and very highly qualified leads. The other nice thing about obscure terms is you are often bidding unchallenged, and even in a bidding war, it's only you against a couple others, as opposed to the many who would bid against you for "Recording studio."

You can use your marketing copywriting skills to craft great entry pages for particular PPC targets, at the same time using those pages as gateways for other traditional SEs. So skill does come into play.

I've also found good results with keeping a TIGHT rein on the budgets - don't let them auto-charge your card, dole it out in small increments and keep tabs.

PPC has its advantages. I can't imaging trying to use it for "search engine optimization," however. Too many searchers, too many competitors, not enough specificity. I don't know how margins are in your business, either, but unless your customers are worth quite a bit to you, it might not be worth it to capture 1 or 2 leads per search term per month.

Also, PPCs generally feel seedier and scummier than e.g. Google's adwords, probably because it's a bit of a scummy business, taking bribes for placements.

LL

[ihelpyou]

Very good points Lance Luke!

Some of them are the basis for good SEO work as well. The fact that you should target your audience with terms that are specific also works very well with what a good SEO does.

[ihelpyou]

I just saw a post by an SEO who is admittingly and Proudly saying he hosts "doorway" pages that lead to his clients sites and buys keywords from GoTo. Now that GoTo is cracking down on relevancy for keywords bought he is upset with this.

sheesh. SEO people come from all different ways of thinking and ALL different ways of Spamming.

[Advisor]

Poor guy...I really feel for him ;)

J

[ihelpyou]

LOL. yea, and he was soooo proud of this that he wanted to tell publically that he was spamming for his clients.

[The-Bom.com]

I am responding to the Question About PPC performance.
My input is it brings traffic in most cases but I haven't seen any sales.

[ihelpyou]

Welcome to the forums The-Bom! :hi:

Thanks for the info! Make sure you stop in from time to time to give us updates, etc.

[Web Witch]

Howdy The-Bom:hi:

[The-Bom.com]

A Idaho Howdy right back at you.

[Blue]

Uhhh........Like............Hi, The-Bom!



























(From California) :rolleyes:

[The-Bom.com]

Hello! Hope your'e Having a good Turkey Day!