22 replies
  • PPC/SEM
  • |
Hey ,

Which gives a better ROI and Reach in term of ads.
and which search engine have good converting traffic.

Currently im using facebook ads.
Now i want to switch to Adword or Bing.

Thanks
#adword #bing
  • Profile picture of the author dburk
    Hi BurhanSafiOfficial,

    The best network for ROI can vary from niche to niche, and from offer to offer, so you must test to find out. Since ROI depends a great deal upon how you manage the campaigns, a lot depends on your management skills. Because AdWords has far greater reach you are most often going to be able to achieve the highest ROI on AdWords, but this may not be true for ever niche, so test to verify.

    As far as reach, no other network comes close to the reach of AdWords, it is many times greater than Bing. AdWords is the undisputed leader in reach. The second largest search network as far as reach is Youtube, which has greater reach than Bing, Facebook, and Yahoo combined.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9825408].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author expmrb
      As, Adwords have greater reach then Bing. It will obviously have a good ROI. But it also depends on the type of clients you are looking for so you must test both of them in order to get a clear view.
      Signature
      SEO Motionz Forum - A Digital Marketing Forum
      Forum Management & Promotion, SEO Tips, Money Making tips etc.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9825973].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeTX
    I split tested both networks couple months ago and found out that Bing gives me slightly better ROI. But there are some products that just won't work with Bing traffic.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9827327].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kingofthesouth
    Originally Posted by BurhanSafiOfficial View Post

    Hey ,

    Which gives a better ROI and Reach in term of ads.
    and which search engine have good converting traffic.

    Currently im using facebook ads.
    Now i want to switch to Adword or Bing.

    Thanks

    Depends on what you are marketing. If the keywords have high competition you will pay a pretty penny for each click. Bing would be the better choice if you wanted to save money and the leads convert just as well as Google.
    There are other alternative and one you may want to look into is AdClickMedia.com
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9827511].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author johnben1444
    Bing is cheaper but i haven't gotten any substantial result from it.

    Anyday anytime i will give up anything for Adword.
    It's a pretty cool way to build your business REAL fast if you have the skills and right budget.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9827548].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bg10
    Adwords is the best but they are very picky as to what you can do there and very fast to shut you down. Bing will work with you and you can call them and get yourself out of trouble most times.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9828471].message }}
  • Thank you so much everyone.

    It helped me alot in clearing my views.

    Appreciated
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9829684].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author whland
    Adwords is probably your best bet for a ROI. As I believe they have more reach than bing.

    If you could afford to it probably wouldn't hurt to use both of them.

    But if not then I would go with adwords.
    Signature
    WebMasterBabble.com Webmaster Forum
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9858000].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sbwebmaster
    Use both if you can. But at the end of the day, all you really care about is the conversions/ROI.

    Generally, Adwords is more expensive than Bing Ads, but Adwords also has more traffic volume. You can't really say one has better traffic than the other because the audience is different between Microsoft and Google.

    More in detail: Read the differences between Adwords and Bing Ads
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9864072].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author janiman
    I,m shocked that you are switching from Facebook ads to Adword or Bing but its you decision. In my opinion Adword is better ROI then Bing.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9865299].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mrjosco
    Just by reading these comments you can tell that 90% of the people commenting have no idea what they are saying.

    Anyone who says "My opinion is that X has better ROI than Y" obviously has no idea what ROI means.

    Anyone who says "X has a bigger reach and therefore a bigger ROI" obviously has no idea what ROI means.

    First, if you were one of the people who responded with one of two messages above, lets learn what ROI is.

    ROI = RETURN ON INVESTMENT [(Money gained from investment-cost of investment)/cost of investment]

    For example, if you spent $10 to drive traffic and that traffic produced $20 in profit, then your ROI would be 1 ($20profit-$10cost/$10cost)

    Notice, it is a ratio - which means scale is irrelevant. If BING brings in $20 profit at a cost of $10 investment and Google brings in $2000 profit at a cost of $1000, which has higher ROI? Neither. They are equal!



    Now, you might begin to realize - how can anyone know what investment brings my own site the biggest return? How can I know which investment brings my site the biggest return?

    The answer to the first question is - they can't! Reach is irrelevant. Opinion is irrelevant. Their own personal experiences, even, are irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is results. Which means the second question has a simple answer too. You can't know which brings a better ROI until you test and see.

    To know, definitively, which has a better ROI you would need to use both and set up controlled tests. You would need to track which brings traffic, how much the traffic from that source costs and how much the traffic from that sources converts, and how many $'s per order that traffic produces.

    Take a note of anyone who suggests one has a better ROI than the other because of how much reach they provide and/or their opinion and stop listening to those peoples advice. They are clueless.
    Signature

    Vintage and Retro Shirts from Vinretro

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9867960].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Originally Posted by mrjosco View Post

      Just by reading these comments you can tell that 90% of the people commenting have no idea what they are saying.

      Anyone who says "My opinion is that X has better ROI than Y" obviously has no idea what ROI means.

      Anyone who says "X has a bigger reach and therefore a bigger ROI" obviously has no idea what ROI means.

      First, if you were one of the people who responded with one of two messages above, lets learn what ROI is.

      ROI = RETURN ON INVESTMENT [(Money gained from investment-cost of investment)/cost of investment]

      For example, if you spent $10 to drive traffic and that traffic produced $20 in profit, then your ROI would be 1 ($20profit-$10cost/$10cost)

      Notice, it is a ratio - which means scale is irrelevant. If BING brings in $20 profit at a cost of $10 investment and Google brings in $2000 profit at a cost of $1000, which has higher ROI? Neither. They are equal!



      Now, you might begin to realize - how can anyone know what investment brings my own site the biggest return? How can I know which investment brings my site the biggest return?

      The answer to the first question is - they can't! Reach is irrelevant. Opinion is irrelevant. Their own personal experiences, even, are irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is results. Which means the second question has a simple answer too. You can't know which brings a better ROI until you test and see.

      To know, definitively, which has a better ROI you would need to use both and set up controlled tests. You would need to track which brings traffic, how much the traffic from that source costs and how much the traffic from that sources converts, and how many $'s per order that traffic produces.

      Take a note of anyone who suggests one has a better ROI than the other because of how much reach they provide and/or their opinion and stop listening to those peoples advice. They are clueless.
      Hi mrjosco,

      While I agree on much of what you wrote in your post, I will disagree with you on what seemed to be one of your main points regarding "reach". Reach is indeed important to achieving the highest possible ROI. And just as important in achieving the highest total profit, which in my opinion is a far more important metric than ROI.

      Which would you rather have?
      A) $10,000 per month in total profit with a 120% ROI?
      Or
      B) $500 per month in profit with a 270% ROI?

      That answer is easy for most marketers, no matter how bad their math. It is easy to see that $10,000 is much more than $500, ROI be damned. Yet we see so many new marketers get hung up on the lesser important metric of ROI, at the expense of total profit.

      When you have much greater reach you are more easily able to target that smallest segment that has the highest ROI. So while you might only get a few customers per month at the highest ROI level on AdWords, you might get those same customers at the rate of only a few a year on Bing. That means there will be many months where your customers with the highest potential ROI are not even reached on Bing. Greater reach means more opportunities to reach your smallest segments, therefore it is generally more likely to reach a greater number of those high ROI customers each month on AdWords. Again, this is not true in every niche, so you must test verify for your particular niche.

      Key takeaways:
      • Reach (or "scale)" is very important for optimizing your PPC campaign's performance.
      • Total profit is more important metric than ROI for optimizing your campaign's performance (again, "scale", as you put it, plays an important role in the total profit you may earn).

      HTH,
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9868392].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author mrjosco
        It doesn't help, because it shows a lack of understanding in terms of fundamental financial principles.

        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

        Hi mrjosco,

        Reach is indeed important to achieving the highest possible ROI. And just as important in achieving the highest total profit, which in my opinion is a far more important metric than ROI.

        Which would you rather have?
        A) $10,000 per month in total profit with a 120% ROI?
        Or
        B) $500 per month in profit with a 270% ROI?

        That answer is easy for most marketers, no matter how bad their math. It is easy to see that $10,000 is much more than $500, ROI be damned. Yet we see so many new marketers get hung up on the lesser important metric of ROI, at the expense of total profit.

        ,
        Your question is irrelevant. You aren't talking about ROI, you are talking about net profit. Do I want the higher net profit? Of course I do. But does that mean the higher net profit is giving the best ROI? No - in fact, it isn't giving the best ROI at all.

        The question: "Which gives the best ROI" the answer: "B".

        Why is this important?

        Because the first marketing dollars should be spent on investments with the highest ROI, and then you move down the list of options as your ROI decreases (but you still remain net profitable) using your last funds for the lowest ROI options.

        Of course, you know you aren't talking about ROI because you even say "ROI be damned" - but then you don't even disagree with me in terms of reach having nothing to do with ROI?

        I am so lost and confused because you wrote an entire post about how you disagreed with my (factual, not opinion) take on ROI and yet you admit in your own post that you aren't even talking about ROI.

        So why are we answering with 'net profit' answers in a thread that is discussing ROI?

        Why am I so aggressive about this, you might ask? Because EVERY SINGLE thread is filled with a bunch of thoughtless, unrelated platitudes that have nothing to do with the original question. Half of them are just outsourced O Desk junkies who have been hired by some lazy marketer to make stupid comments so they can squeeze a forum signature link in their vapid and useless posts. The other half are so clueless they don't even realize they aren't addressing the issue.

        Pro Tips for effective forum usage:

        1. Read the original post
        2. Read the reply's
        3. Reply, if necessary, with something that is actually related to the thread topic.

        Don't argue that a bigger net profit is better than a smaller one (duh) when the topic is about ROI and not net profit...
        Signature

        Vintage and Retro Shirts from Vinretro

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9868660].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author dburk
          Originally Posted by mrjosco View Post

          It doesn't help, because it shows a lack of understanding in terms of fundamental financial principles.



          Your question is irrelevant. You aren't talking about ROI, you are talking about net profit. Do I want the higher net profit? Of course I do. But does that mean the higher net profit is giving the best ROI? No - in fact, it isn't giving the best ROI at all.

          The question: "Which gives the best ROI" the answer: "B".

          Why is this important?

          Because the first marketing dollars should be spent on investments with the highest ROI, and then you move down the list of options as your ROI decreases (but you still remain net profitable) using your last funds for the lowest ROI options.

          Of course, you know you aren't talking about ROI because you even say "ROI be damned" - but then you don't even disagree with me in terms of reach having nothing to do with ROI?

          I am so lost and confused because you wrote an entire post about how you disagreed with my (factual, not opinion) take on ROI and yet you admit in your own post that you aren't even talking about ROI.

          So why are we answering with 'net profit' answers in a thread that is discussing ROI?

          Why am I so aggressive about this, you might ask? Because EVERY SINGLE thread is filled with a bunch of thoughtless, unrelated platitudes that have nothing to do with the original question. Half of them are just outsourced O Desk junkies who have been hired by some lazy marketer to make stupid comments so they can squeeze a forum signature link in their vapid and useless posts. The other half are so clueless they don't even realize they aren't addressing the issue.

          Pro Tips for effective forum usage:

          1. Read the original post
          2. Read the reply's
          3. Reply, if necessary, with something that is actually related to the thread topic.

          Don't argue that a bigger net profit is better than a smaller one (duh) when the topic is about ROI and not net profit...
          Hi mrjosco,

          I'm sorry I must have not expressed my point clearly enough.

          I did read the entire thread before posting, I believe my point of disagreement with your reply was directly on topic, it related to "reach" as a factor in achieving high ROI.

          To clarify some points that I had left out for the sake of brevity:

          I agree that "reach" is not used as part of the formula to calculate ROI, which seemed to be the point you were trying to make in your original reply (please correct me if I'm wrong). However, it is my opinion that "reach" is an important factor to consider in selecting an ad network that one might achieve the highest ROI, as well as the "optimal" ROI. I believe I have already expressed the reasons for this in my previous post so I will not repeat what was already posted.

          The OP asked:
          Which gives a better ROI and Reach in term of ads.
          and which search engine have good converting traffic.
          You asked:
          Originally Posted by mrjosco View Post

          So why are we answering with 'net profit' answers in a thread that is discussing ROI?
          Because I believe it is highly relevant to the question of "better ROI". Please allow me to explain why it is crucial to achieving optimal ROI.

          "Better" ROI doesn't necessarily imply "highest" ROI, it could also mean "optimal ROI" which rarely, if ever, is the highest ROI for a marketing campaign. I intended to steer the conversation in a direction the would be the most useful for the OP, as well as other forum readers interested in this topic, by focusing on an answer that encourages "optimal ROI", over highest ROI, as the "better ROI". This seems pretty relevant in my opinion. Perhaps we have a different understanding of the term "relevant"?

          So when you say
          Originally Posted by mrjosco View Post

          You aren't talking about ROI, you are talking about net profit. Do I want the higher net profit? Of course I do. But does that mean the higher net profit is giving the best ROI? No - in fact, it isn't giving the best ROI at all.
          Again, I will disagree.

          In my opinion the "best" ROI is the one that gives the highest profit, not the highest percentage (unless you are being paid based upon winning a contest of who can get the highest percentage - I actually participated in and won such a contest in the past). Please note that the OP specifically asked for the "better ROI and reach", in the same sentence, which indicates he understands that ROI multiplied by "reach" equals total profit.

          Apparently in this context you seem to agree that higher total profit is "better" if I understood the following statement "Do I want the higher net profit? Of course I do."

          I hope that clarifies my point and that we can find grounds for mutual agreement on both the relevancy and utility of the points expressed.

          By the way, I do understand and share your frustrations with the massive amounts "thoughtless, unrelated platitudes " that pollute the Warrior forum.

          Now to your comment:
          "It doesn't help, because it shows a lack of understanding in terms of fundamental financial principles."

          Please tell me what specific "fundamental financial principles" you are referring to? I have managed to collect a few principles over my 30yr career in marketing and I am always eager to add to that collection.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9869070].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Allset800
    The fact that Google’s brand name has become interchangeable with the word “search” in the context of the Web is a big problem for Microsoft Corp. It launched Bing in 2009, with hopes the name would elicit association with finding the right answer (like buzzing in on a game show). Today Google search still dominates the Canadian market, with 67 per cent market share according to comScore Inc. Bing has improved Microsoft’s market share since replacing its Live Search brand, but still doesn’t claim even half of what Google delivers.

    So when deciding where to advertise online, it seems like Google is the obvious choice for marketers. It has a larger audience, so it can deliver more clicks to a given keyword campaign, right? Well not in every situation, it turns out. Plus, there are certain circumstances where Bing Ads can cost less than Google’s AdWords and still get you the same results.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9873201].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author PriyaN12
    Adword is pretty cool one ....
    Bing is cheaper but i the result is not upto the mark .
    Signature

    Money Making Without Investment

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9874694].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author martworld
    Adwords has greater reach but bing has better ROI simply because there CPC is very low. We can run paydayloan and insurance campaigns with bing at very reasonable CPC which is not the case in adwords.

    Secondly, bing provides various coupons and vouchers which can be used by newbies to test their campaigns. Adwords do provide the vouchers but with conditions.
    Signature
    Bing $100 Coupons, Adwords $100 coupons, Windows 7,8 and 10 Keys available. Visit: https://bestaccounts.net
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9877236].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author leilapearse
    Banned
    That would solely depend on your target niche. But wel, as far as reach, no other network comes close to AdWords, it is many times greater than Bing. AdWords is the undisputed leader in reach so it obviously have a good ROI too.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9879111].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RiseAboveAll
    I run several campaigns for law firms and use both or 3 (yahoo), just because bing is still installed on almost laptop and desktops today are installed with it. but those are the older folks who dont switch over to google as their home page. the ROI is good on microsoft advertising
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9883245].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jamesperez
    Banned
    Adword is best & Bing is good. Google is used by everyone but bing is not much.
    So your first target will be google, Then others...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9885404].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author solemar
    I suggest You to use Bing Ads: Adwords ismore expensive and don't approve a lot of kind of ads.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886278].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ankushkohli
    Adword is the best and Bing is good however if you want to get good ROI and build your business faster then Adwords is the tool to select.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10642014].message }}

Trending Topics