The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless

Steven Wagenheim · 10-04-2010, 04:48 PM

Well, I've been doing a bit of experimenting with the new Google keywords
tool since they deep sixed the legacy tool and my final verdict is in.

It's worthless.

I have no idea what Google was thinking but I find this tool totally useless.

I might was well use Wordtracker for all the good this piece of crap is.

What do the rest of you think?

I'm making a poll to see how we stand.

Marhelper · 10-04-2010, 05:00 PM

I have to go with poor as I miss the old interface. Why fix what isn't broken?

Jacob Martus · 10-04-2010, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

Well, I've been doing a bit of experimenting with the new Google keywords
tool since they deep sixed the legacy tool and my final verdict is in.

It's worthless.

I have no idea what Google was thinking but I find this tool totally useless.

I might was well use Wordtracker for all the good this piece of crap is.

What do the rest of you think?

I'm making a poll to see how we stand.

It's closer to accurate than the legacy tool was for keywords that I rank #1 for. Not 100% accurate but there are lots of keywords that the search volume was grossly overestimated for before and now they are much closer to being accurate.

Legacy tool had lots of keywords showing much higher search volume than they actually had.

giseo · 10-04-2010, 05:03 PM

why worthless?

Mike Anthony · 10-04-2010, 05:23 PM

Its good. You just need to get used to the new interface and learn the tricks to get it to give you what you need. Plus I am much more comfortable getting low numbers that are more reliable than higher numbers that were ridiculously off.

Clyde · 10-04-2010, 05:28 PM

It's good and def. more accurate but still too buggy to be out of Beta IMO.

The Matcy-type filter for example, doesn't work most of the time.
Logging in using various accounts will give different results for the same keywords.
etc

inter123 · 10-04-2010, 06:43 PM

I think most people are going to dsiagree with Mr Steven Wagenheim. The tool is more accurate then the one before. In the old tool, you would see it give 27,000 or any other large number for a keyword, spend time ranking for it, only to discover 10 visitors a day. At least this one is more correct with the number of searchers.

bluenetworx · 10-04-2010, 07:42 PM

I find it worthless at the moment, its thrown me off a lot, I am now trying to figure out what is a good volume to aim for. I used to think 1000+ exact matches was good, not I am not sure and am thinking 500 is ok with this new data. From what I can gather the figures are about 1/3 what they used to be.

Any thoughts?

Dellco · 10-04-2010, 08:01 PM

I find it next to worthless, because all my traffic and rankings simply do not corroborate at all with this tool. Not even close. None.

Some are too low, while others are way, way too high.

There is a keyword where it says (local) Searches are 14,000 a month; well, a 2nd position ranking I have for it only gets 3000 (global) UVs a month....for years. There is a very huge difference there. And furthermore, this keyword is also number 2 at Bing/Yahoo and in all the international Google SERPs.

There is another where it says the keyword only gets 73 local searches a month, well, this one gets a few hundred - at position 5.

So my verdict is: Almost worthless. The worst part is, many software base their numbers from this tool, although you won't find them exactly the same either.

Jacob Martus · 10-05-2010, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dellco

There is a keyword where it says (local) Searches are 14,000 a month; well, a 2nd position ranking I have for it only gets 3000 (global) UVs a month....for years. There is a very huge difference there. And furthermore, this keyword is also number 2 at Bing/Yahoo and in all the international Google SERPs.

The #2 spot usually gets around 20 to 25% of the search traffic. So
14,000 x .25 = 3500. That's pretty damn close to how much you're getting. So in that example, the keyword tool is right on.

Texjd · 10-05-2010, 07:03 AM

The new interface does suck compared to the old version. Part of it is we are all used to the old one. But on any given day the display is wierd and I get tired of fooling with it.

The numbers have never been accurate, using history for future results will never be dead on and it's impossible to measure. Every keyword can have it's unique up and downs plus google will tell you that it's just a guide.

In adwords it's totally off in numbers and cpc. Just ran a new test for a client and tracked the differences and it was totally off. Had a very healthy budget so I could go for the top three positions and it did come close on one of three keywords in cpc and numbers but missed the other two by a country mile.

Always use multiple sources for counts (that means other search engines too) and don't rely on exact numbers. Just go for the terms that get good numbers from all sources.

Every day can be a new day on the Internet so don't get caught up in exact numbers.

Dellco · 10-05-2010, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacob Martus

The #2 spot usually gets around 20 to 25% of the search traffic. So
14,000 x .25 = 3500. That's pretty damn close to how much you're getting. So in that example, the keyword tool is right on.

That 14,000 is just US local search, the global search is supposedly 50,000.

Notwithstanding traffic from Yahoo/Bing....

In almost three years, I have never exceeded 3500 uniques/month. The proof is in the pudding.

Mark Brian · 10-05-2010, 08:07 AM

Regardless of data accuracy, I prefer the simplicity of the old KW tool.

Jacob Martus · 10-05-2010, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dellco

That 14,000 is just US local search, the global search is supposedly 50,000.

Notwithstanding traffic from Yahoo/Bing....

In almost three years, I have never exceeded 3500 uniques/month. The proof is in the pudding.

Do you use webmaster tools? And if so, what CTR are you getting and how many impressions are showing?

For most of the keywords where I rank, webmaster tools is fairly accurate numbers with regards to the keyword tool. Not 100% accurate but better than they were on the legacy interface.

Steve Razz · 10-05-2010, 05:53 PM

I’m trying to get the New Google Keyword Tool to match MNF5 and or MS. Even with the options set for United States and verified on all three tools there still seems to be 25% to 70% variance (more with MNF5). All set for Exact Match, Local Monthly searches, United States Only.

I figured most keyword utilities get there data from Google so why would there be such a difference?

What sucks is there is no consistency to the numbers, it’s not like you can just divide the data by 4 and move on - there’s just no making sense of it.

I actually found a great keyword to target, MS showing 98 local searches a day (aprox 3K/month) MNF5 shows 16K/month and Google keyword tool shows 7600/month, the opposite of most other results, was expecting Google to be in the low 100's. I just don’t get it.

What are you experienced folks using these days to assess keyword data??

Jacob Martus · 10-05-2010, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Razz

I’m trying to get the New Google Keyword Tool to match MNF5 and or MS. Even with the options set for United States and verified on all three tools there still seems to be 25% to 70% variance (more with MNF5). All set for Exact Match, Local Monthly searches, United States Only.

I figured most keyword utilities get there data from Google so why would there be such a difference?

What sucks is there is no consistency to the numbers, it’s not like you can just divide the data by 4 and move on - there’s just no making sense of it.

I actually found a great keyword to target, MS showing 98 local searches a day (aprox 3K/month) MNF5 shows 16K/month and Google keyword tool shows 7600/month, the opposite of most other results, was expecting Google to be in the low 100's. I just don’t get it.

What are you experienced folks using these days to assess keyword data??

Use Google keyword tool. Even if it's inaccurate, it's still the most reputable source to get your data from.

And for nearly all of the keywords where I rank, keyword tool is very close to accurate. I like the new tool. It's much better than the old one IMO.

Lozzer100 · 11-15-2010, 01:18 PM

Hi Guys

I agree with the post above - I like the new tool, especially the accuracy and layout. Surely it is easy to use?!

I found a great low competition keyword with 3,000 exact monthly searches about 3 weeks ago, built a new site and had it ranking on page one a couple of weeks later. So far I've made 15 sales from it - with a keyword that was easier to find than with the old interface.

Just my two pennies worth :-)

Cheers!

Loz

View Poll Results: What Do You Think Of The New Google Keyword Tool?
Great	4	12.12%
Good	9	27.27%
Fair	4	12.12%
Poor	8	24.24%
Worthless	8	24.24%
Voters: 33. You may not vote on this poll

10-04-2010, 04:48 PM	#1
Steven Wagenheim Content & Copywriting Wiz War Room Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Roselle, NJ, USA Posts: 16,405 Blog Entries: 11 Thanks: 1,551 Thanked 6,304 Times in 2,349 Posts Social Networking	The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless Well, I've been doing a bit of experimenting with the new Google keywords tool since they deep sixed the legacy tool and my final verdict is in. It's worthless. I have no idea what Google was thinking but I find this tool totally useless. I might was well use Wordtracker for all the good this piece of crap is. What do the rest of you think? I'm making a poll to see how we stand.
	My Rubber Water Musical Facebook Fan Page Of Original Tunes The 2nd Best Newsletter On The Web Next To Paul Myers Talk Biz News...Please See Paul's Sig For A Link To It

10-04-2010, 05:00 PM	#2
Marhelper Senior Warrior Member War Room Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 3,186 Thanks: 226 Thanked 237 Times in 184 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless I have to go with poor as I miss the old interface. Why fix what isn't broken?
	Get on Page 1 of Google Quickly ... EMD Rocket Fuel thinking about abortion

10-04-2010, 05:03 PM	#4
giseo HyperActive Warrior Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 182 Thanks: 2 Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless why worthless?
	Tired about blogging about tedious subjects like blue widgets and four slice toasters? Learn how to have fun and profit blogging about a continually growing massive multi-billion industry. Find out how to do it for only $5 here!

10-04-2010, 05:23 PM	#5
Mike Anthony SEO D'Artagnan War Room Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 4,980 Thanks: 476 Thanked 1,090 Times in 701 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless Its good. You just need to get used to the new interface and learn the tricks to get it to give you what you need. Plus I am much more comfortable getting low numbers that are more reliable than higher numbers that were ridiculously off.
	The World's only Full ongoing, no limit, no question unanswered Mentorship on Building powerful SEO Networks reopened by popular demand for a short time.

10-04-2010, 05:28 PM	#6
Clyde Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 909 Thanks: 53 Thanked 92 Times in 81 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless It's good and def. more accurate but still too buggy to be out of Beta IMO. The Matcy-type filter for example, doesn't work most of the time. Logging in using various accounts will give different results for the same keywords. etc
	Generate Unlimited Number of Micro Niche Keywords, Multi-threaded EMD Finder PLUS More! 50% OFF WSO.

10-04-2010, 06:43 PM	#7
inter123 Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 872 Thanks: 117 Thanked 42 Times in 37 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless I think most people are going to dsiagree with Mr Steven Wagenheim. The tool is more accurate then the one before. In the old tool, you would see it give 27,000 or any other large number for a keyword, spend time ranking for it, only to discover 10 visitors a day. At least this one is more correct with the number of searchers.

10-04-2010, 07:42 PM	#8
bluenetworx HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 199 Thanks: 10 Thanked 22 Times in 21 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless I find it worthless at the moment, its thrown me off a lot, I am now trying to figure out what is a good volume to aim for. I used to think 1000+ exact matches was good, not I am not sure and am thinking 500 is ok with this new data. From what I can gather the figures are about 1/3 what they used to be. Any thoughts?
	Affiliate Marketing

10-04-2010, 08:01 PM	#9
Dellco HyperActive Warrior Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 447 Thanks: 33 Thanked 69 Times in 62 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless I find it next to worthless, because all my traffic and rankings simply do not corroborate at all with this tool. Not even close. None. Some are too low, while others are way, way too high. There is a keyword where it says (local) Searches are 14,000 a month; well, a 2nd position ranking I have for it only gets 3000 (global) UVs a month....for years. There is a very huge difference there. And furthermore, this keyword is also number 2 at Bing/Yahoo and in all the international Google SERPs. There is another where it says the keyword only gets 73 local searches a month, well, this one gets a few hundred - at position 5. So my verdict is: Almost worthless. The worst part is, many software base their numbers from this tool, although you won't find them exactly the same either.

10-05-2010, 07:03 AM	#11
Texjd HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: , , . Posts: 298 Thanks: 0 Thanked 30 Times in 25 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless The new interface does suck compared to the old version. Part of it is we are all used to the old one. But on any given day the display is wierd and I get tired of fooling with it. The numbers have never been accurate, using history for future results will never be dead on and it's impossible to measure. Every keyword can have it's unique up and downs plus google will tell you that it's just a guide. In adwords it's totally off in numbers and cpc. Just ran a new test for a client and tracked the differences and it was totally off. Had a very healthy budget so I could go for the top three positions and it did come close on one of three keywords in cpc and numbers but missed the other two by a country mile. Always use multiple sources for counts (that means other search engines too) and don't rely on exact numbers. Just go for the terms that get good numbers from all sources. Every day can be a new day on the Internet so don't get caught up in exact numbers.
	Computer Problems? Fix It Yourself With Our Utilities! Repairing Windows XP

10-05-2010, 08:07 AM	#13
Mark Brian Spartan Warrior War Room Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: PH Posts: 906 Thanks: 124 Thanked 145 Times in 73 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless Regardless of data accuracy, I prefer the simplicity of the old KW tool.

10-05-2010, 05:53 PM	#15
Steve Razz Active Warrior Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 31 Thanks: 1 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless I’m trying to get the New Google Keyword Tool to match MNF5 and or MS. Even with the options set for United States and verified on all three tools there still seems to be 25% to 70% variance (more with MNF5). All set for Exact Match, Local Monthly searches, United States Only. I figured most keyword utilities get there data from Google so why would there be such a difference? What sucks is there is no consistency to the numbers, it’s not like you can just divide the data by 4 and move on - there’s just no making sense of it. I actually found a great keyword to target, MS showing 98 local searches a day (aprox 3K/month) MNF5 shows 16K/month and Google keyword tool shows 7600/month, the opposite of most other results, was expecting Google to be in the low 100's. I just don’t get it. What are you experienced folks using these days to assess keyword data??

11-15-2010, 01:18 PM	#17
Lozzer100 Loz James War Room Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 107 Thanks: 75 Thanked 133 Times in 14 Posts	Re: The Verdict Is In...New Google Keyword Tool Is Worthless Hi Guys I agree with the post above - I like the new tool, especially the accuracy and layout. Surely it is easy to use?! I found a great low competition keyword with 3,000 exact monthly searches about 3 weeks ago, built a new site and had it ranking on page one a couple of weeks later. So far I've made 15 sales from it - with a keyword that was easier to find than with the old interface. Just my two pennies worth :-) Cheers! Loz