115 replies
  • PPC/SEM
  • |
Im looking to advertise my web design business. I am leaning towards PPC but don't know where to start. I would prefer to hire a company to do my PPC for me. Any recommendations? The other option is SEO but I don't want to wait around for rankings. It seems like PPC will be good for immediate results. What are your thoughts? Thanks
#ppc #seo
  • Profile picture of the author Holmstrom
    Hi Geek, my opinion that you do both. SEO and PPC. If you have some kind of budget, go with Bing ppc platform, its easy to start. You can do it by yourself. Then create Facebook page for your site and use fb ads, promote your posts.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559003].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by Geek3000 View Post

    What are your thoughts?
    (i) I don't do either (I've done PPC with some success, in the past);

    (ii) In general, PPC is far quicker and more efficient than SEO;

    (iii) In general, PPC is far more secure and reliable than SEO;

    (iv) In general, PPC brings far better quality traffic than SEO (Goodle AdWords might be an exception to that, for obvious reasons);

    (v) In general, SEO traffic is a bad idea, given any choice, for all the reasons explained here, among others;

    (vi) For myself, I'd always much prefer to handle my own PPC and learn a valuable new skill than to outsource, be dependent on someone else, and not learn much.

    Just my perspectives.

    .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559034].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jan roos
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      (i) I don't do either (I've done PPC with some success, in the past);

      (ii) In general, PPC is far quicker and more efficient than SEO;

      (iii) In general, PPC is far more secure and reliable than SEO;

      (iv) In general, PPC brings far better quality traffic than SEO (Goodle AdWords might be an exception to that, for obvious reasons);

      (v) In general, SEO traffic is a bad idea, given any choice, for all the reasons explained here, among others;

      (vi) For myself, I'd always much prefer to handle my own PPC and learn a valuable new skill than to outsource, be dependent on someone else, and not learn much.

      Just my perspectives.

      .
      What she said.
      Signature

      I'll teach you how to make money like a Mamba.

      Sign up for the free money mambas newsletter!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559037].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Simon Anthony
    Originally Posted by Geek3000 View Post

    Im looking to advertise my web design business. I am leaning towards PPC but don't know where to start. I would prefer to hire a company to do my PPC for me. Any recommendations? The other option is SEO but I don't want to wait around for rankings. It seems like PPC will be good for immediate results. What are your thoughts? Thanks
    Just about every internet marketer uses paid traffic, and for good reason. It's virtually traffic on tap and very targeted if you do it right. It starts working immediately for you 24/7. SEO can take ages to have an effect and it's very unreliable, and there's no guarantees that you'll even stay in the rankings from one week to the next.

    As has been said above, look at Bing ads, Facebook ads.
    Also try banner ads. Personally I haven't used it, but there's a site called "buysellads (dot) com" that matches people up with website owners who have advertising space for sale on their sites. Obviously it's up to you to check on average number of visitors and choosing the best space on their site for your ad.

    With your business I'd definitely go for both methods. Start SEO and outsource that part, but get sales rolling in now and start testing your sales pages using PPC.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559096].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JensSteyaert
    I agree with going for ppc instead of Seo. The keywords you will want to rank will be nearly impossible. PPC will give you an mmediate insight in how well your site / sales page converts and if you have managed a profitable campaign you can rinse and repeat and scale pretty fast.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559111].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeMiller
    I don't completely agree with advices to ignore SEO altogether. On the long run you can work on ranking for the keywords that are most profitable in your PPC campaigns, but that's surely for the long run.
    You can see some WSOs with magic methods that will rank you even for highly competitive keywords overnight... ohh boy, if it was just so simple

    SEO is a lot of work and takes time, while on the other hand PPC is quick, and gives you basically immediate results.

    With SEO you only have some partial control over your appearance in SERPs, while with PPC you fully control every aspect of it, including the ad copy, which is very important.

    One more thing you always have to consider: you said that you don't want to wait for SEO results. Let me rephrase that. If you wait, you pay, a lot... time is money, and if you want to wait for unsure SEO results, you miss out on business and profit done today. You can go for SEO as an addition to PPC, but you surely can't ignore PPC altogether.
    Signature
    Dominate LinkedIn, establish yourself as an expert, generate a constant stream of high-paying clients and grow your business:
    Learn how to unlock LinkedIn’s full potential!


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559219].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BritishMike
    Do a Google search for 'Intelligent PPC'

    PPC is quicker but you stand to lose a lot of money if you don't employ the right campaign settings and tactics from the start. The best thing to do is disregard the advice you get from any Adwords rep as they will be encouraging you to generate more clicks with no real regard for your back-end conversions (the number of web design enquiries you get).

    I have 10 years PPC experience so let me know if you want a Skype chat about all of this.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559232].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BritishMike
    Also, bear in mind that the most important part of any PPC campaign is the landing page.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559236].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author joseph102
    PPC campaigns are great for short term sales or for limited time promotions but for long term Seo is best. If your business is new I would also recommend a PPC campaign in order to get a lot of exposure right away.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559376].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by joseph102 View Post

      for long term Seo is best.
      Strange how this seems to be the perspective among people promoting SEO-related services/products in their signatures, while for so many of the rest of us (who make our livings from digging for gold rather than from selling shovels) SEO has actually proven about the worst, most precarious, most ephemeral and lowest-quality traffic-generation method we've encountered?

      .
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559393].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author joseph102
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        Strange how this seems to be the perspective among people promoting SEO-related services/products in their signatures, while for so many of the rest of us (who make our livings from digging for gold rather than from selling shovels) SEO has actually proven about the worst, most precarious, most ephemeral and lowest-quality traffic-generation method we've encountered?

        .
        Seriously? I am using this to promote my business not seo related services. Its good to be smart but foolish to be over smart. I answered this question from my personal experience but you were more concerned about signature. Wow

        Your real face (fraud, scam) : http://alexa-smith-warrior-forum-scam.typepad.com/

        P.S Seo is much more than what you think.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559407].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ppcmanager
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        Strange how this seems to be the perspective among people promoting SEO-related services/products in their signatures, while for so many of the rest of us (who make our livings from digging for gold rather than from selling shovels) SEO has actually proven about the worst, most precarious, most ephemeral and lowest-quality traffic-generation method we've encountered?

        .
        I don't think it would be right to completely ignore SEO as a source of traffic. A lot depends upon the SEO strategy as well. If your SEO traffic isn't converting but PPC traffic is, then you need to look into the keywords driving traffic and the intent behind those searches, landing page design etc.

        Provided you have the budget, both SEO & PPC should be part of the marketing mix. I agree that in this case, PPC would be a better option for OP since attaining top rankings for web design related keywords will take some time for sure.

        Also, SEO is not just about ranking for few high-volume keywords. OP can also start an inbound marketing campaign by integrating a blog on his website, using SEO to optimize such blog posts, and add social media/list building to the mix. HubSpot was a good example of this, generating 25000 leads per month on average.

        I don't sell SEO service btw so this isn't a biased opinion, infact I am promoting PPC-related service in my signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9560154].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AnthonyCapetola
    You should be doing both. Your site should be not only search engine optimized but also optimized for mobile and optimized for the user.

    As for PPC, especially web design, this would probably be done best with text ads. Now with that consider saturation of the market and also volume per search engine. For a web design company focusing on a local market then PPC may not be the best source of traffic but it could bring in quality leads.

    If your reach is to be much wider then the cost will grow significantly. If you are considering PPC then look into hiring either a private contractor, employing a PPC specialist or hiring a firm to run it for you.

    I only work with Google at the moment, yes our company handles Bing and Yahoo ads as well but all things considered lets just call it Google for you since you need that market share. Text ads become very expensive if the niche is highly competitive. This ads have to be very optimized and you'll have to do some level of A/B testing with ad text.

    If you want to get into Display or Video Ads I think the most you'll end up doing is drive up costs per clicks and overall ad spend. PPC is not something to take lightly nor is SEO. You should be doing both regardless but you really gotta be an ace at AdWords to benefit from it the most.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9559644].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author svetod
    My suggestion would be to start with PPC first. That way you can see if your website converts well and you may do some changes if needed in order to improve the performance. Later on you can add SEO, Facebook, Email Marketing and other traffic source.
    Signature
    Want To Know How I Make Money Online? Read my story http://affiliate-lifestyle.com/
    Follow me on Instagram for Daily Inspiration & Free Tips: svetlintodd
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9560810].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jarvis Edwards
      Originally Posted by svetod View Post

      My suggestion would be to start with PPC first. That way you can see if your website converts well and you may do some changes if needed in order to improve the performance. Later on you can add SEO, Facebook, Email Marketing and other traffic source.
      I'd say /\ his advice is spot-on. Why spent oodles of time optimizing for SEO and trying to conquer Google's newest animal, when you can get immediate results (data) with PPC?

      I wasted soooooo much time trying to "rank" keywords, just to find out said keywords either produced little to no REAL traffic, or even worse, I got traffic that had no chance of converting at all.

      Unless you can risk several years of time testing SEO concepts while waiting for results, I'd say go PPC. You can then continue to analyze data over time (trends, keywords that convert, which don't, demographics for converting visitors, etc).

      You can optimize for SEO over time that way without putting all of your eggs in one basket. It's just a matter of getting good with PPC (testing) without breaking the bank.

      So in the long run--BOTH. In the short term--PPC.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9566294].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Marketing Monk
    I've been following the SEO industry for a long time and it looks like a crazy roller coaster ride.

    For example, for the longest time people thought "guest posting" and Google Authorship were good for SEO. And then BAM, suddenly Google comes out and tells you guest posting sucks and could actually hurt your SEO. Then they shutdown Google Authorship. Now Google starts telling people they should add HTTPS security to their site. Guess what, 2 years from now they will change your mind and you would've spent all that time changing your site for nothing.

    Google is a fickled mistress. PPC at least once you learned it, you can control your own fate more. /rant
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9561386].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WebScavenger
    You can test both and see which works best for you.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9561421].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DavidKeefe
    Hey,

    Both are good seo and ppc but First I Prefer to seo because it gives a organic result at low price but ppc take a pay per click so go on seo.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9561555].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sandhyaochre
    If you have budget then you can go for PPC otherwise SEO.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9564676].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9564760].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Hi JawadAshraf,

      We often hear comments from people that have put hundreds of hours into learning SEO, and comparing it to a couple of hours of study in PPC. Both disciplines take time and resources to learn and master.

      If you are having difficulty making PPC work for you then it could be for many reasons, one of the most common is lack of skill. Search engines are very good at providing relevant results for searchers, so the search engines are handling the targeting of your traffic in organic results. With PPC you are in control of your targeting methods, so if you lack the skills and knowledge to properly target your audience you are likely to fail.

      Perhaps it isn't PPC that has failed you, but you that has failed to put in the effort to learn how to master PPC?

      Have you taken courses, coaching, or hired consultants? How in-depth has your study of PPC been?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9564882].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author JawadAshraf
        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

        Hi JawadAshraf,

        We often hear comments from people that have put hundreds of hours into learning SEO, and comparing it to a couple of hours of study in PPC. Both disciplines take time and resources to learn and master.

        If you are having difficulty making PPC work for you then it could be for many reasons, one of the most common is lack of skill. Search engines are very good at providing relevant results for searchers, so the search engines are handling the targeting of your traffic in organic results. With PPC you are in control of your targeting methods, so if you lack the skills and knowledge to properly target your audience you are likely to fail.

        Perhaps it isn't PPC that has failed you, but you that has failed to put in the effort to learn how to master PPC?

        Have you taken courses, coaching, or hired consultants? How in-depth has your study of PPC been?

        I actually didn't put a lot of my efforts in learning PPC and there is a drawback of the PPC too. Means you have to TEST, TEST & TEST. While in SEO, you know your keywords and you have to just rank #1 and start getting buyers and there's no testing and wasting time required. People say SEO takes time but I say it's NOT. If and when you know what you should do to take #1 spot ASAP and that's what I know and do.

        Cheers!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587728].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author dburk
          Originally Posted by JawadAshraf View Post

          I actually didn't put a lot of my efforts in learning PPC and there is a drawback of the PPC too. Means you have to TEST, TEST & TEST. While in SEO, you know your keywords and you have to just rank #1 and start getting buyers and there's no testing and wasting time required. People say SEO takes time but I say it's NOT. If and when you know what you should do to take #1 spot ASAP and that's what I know and do.

          Cheers!
          Hi JawadAshraf,

          Thanks for perfectly illustrating my point.

          If you truly put a lot of time and effort into learning PPC you would learn the real value of testing. You get similar value in testing within your SEO campaigns.

          I guess you could say there are 2 kinds of learning, 1. learning about a subject, 2. Learning from experience. The first kind brings awareness, the second kind brings knowledge. It makes sense that you might find it difficult to see the value in something that you have never experienced.

          One of the things you will likely discover from lots of experience in testing PPC campaigns is that some keywords that you thought would be the most valuable for SEO, actually do not convert as well as you had imagined they would. And, that some long tail keywords might convert so high that you are way better off targeting those keywords first. Without testing, you would never know this. So, you might actually be wasting lots of time and money. From your perspective of having no comparable data you are oblivious to just how much of your time and money you have wasted. I guess this is what is meant by that saying "ignorance is bliss".

          Please allow me to illustrate my point with a hypothetical example:

          Let's say you have a dog training course you sell and you are deciding which keyword to target from the following choices:

          • dog training - 8100 monthly searches
          • dog training classes - 4400
          • puppy training classes - 3600

          "Dog training" looks like a good short head keyword, relevant to your niche, lots of search volume, right? Of those 3 it looks like the best, and "puppy training classes" looks to be the worst, right? Even if you could rank "Puppy training classes" at half the time and cost, it still doesn't look at first glance to be as good as "dog training", right?

          While that would be true if they each had the exact same CTR and the exact same conversion rate. But guess what? They do not have the same CTR, nor the same conversion rates. You are not safe using industry, or niche averages, each keyword has it's own distinct key metrics. Where are you going to get this data from without testing?

          After running a short series of tests you might discover the following:
          • dog training - CTR 1.79 % | Conversion rate 2.2%
          • dog training classes - CTR 4.7% | Conversion rate 3.9%
          • puppy training classes - CTR 12.6% Conversion rate 6.9%

          Now let's say your value per conversion is $30 so you can now calculate a value per click and value per month for each keyword:
          • dog training - Value per click $0.66 | Value per month $95.69
          • dog training classes - Value per click $1.17 | Value per Month $241.96
          • puppy training classes - Value per click $2.07 | Value per Month $938.95

          Now, with this data we see these keywords in a completely different light. We can now see the true value of each keyword. We might also discover the keyword that looked like the most valuable, without this new data, is actually the worst choice for optimizing, both in terms of value per click, as well as cost per click.

          Using PPC to test for SEO can be just as beneficial for your SEO campaigns as it is for your PPC campaigns. You can test SEO campaigns without PPC, it is just much more difficult and generally takes much longer to get valid actionable data. As you can see with the above example, testing does indeed payoff for SEO.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588392].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by dburk View Post

            • dog training - 8100 monthly searches
            • dog training classes - 4400
            • puppy training classes - 3600

            "Dog training" looks like a good short head keyword, relevant to your niche, lots of search volume, right? Of those 3 it looks like the best, and "puppy training classes" looks to be the worst, right? .
            Actually NO thats not how you do effective SEO. You don't pick keywords based on search volume but on competition research. Whats easier and faster and more likely to rank for. shucks thats why in some cases you don't even care as much about conversion rate because the cost of ranking is so low that you'd be foolish not to take the sales conversions despite the rate. Its probably hard for you to wrap your head around that because with PPC the overall cost is always rising. In quite a few cases it stops with SEO for long stretches at a time.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9593546].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author dburk
              Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

              Actually NO thats not how you do effective SEO. You don't pick keywords based on search volume but on competition research. Whats easier and faster and more likely to rank for. shucks thats why in some cases you don't even care as much about conversion rate because the cost of ranking is so low that you'd be foolish not to take the sales conversions despite the rate. Its probably hard for you to wrap your head around that because with PPC the overall cost is always rising. In quite a few cases it stops with SEO for long stretches at a time.
              Hi Mike,

              Thanks for bringing that up, it was so elementary that I just assumed everyone reading this would already know the basic concept of comparing value vs. cost. While I did mention the "cost" side of the equation, I did not elaborate on it, as it is a whole other topic.

              My reply was on the topic of calculating Value which is a rarely discussed topic in the SEO forum, beyond just looking at search volume and obvious clues to commercial intent. There is a quick and reliable method to calculate approximate value through testing, that was the point of my reply.

              Marketing always boils down to the basic formula:
              (Value - Cost) * Quantity/Time = Profit/Time

              Calculating cost per click is the other side of the equation that any experienced SEO worker should already know how to estimate. I guess it was silly of me to assume you already knew that part. Or, perhaps it was really silly of you to assume I didn't?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9593830].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                Hi Mike,

                Thanks for bringing that up, it was so elementary that I just assumed everyone reading this would already know the basic concept of comparing value vs. cost. While I did mention the "cost" side of the equation, I did not elaborate on it, as it is a whole other topic.
                Nope.

                You claimed the keyword with the most traffic would appear to be the best for SEO but it was all crapola because thats not how you determine the best in SEO EVER so it appears to no one experienced that way which made your whole claim well... crapola.

                and now you want to dig your way out of yet another blundering assumption about SEO and those that do it.

                Simple

                My reply was on the topic of calculating Value which is a rarely discussed topic in the SEO forum, beyond just looking at search volume and obvious clues to commercial intent
                Yawn...we've covered why that is - because cost calculation and value in SEO is done after the fact (sometimes waaaay after the fact) and the SEO forum caters mostly to ongoing or upcoming campaigns. Your point on that is dead but you can try and flog it all you want because most readers will get that.

                Calculating cost per click is the other side of the equation that any experienced SEO worker should already know how to estimate.
                You can only guess going in with SEO. Are you this untrained in SEO? The whole point of SEo is that you do not know all the clicks you will get and can only do calculations way after the fact. Its silly to think you can estimate.

                PPC will NOT give you the full answer for organic traffic. Get it through your noggin. If you can then you are doing SEO wrong. All it can do is give you the conversion rate of your page. Why? because in any professional SEO campaign you will pick up all kinds of long tail rankings some that you did not even plan for but I am getting that you are pretty clueless on SEO done right so I should have spelt that out for you. You obviously only really know PPC and you can't wrap your mind around getting traffic for terms you do not pay each click for.

                With PPC you can control placement within reason or at least project it and the cost you will pay but with SEO you might be ranked Number 1 for 12 months, 7 months and slip to number two rise from 3 to 2 with no additional outlay

                With all this lecturing on value and cost determined by PPC you are really just showing you have no idea what you are talking about with SEO. the longer you rank is the more the overall cost of SEo goes down because you are not paying for each click . so the idea that you can estimate it with any precision going in based on PPc is just absurd nonsense


                guess it was silly of me to assume you already knew that part. Or, perhaps it was really silly of you to assume I didn't?
                Its actually worse. It was terribly silly of me to think you had the first clue about SEO.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595130].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author dburk
                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  Nope.

                  You claimed the keyword with the most traffic would appear to be the best for SEO but it was all crapola because thats not how you determine the best in SEO EVER so it appears to no one experienced that way which made your whole claim well... crapola.

                  and now you want to dig your way out of yet another blundering assumption about SEO and those that do it.

                  Simple

                  Yawn...we've covered why that is - because cost calculation and value in SEO is done after the fact (sometimes waaaay after the fact) and the SEO forum caters mostly to ongoing or upcoming campaigns. Your point on that is dead but you can try and flog it all you want because most readers will get that.

                  You can only guess going in with SEO. Are you this untrained in SEO? The whole point of SEo is that you do not know all the clicks you will get and can only do calculations way after the fact. Its silly to think you can estimate.

                  PPC will NOT give you the full answer for organic traffic. Get it through your noggin. If you can then you are doing SEO wrong. All it can do is give you the conversion rate of your page. Why? because in any professional SEO campaign you will pick up all kinds of long tail rankings some that you did not even plan for but I am getting that you are pretty clueless on SEO done right so I should have spelt that out for you. You obviously only really know PPC and you can't wrap your mind around getting traffic for terms you do not pay each click for.

                  With PPC you can control placement within reason or at least project it and the cost you will pay but with SEO you might be ranked Number 1 for 12 months, 7 months and slip to number two rise from 3 to 2 with no additional outlay

                  With all this lecturing on value and cost determined by PPC you are really just showing you have no idea what you are talking about with SEO. the longer you rank is the more the overall cost of SEo goes down because you are not paying for each click . so the idea that you can estimate it with any precision going in based on PPc is just absurd nonsense


                  Its actually worse. It was terribly silly of me to think you had the first clue about SEO.
                  LOL.

                  Lies, lies, and more damned lies.

                  I said what I said, not what you said I said.

                  Again you go off on this tirade of vitriol trying to redefine the meaning of my words.

                  Stop it!

                  Let my words speak for themselves, please refrain your words to speak for whatever you believe. It's just closer to the truth that way.

                  You are like a one-trick-poney, all you know how to do is use non sequitur ad hominem attacks. Tell us what you think and believe about the topic, and stop trying to tell us what you think I think. It just looks like someone getting mad because they can't argue based on logic and truth.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595627].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                    Yawn..........................

                    The same old tactic whenever he gets his premise blown up. Want your own words? Sure

                    "Dog training" looks like a good short head keyword, relevant to your niche, lots of search volume, right? Of those 3 it looks like the best, and "puppy training classes" looks to be the worst, right? Even if you could rank "Puppy training classes" at half the time and cost, it still doesn't look at first glance to be as good as "dog training", right?
                    NO. NYET. NUNCA. the best is NEVER determined by search volume. NO SEO worth a dime thinks that search volume makes a particular phrase the best and worse every SEO knows that time and cost ratio to value is not going to be determined by volume but by competition metrics and values which you missed even mentioning.

                    Why is the search volume not the gauge of what is best? because YOU MAY NEVER RANK FOR IT if the competition is too stiff. This is why your premises and lectures fail so miserably. Garbage in garbage out. You don't understand how SEO is done so your comparisons and corrections are correcting/contrasting things that no one holds to or practices. Your whole long winded lecture was based on correcting a premise that no one claims. In other words a strawman

                    You are like a one-trick-poney, all you know how to do is use
                    LOL if you are going to link to definitions of fairly easy phrases like you are educating anyone then the least you can do is spell them right.

                    P.S. save yourself carpal tunnel syndrome telling people to stop it when they disagree with you. It has no effect unless you are a mod
                    Signature

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595865].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author dburk
                      LOL

                      Funny how you keep making my point for me, then pretend it was somehow your point. Then you pretend that the person you are attacking somehow had it wrong all along simply because you say so.

                      I'd be suprised if I haven't already forgotten twice what you have ever learned about SEO.

                      You keep bringing up irrelevant topics and pretend "in your mind only" that I wasn't already aware of those things. This is classic straw man argument that is the hallmark of your reputation as a troll on this forum.

                      Some of the things you say show how little you actually know about marketing. I could easily point them out and ridicule you about your naive viewpoints, but that is your style, not mine. I keep offering an olive branch to you and you take each gesture as if it was a signal of defeat and you just pile on the vitriol, like some bitter tortured soul.

                      Why don't you just stick to discussing the topic instead of trying to malign everyone that appears knows something you don't? Tell us what you know, stop trying to prevent any viewpoint that differs from yours from being heard. Stop being a bully.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596230].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                        LOL

                        Funny how you keep making my point for me, then pretend it was somehow your point. Then you pretend that the person you are attacking somehow had it wrong all along simply because you say so.

                        I'd be suprised if I haven't already forgotten twice what you have ever learned about SEO.
                        ROFL....Now you are just typing to type because no regular on this forum would buy for an instant that you know SEO even half as much as I do. Debate the issue and stop making claims in a see through attempt at handwaving and I suppose you might convince some noob but its not happening now with those responses

                        Some of the things you say show how little you actually know about marketing. I could easily point them out and ridicule you about your naive viewpoints, but that is your style, not mine.
                        Go for it. If you are right then it will be instructive to all and if you are wrong (which we both know you are ) then it will also be instructive to all because your last two posts have completely veered of any issue, failed to answer any point and if followed by a third of that substance won't be worth my or anyone else's time and yu can have the last word which you deeply desire

                        P.S. If you are bullied by people having a different opinion than yours and calling you out on your assessment of how others do things or what they do or do not know (SEO or marketing) which is the game YOU started then you need to work on acquiring and putting on some big boy pants. As the old saying goes - If you can't take the heat ...just stay out the kitchen. Crying because you got answered back should be left for little girls with pony tails. Don't want to be challenged on your points about what Most people in SEO here at WF don't know then don't make claims about them which you know nothing about.
                        Signature

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9597231].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author dburk
                          Mike,

                          Here we go again, must every thread you are involved in devolve to you claiming you know more than anyone else? Everyone else is wrong and only you know what is right?

                          Face it Mike, virtually everything you post on this forum, as an example of your superior knowledge, is just common knowledge among experienced marketers. Where are the innovations and revelations of new things that you have learned? Things that go beyond common knowledge? Instead, we just get an immediate attack for any thought, idea, or concept that is outside of your perception of popular and well known beliefs.

                          Has it ever occurred to you that someone with a different opinion, idea, or experience may have discovered something beyond what you already know? Have you ever once considered testing any of the new ideas that seem so foreign to you? How is it ever possible to learn anything beyond common knowledge?

                          Let's agree that our approach to search engine marketing is very different. I prefer a data driven approach, you have made it abundantly clear that you prefer a data-less approach to marketing, relying simply on what has become tradition and common knowledge. This was made abundantly clear with the following comments on one of your replies in this thread:
                          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                          You can only guess going in with SEO. Are you this untrained in SEO? The whole point of SEo is that you do not know all the clicks you will get and can only do calculations way after the fact. Its silly to think you can estimate.

                          PPC will NOT give you the full answer for organic traffic. Get it through your noggin. If you can then you are doing SEO wrong. All it can do is give you the conversion rate of your page. Why? because in any professional SEO campaign you will pick up all kinds of long tail rankings some that you did not even plan for but I am getting that you are pretty clueless on SEO done right so I should have spelt that out for you. You obviously only really know PPC and you can't wrap your mind around getting traffic for terms you do not pay each click for.
                          Those are the comments that so clearly tell the differences in our approach. Data-less decision making is a well established "common" practice in SEO, as it is in marketing in general. I won't deny that, I am just not a follower of that approach and never will, no matter how popular it becomes.

                          Please allow me to reassert my point: I beleive testing, with a purpose, can provide data to inform our decisions.

                          Pooh pooh that notion it if you wish, go ahead and stick to your data-less decision method, simply because it is a popular practice in the SEO circles where you live. That is your choice to make. I am just here to offer an alternative method, one based on science and math. You're the populist, I am the math and science geek. I can live with that.

                          Anyone that chooses to test, measure and analyse using basic marketing principles has discovered that a page will have many different conversions rates, based in part on the market segment that is targeted. This data is easily gathered by setting up and running tests. The results can inform your decisions, these insights allow us to make better decisions. Without this data we are left with "guessing" as the only option.

                          By the way, for anyone that wants to follow the data less decision making discipline Google has designed a special course just for you folks. Mike, this could be an opportunity for you to get certified as a bona fide expert in the methodology that you so aggressively advocate. Here's the link for you and anyone else interested: https://analyticsacademy.withgoogle.com/course20140401

                          Here's the promo video Enjoy!:

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9597574].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                            Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                            Face it Mike, virtually everything you post on this forum, as an example of your superior knowledge, is just common knowledge among experienced marketers.
                            Don your boring me and are a waste of time so this will be my last post to you here (I am sure you will try in another thread as you always do). Unfortunately for you anyone who cares to read this thread can see you claiming superior knowledge to what over 50% Of SEOs in WF forums know and then me responding to that claim. Lie on all you wish. Its what you do when you get caught on points you can't rebut. Your history on that is solid


                            Those are the comments that so clearly tell the differences in our approach. Data-less decision making is a well established "common" practice in SEO, as it is in marketing in general. I won't deny that, I am just not a follower of that approach and never will, no matter how popular it becomes.
                            Don you are TOTALLY and utterly clueless. It has nothing to do with approach. You just don't get SEO. I stated A FACT and denying it is beyond asinine. There was no proposal for Data less decision making. Thats just your bared faced lying and pontificating again. The data you go off as I stated includes competition metrics which you entirely left out. You cannot know the cost to value ratio with SEO until after the campaign is near finished or finished. Why? its so basic and simple

                            Your position 1-10 is going to give you various levels of traffic. Position one gets the most followed by two and three and then it drops off rather substantially. This has been validated by mutiple scientifically done tests. Because one can NEVER guarantee a particular spot in organic listings like you can with PPC overall traffic cannot be nailed down beforehand. You may settle in at one or two or three. The over all costs of the campaign will depend on( and let me put it in Caps so it might penetrate your mind this time)

                            THE LEVEL OF COMPETITION FOR THAT TERM IN THE ORGANIC LISTINGS AND THE RANK YOU ACHIEVE.

                            SO you would have to use the following equation. Cost of campaign to move into position (depending almost solely on competition) divided by traffic (depending on search volume and actually attained position) to determine the cost per click and then you would factor in your page conversion rate (which in your dependence on strawman arguments you pretend was denied)

                            Compounding that isue is that you may fluctuate up and down in the top five positions (with no algo change or penalty) over time and in various geographic regions. The idea that PPC is going to give you the data you need to estimate the value is therefore GRADE A CRAPOLA. The level of traffic which you can never know or cap off (with SEO you can keep getting traffic for YEARS based on the same dollar and even time outlay) has to be a fundamental part of the value calculation and it cannot be nailed down by budget as it can with PPC.

                            This is the real reason you don't see cost to value discussed as much in the SEO forum and not as you erroneously claim because SEOs don't know about it or use it. Its simply that the numbers are achieved way after the fact and are constantly changing due to the fact that SEO is long term and positioning fluctuates.

                            Some people see this indeterminable part of SEO as a negative but its the reason that for many others it works out far cheaper

                            Now go ahead and post another video that makes no point to the issues I just laid out so as to distract that you don't understand SEO. It seems to be all you can do at this point since your claims against what people who discuss SEO on WF forums don't know or practice has been blown to smithereens. See you around.
                            Signature

                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9597780].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author dburk
                              Hi Mike,

                              Come on Mike, you have to admit it was pretty funny, right? And spot on to the point we are discussing about data driven vs. data-less decision making.

                              You can bury your head in the sand if you want, as it seems to be what you want to do instead of dealing honestly with the point I made about data driven decisions.

                              Sure, past results do not guarantee future performance, but it can inform our decisions. And while PPC campaigns on Google search will yield different results from an organic campaign, it still provides a lot of useful data to inform our decisions. Since both types of campaigns target the exact same audience, it has the potential to give us very valuable insights about that specific audience segment.

                              Having those valuable insights allows us to compare the relative value between keyword candidates, and yes it does allow us to estimate a range for value per click. That, combined with a reasonable estimate of CTR, based on ad position, headline, and text snippet choices, we can get estimates that are very valuable to the decisions we must make on our SEO campaigns.

                              The tests you can perform using PPC not only provides data that shows the relative difference in value, they also can provide valuable data about which value propositions are important to our targeted audience, which page title and text snippets will perform best as well as what range of earnings we can expect once we reach a top 3 SERP position.

                              A lot of SEO "only" guys don't seem to realize the huge differences in CTRs and conversion rates you can expect from seemingly related and relevant keywords. One keyword might have very low CTR and conversions while another, very similar keyword converts at rate that is 5000% higher than the first. You can't know this without data, data that you can quickly garner through quick and easy tests.

                              Testing also allows us to optimize our landing page content in advance of reaching top SERP ranking, this reduces the chance of a high bounce rate penalty once we do rank our targeted keyword. I could go on and on listing the benefits, but is should be pretty clear to most readers at this point. I understand that you are committed to your position, Mike, and don't expect that you will learn anything new here, but for others reading there is still hope.

                              Data driven decisions won't allow you to predict the future with absolute precision, but it is pretty effective at getting you into a predictable range of performance. Why guess when you have data? Why go data-less when you don't have to?
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9598097].message }}
                • Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  You can only guess going in with SEO.
                  The point, or one of them at least, that Don is trying to convey is, you wouldn't have to guess by having data to back things up. His example illustrates the point. Then you create or adjust your SEO efforts based on what you just learned so that you maximize your profits.

                  Yes, SEO is only a guess going in. But it doesn't have to be. Indeed, it should not be a guess. You can use PPC data as well as any SEO data you may have and compare to improve your overall marketing efforts. Surely you can see the value in that.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9598111].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                    Originally Posted by LucidWebMarketing View Post

                    The point, or one of them at least, that Don is trying to convey is, you wouldn't have to guess by having data to back things up. His example illustrates the point. Then you create or adjust your SEO efforts based on what you just learned so that you maximize your profits.
                    Nope. Go ahead tell me how you determine cost to value ratio for SEO off of PPC since you seem to have the same misunderstanding as Don. Maybe I can explain it to you since he couldn't get it. PPC will only show you the conversion rate on your page for the term (in SOME cases). That it can give you that is NOT in dispute. What it CANNOT do is tell you your traffic from organic or give you any idea what the cost to value ratio is for the money spent ranking - not going in and frankly not for months to see where your ranking settles. SEO sans PPC is not going in "without data" either as you and Don are pretending. Its a matter of more suitable data and for the cost and payoff competition metrics are going to play a far greater role than anything you THINK you learn from PPC.

                    Yes, SEO is only a guess going in. But it doesn't have to be. Indeed, it should not be a guess. You can use PPC data as well as any SEO data you may have and compare to improve your overall marketing efforts. Surely you can see the value in that.
                    and surely you must see that PPC in no way shape or form tells you the traffic you are going to get off organic given that traffic varies by position in organic. Don't you guys know this???? WOW! Perhaps its just an illusion that people who are into PPC THINK they are getting when they really are not but it IS quite a delusion.

                    Again you MAY get how the traffic for that keyword will convert but that is NOT my dispute. You still CANNOT determine cost to value per click without knowing traffic since SEO is not per click

                    This is BASIC Mathematical reality so YES it has to be a guess no matter how you delude yourselves because you did a PPC campaign - you have NOT taken the guess work out of the value you will receive on the time and effort spent om organic. Theres no way to guarantee you will hit one two or three. That kind of specificity needed to determine traffic is not available in organic and that should be obvious to anyone who has done a SEO campaign of any sort.

                    P.S. I should add that PPC advocates can't even keep on the same page. Ron Rule claims the exact opposite - that a site SE optimized has a different conversion than a page without it and using PPC. in which case even the conversion to sales in a PPC campaign would not be predictive for an organic campaign. I don't know if I buy that across the board but given in many cases the visitor knows the ad is an ad the conversion rates naturally will not hold in many cases for organic (closer when the term has natural commercial intent).
                    Signature

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9598426].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author M1ks
    PPC will not get you any result. Use SEO and its cheaper also.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9566180].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DrewIM
    I love how people try PPC once, have no idea what they're doing, lose money, then go around telling everyone that PPC doesn't work.

    If you have the budget, run some PPC ads to get some immediate traffic and like svetod said, do some initial testing to see if your website coverts. You may lose some money up front, but the information you can gain is invaluable.

    BUT......

    Make sure you know what you're doing; don't jump in the PPC pool without knowing how to swim. There are plenty of books and courses out there that can get you up to speed.

    Then you just have to play the game of spending less on traffic than you're making on sales...aren't we all.

    SEO is still a viable strategy but just not for a "I need customers now" mentality. That doesn't mean it still isn't important.

    When you have time, write some articles for you website based on keywords that your ideal customers may be looking for. Just don't be too broad, do your keyword research and find some specific long tails. Or outsource this. That way you can still build some SEO juice.

    Also, Youtube is an amazingly easy "SEO" technique that can get you ranked very quickly if you target the right keywords.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9566346].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author manojbhai424
    I Think you have to go for ppc . if you don't want to wait for keyword than it is better option for you . and it is also give instant result and inquiry for your new business.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9567189].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    Does no-one do the figures on the retail side, let's exclude niche and long-tail keywords - different dynamics. Let's say you have $0.50 per click, at standard conversion 2.5% you need 40 visitors per order or $20 in ppc - so 2 visitors per $1 - however small business often has 5-10x lower conversion than a corporate equivalent so invariably costs are higher. The corporates generate 25-30 visitors per $1 or $1.50 per order acquisition - the internet is global - you are competing directly against niche as well as corporate locally and those shipping internationally.

    Sure, none of this takes in to account lifetime value - but let's be realistic - people are price sensitive so can you 'guarantee' the customer won't buy elsewhere and will come back validating your $20 ppc cost per order. Obviously many indirect factors come in to play - but even if your ppc is 40% of your marketing spend - standard is 8% - Amazon is 4% - you costs are still 500% higher than your competition.

    PPC is good for branding, otherwise it lines service providers pockets, and keeps Google stockholders happy as they generate 70% of their revenue from Adwords. You can use this breakdown as a starting point - https://www.custora.com/pulse/channel. You need to make sure your acquisition cost matches you business model - ppc can work - but for most it works against them!

    What do we do - we use specialist corporate hosting which generates ~24 visitors per $1 - but it needs a clean commerce install with best practice business processes. Some background information is here - http://www.warriorforum.com/ecommerc...ml#post9567388. The advantage is that acquisition per order is at corporate levels so we don't have to spend 40hrs per week playing on social media and ppc keyword analysis - but we're on the retail side with 30% gross profit margins similar to Amazon - working for free is not our idea of work!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9569537].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      Does no-one do the figures on the retail side, let's exclude niche and long-tail keywords - different dynamics. Let's say you have $0.50 per click, at standard conversion 2.5% you need 40 visitors per order or $20 in ppc - so 2 visitors per $1 - however small business often has 5-10x lower conversion than a corporate equivalent so invariably costs are higher. The corporates generate 25-30 visitors per $1 or $1.50 per order acquisition - the internet is global - you are competing directly against niche as well as corporate locally and those shipping internationally.
      Hi serpyre,

      Is there such a thing as a "standard conversion"? I think not. Perhaps a typical, or average conversion rate, and as you may have heard, averages lie. You do realize that nearly half of all websites perform above average, right? And nearly half of all campaigns have better than average CPC, and nearly half have better than average costs, right? Your averages don't apply to those folks.

      Every niche is different, different competitors, different customers, and different marketing trends. While I agree that larger corporations have advantages like bigger budgets, and an established brand name, there are many other factors that come into play, and small business can often compete successfully if they have a well chosen and executed strategy.

      In most cases, regardless of size, you are competing with a strategy that was conceived by a single person. So, if a small business hires a person with as much knowledge and experience as the person that formulated the strategy of your competitors then you have a chance of winning.

      Marketing is a game of strategy, and just like in warfare, the guy with the largest army does not always win. Many times the win goes to the guy with the best strategy, when well executed. Small businesses can develop a strategy to exploit the weaknesses of their larger competitors.

      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      PPC is good for branding, otherwise it lines service providers pockets, and keeps Google stockholders happy as they generate 70% of their revenue from Adwords.
      Yes, PPC is good for branding, but it is also good for direct response campaigns. There are thousands of niches that have no large competitors. And there are many niches that have small companies competing successfully against large companies.

      According to the latest earning reports, Google earns closer to 90% of their profit from AdWords, not 70%. Lets give full credit for the role advertising revenue fuels Google's growth. Advertisers are using AdWords because it works, how else would it be able to continue growing like it has?

      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      You can use this breakdown as a starting point - https://www.custora.com/pulse/channel. You need to make sure your acquisition cost matches you business model - ppc can work - but for most it works against them!
      If you dig deeper into the data you will find that they are reporting a breakdown of revenue generated by channels using last click attribution model. This does not tell the whole story. For example, much of the organic, email, and direct revenue comes from previous visitors and customers that were acquired through CPC. That is the purpose of branding campaigns, right?

      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      What do we do - we use specialist corporate hosting which generates ~24 visitors per $1 - but it needs a clean commerce install with best practice business processes. Some background information is here - http://www.warriorforum.com/ecommerc...ml#post9567388. The advantage is that acquisition per order is at corporate levels so we don't have to spend 40hrs per week playing on social media and ppc keyword analysis - but we're on the retail side with 30% gross profit margins similar to Amazon - working for free is not our idea of work!
      You have been pushing your top tier hosting theory repeatedly on this forum, yet I have not seen a single credible source cited by you or anyone else on this forum, or elsewhere. I agree that it helps to have fast and reliable hosting, but you seem to be postulating that it makes "all" the difference. If so, why are so many people that are not using those service providers doing so well?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570870].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ubaidrehman
    Go for google adwords the best PPC and if you read their tutorials you can set one of the best campaigns .. for SEO you must focus on maintaining the position after you done with PPC
    Signature

    Engaging Everything

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570222].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author serpyre
      Originally Posted by ubaidrehman View Post

      Go for google adwords the best PPC and if you read their tutorials you can set one of the best campaigns .. for SEO you must focus on maintaining the position after you done with PPC
      Out of interest, did you read our post.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570270].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ronrule
    Everyone who thinks "PPC is expensive" is doing it wrong... it doesn't matter what the top bid is, you don't have to be the top bidder, you bid what you can afford/what works with how well your site converts. Bid based on your CPA, not what other people are bidding.

    PPC offers instant gratification (you will get traffic TODAY), and your position doesn't change when Google tweaks their algorithm or a competitor decides to get more aggressive with their SEO strategy.

    The biggest mistake people make with PPC is treating it like SEO, following the logic that the higher you are the better off you are. That's a flawed way to look at it because with a material cost per click, it's not about how often your ad is shown - it's about how it converts WHEN it's shown.

    You can also drive multiple keywords to the same page with PPC, which is incredibly difficult to do with SEO. You don't have to bloat your site with useless content that no one wants to read, you can develop landing pages that convert better, and you can instantly change what page a keyword delivers a visitor to.

    Here's a real life example; I often have two sites running for products. A landing page, hosted on its own domain, and a "product page" within the main site's shopping cart. The landing page is basically a mini site of its own, with an integrated order form. Some audiences convert better on these pages, others convert better in the traditional shopping cart setting. If I put all of my focus into SEO to rank both of these sites, even if I'm successful in ranking one it could end up being an exercise in futility because what keyword CONVERTS from one type of search may not convert for another. With PPC I can test both - I can split the SAME keyword to BOTH pages and see which one converts better, and I can do this across multiple pages at the same time.

    The data alone makes it infinitely more valuable. I've never had a page convert above 4-5% on purely organic phrases, but some of my PPC pages convert as high as 15% after doing enough testing to understand the audience's behavior as it pertains to their keyword use. I could never have figured that out waiting weeks to rank on words.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570374].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    As with most things - it depends how you use it, however from everything we have experienced, everyone we have spoken to (sme to venture capital), and everything we have read - for the majority - this is the general consensus: https://concept5.com/google-adwords-...mall-business/
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570411].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ronrule
      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      As with most things - it depends how you use it, however from everything we have experienced, everyone we have spoken to (sme to venture capital), and everything we have read - for the majority - this is the general consensus: https://concept5.com/google-adwords-...mall-business/
      You've posted this link a few times in other threads, but always seem to forget to mention that's an opinion piece written by an SEO firm...

      The only reason Adwords could ever be a "destroyer of small business" is when they try to match the top bid thinking "that's what it costs" without giving proper consideration to their revenue and cost per acquisition. Most small businesses don't have the wherewithal and knowledge to do it properly. That, not the medium, is why they fail at it.

      The other problem is they fail to consider the funnel value in their calculations ... my average product may be $20, but my average ORDER is $60-$80, and a large percentage of those customers will return and order something else AGAIN within 90 days. If I looked at PPC on a per-product basis, and calculated my bids based on the revenue generated from the $20 front end product I was advertising, I would be bidding less and making less. For some products, I would lose money on every single sale with PPC. By bidding based on the site-wide AOV and customer values, not the individual product prices, I usually end up with a 400-2000% ROI on my spending.

      What's key is control of costs. If I spend $10K on PPC and $10K on SEO, I guarantee you I'll get more money back out of the PPC spending than I do on the SEO. I know because I've done both.

      I also kind of view PPC like insurance ... once you've found your sweet spot, you're securing your position. It doesn't matter what's going on in the organic results or what your competitors are doing. You pay X in, you get Y back. It simplifies the revenue model and "holds your spot".

      The trouble is that people tend to look at it as something they can do themselves when they really shouldn't. You wouldn't attempt to book radio or TV ads without hiring a media company, and most businesses wouldn't attempt to dive into SEO without hiring an SEO expert. But then they look at AdWords or AdCenter and say "This looks easy enough, I don't have to pay someone to manage it" and they fall on their face because they don't know what metrics they need to be looking at to make decisions. Like any other form of marketing, just because the INTERFACE is simple doesn't mean the logic behind what you should be plugging in is. Let an expert handle it, and make sure they have access to all of the data points required to make a decision. PPC is infinitely more profitable than SEO when you're handling the data properly - the medium isn't the problem. It's the knowledge of how to properly collect and utilize it that's lacking for most people.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570417].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    That's the point we were making "revneue and cost per acquisition", the retailer either doesn't know what they are doing and waste money or pay inexperienced ppc providers to do the same - the end result is the same. The exact same problem exists with seo services which is posted on ppc service providers - it's just that incorrect ppc (cost) will generally destroy the business faster than incorrect seo (time) - in the end you need both cost and time to balance - but that's a rare skill!

    Looks like you found that balance like ourselves - just did it using a different approach - there is always more than one way to get to the end result!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570441].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ronrule
      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      That's the point we were making "revneue and cost per acquisition", the retailer either doesn't know what they are doing and waste money or pay inexperienced ppc providers to do the same - the end result is the same. The exact same problem exists with seo services which is posted on ppc service providers - it's just that incorrect ppc (cost) will generally destroy the business faster than incorrect seo (time) - in the end you need both cost and time to balance - but that's a rare skill!
      It's not a rare skill, I can hire people all day long with that skill. Just like a business owner would hire an SEO firm to do the same in that capacity.

      The disconnect, as I see it, has more to do with expectations and how these two services are pitched and perceived. SEO is marketed like a billboard, where dollars in = exposure, while PPC is marketed like lead gen where dollars in translates to dollars out.

      Someone who spends $10K on SEO, who has made no money with it, can still go to Google and search for a keyword, see their site come up, and be satisfied that they "got what they paid for". That makes the SEO sales guy's job a heck of a lot easier - he can show "results" by doing a Google search and say "See that guy in #1? We did that." - and that's all he has to say. He doesn't have to talk about how much money was actually MADE as a result of that guy being in the #1 spot.

      SEO is also sold, usually, based on its time consuming nature. They'll say in their pitch "You won't see any results for at least 3 months" - and the buyer rationalizes it. But for a PPC manager to ALSO say "You won't see any results for 3 months", the business owner doesn't always rationalize it the same way and sees it as throwing away money, making them less willing to do it unless some more immediate return can be seen. Getting that immediate return isn't always possible - getting the DATA that will ultimately lead to a much more lucrative return than SEO is. PPC Managers have generally done a poor job of conveying expectations compared to SEO managers, and that leads to a lot of the frustration.

      Really, in spite of their similar appearances, SEO and PPC are worlds apart and need to be treated as such. But dollar for dollar you can get a lot more out of PPC if you know what you're doing. There's only so many "page one" positions for a keyword, but there are an INFINITE number of page one placements for PPC and the ability to fine-tune them to get your ROI where it needs to be. SEO doesn't offer that - it's a crap shoot.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570578].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    Actually there are three ways to achieve the same result: seo, ppc, a balance of the two. Finding one or the other we find is an 80(don't know what they are doing / 20 (do know what they are doing) scenario. It is not black and white - but from 0% ineffective to 100% effective - with the latter 20% making up for the other 80% - a concentration at the top - very similar to the top 5% of retailers generate 50% of all online revenue.

    Now most should just follow this https://www.custora.com/pulse/channel - you don't have to think. There is a slight exposure slant to seo and coupled with the fact that it is time based means that if you are learning on your own seo will have the 'edge' over ppc but not materially. If you are purchasing services then it's much of a muchness which way you go.

    We however generally avoid using services from either directly for material traffic!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570761].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ronrule
      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      Actually there are three ways to achieve the same result: seo, ppc, a balance of the two. Finding one or the other we find is an 80(don't know what they are doing / 20 (do know what they are doing) scenario. It is not black and white - but from 0% ineffective to 100% effective - with the latter 20% making up for the other 80% - a concentration at the top - very similar to the top 5% of retailers generate 50% of all online revenue.
      The top retailers generate their revenue through brand awareness. How they've allocated their marketing dollars to SEO or PPC is immaterial in comparison.

      More people will buy shoes from Zappos "because it's Zappos" than people will go to Google and type "womens shoes" and buy from the site that appears in the search results or PPC ads.

      Taking a "here's what big brands do, so here's what you should do" approach doesn't work for the little guy because it doesn't factor in the weight the big brand's name carries. In fact, shoes make a great example here ... go to Google and type "womens shoes" right now, what do you see?

      DSW
      Zappos
      Nordstrom
      Macy's
      Amazon
      Overstock
      Kohls
      Lord & Taylor
      ShoeBuy.com (one of the top 100 eCommerce sites if you aren't familiar)

      There's your organic page one results. Think the little guy stands a chance in ranking against these guys organically on that keyword? No freaking way. But he CAN get there with PPC - and he doesn't have to "outbid the big guys" to do it - he can bid what he can afford, and his ad will be shown. Granted it will be shown less frequently than the big guys ads, but it WILL be seen by some percentage of people searching for that phrase, at a price he can afford.

      Or ... you can go the SEO route and rank on a bunch of crappy long tail phrases and hope for the best, but you will never rank on the word you actually WANT.

      One way gets you sales today. The other requires a lot of patience, and even more luck. Sorry man, but anyone who says not to make PPC part of their strategy shouldn't be developing strategies.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570778].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    You still didn't read what we wrote - the breakdown on Custora is the simple way to balance out the marketing budgets without thinking or experience. We understand your focus on ppc, but there are two other ways - all with their pros and cons. We come across this all the time - confirmation bias.

    We use both business seo (backlinks, press releases, social media) and ppc as a secondary source of traffic - have no affiliation to either one which always comes in to conflict as most are either business seo -or- ppc - as evidenced here. The other interesting thing we find is that people presume that we know less than them - but never consider the possibility overall we might know more.

    So we use something else for primary traffic - but then the consultants did work on rollout projects like Renault and Samsonite
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570821].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ronrule
      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      You still didn't read what we wrote - the breakdown on Custora is the simple way to balance out the marketing budgets without thinking or experience. We understand your focus on ppc, but there are two other ways - all with their pros and cons. We come across this all the time - confirmation bias.

      We use both business seo (backlinks, press releases, social media) and ppc as a secondary source of traffic - have no affiliation to either one which always comes in to conflict as most are either business seo -or- ppc - as evidenced here. The other interesting thing we find is that people presume that we know less than them - but never consider the possibility overall we might know more.

      So we use something else for primary traffic - but then the consultants did work on rollout projects like Renault and Samsonite
      Unlike you, I have no bias to one method or the other (I'm not a service provider). The proof is in the numbers... and dollar for dollar, every brand I've ever developed the online marketing strategy for, of which both PPC and SEO were a factor, saw a greater return on their PPC efforts than their SEO regardless of budget allocated to each. PPC simply allows you to target better and the audience converts better. Every time.

      You can stand in a coffee shop and shout about your products all day long and probably sell a few ... or you can pony up, focus only on likely buyers, and truly get your money's worth. That's the main difference.

      Also, everything you've said about web hosting is frankly a bunch of crap. The ONLY instance where changing hosts has had any measurable impact on sales is:

      (a) If the previous host was a known black hat safe harbor and Google had manually penalized them by IP.
      (b) If the new host was serving pages faster.
      (c) If the previous host was routing IP's through a country other than target demographic of the intended audience.

      That's it. A clean IP on a speedy server hosted in the same country as the audience you're targeting will have zero impact from host to host.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570933].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    It's Friday, there are more interesting things to do. You won't, guessing no one here has been a lead architect on a $10s millions project in $multi-billion companies. They use tools like SAP which generate 1,000% efficiency - small business is under 200%.

    It’s very simple, add some corporate grade hosting, a clean platform install, and some best practice tech seo and you get 25-30 visitors per $1 or an effective 3c per click. Now the architecture we use is unimaginable to anyone outside of the environment - designed by SAP architects - so we put people on to combinations like Nexcess with Magento as an example. Add some more clusters and load some more products - Google will starting sending more traffic - normally within hours.

    Now the problem, do a clean install and you reduce service provider chargeable time by 80%, add some Nexcess clusters and you have effective ppc of 6c per click reducing ppc services by 80%, use some best practice tech seo and you reduce seo services by 80% - ending up with 300-500% efficiency like a mid-market company looking 3-5x bigger than you really are. Google and customers start coming to you - you should see what happens when you look 7-10x bigger – they start ranking you top spot next to the corporates!!!

    We saw the film Divergent yesterday, Divergents can see all sides and take the best parts from each, which causes confusion and contempt from each of the factions - that's us!

    In the end our primary interest is in the forex market, but we have more overall knowledge than anyone here - each 'faction' will naturally have more detail but less overall perspective. We can simply tell a retailer what they need to do on all sides and reduce their costs by 50-80% based on knowledge consultants spent 1yr explaining to us - it has little or no impact on what we do.

    It’s all very nice to make money to survive, but it’s much better to make money to live – and you’re not going to do that with 100-200% efficiency!

    Some weekend background reading!
    Setting up Magento please advise
    Lost with ecommerce startup

    Enjoy the weekend!!!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9571159].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ronrule
      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      It's Friday, there are more interesting things to do. You won't, guessing no one here has been a lead architect on a $10s millions project in -billion companies. They use tools like SAP which generate 1,000% efficiency - small business is under 200%.
      I have, and continue to. Unless you think companies like IBM, UPS, Gateway, Bank of America, Este Lauder, and As Seen On TV don't count in your narrow view of online marketing...

      It’s very simple, add some corporate grade hosting, a clean platform install, and some best practice tech seo and you get 25-30 visitors per $1 or an effective 3c per click.
      Click costs are insignificant (and unrelated to the platform or hosting). CPA is all that matters.

      Now the architecture we use is unimaginable to anyone outside of the environment - designed by SAP architects - so we put people on to combinations like Nexcess with Magento as an example. Add some more clusters and load some more products - Google will starting sending more traffic - normally within hours.
      False.

      Now the problem, do a clean install and you reduce service provider chargeable time by 80%, add some Nexcess clusters and you have effective ppc of 6c per click reducing ppc services by 80%, use some best practice tech seo and you reduce seo services by 80% - ending up with 300-500% efficiency like a mid-market company looking 3-5x bigger than you really are. Google and customers start coming to you - you should see what happens when you look 7-10x bigger – they start ranking you top spot next to the corporates!!!
      Also false.

      We saw the film Divergent yesterday, Divergents can see all sides and take the best parts from each, which causes confusion and contempt from each of the factions - that's us!
      Why am I not surprised your theoretical fake strategies are rooted in movies?

      In the end our primary interest is in the forex market, but we have more overall knowledge than anyone here - each 'faction' will naturally have more detail but less overall perspective. We can simply tell a retailer what to do on all sides and reduce their costs by 50-80% based on knowledge consultants spent 1yr explaining to us - it has little or no impact on what we do.
      False again.

      It’s all very nice to make money to survive, but it’s much better to make money to live – and you’re not going to do that with 100-200% efficiency!
      Neither are you with any of the strategies you've suggested. Dude ... you sell SEO and Magento services. We get it. It's amateur at best.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9571174].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    That's what a 'faction' always says - don't worry - the seo people say the same - the service providers say the same - pretty funny. We posted a simple clean install guide somewhere around here - http://www.warriorforum.com/search-e...ml#post9554157 - so everyone can do it for themselves - unless you want to go for 700-1,000% efficiency which no-one here understands anyway - the forex market is more interesting, has a better return on investment, plus it's closed at the weekends so we can go for caipirinhas!!! We’ll let the factions argue the ‘details’ amongst themselves!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9571195].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      ...unless you want to go for 700-1,000% efficiency which no-one here understands anyway...
      That's true, around here we are grounded in reality, you know things that can be proven with real data from tests based on scientific methods. We don't go in for technical double-talk spewed by sales reps from SAP and the like. Who do you think taught those guys?

      While there are plenty naive folks in this forum, it would be a mistake to assume that we are all less knowledgeable than you. The collective knowledge of Warriors in this forum is, in my opinion, way beyond your ability to grasp, but if you start to share what you do know and allow it to stand up to peer review you may find out just how valid your theories are, or are not.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9571419].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    Perhaps a read of "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" is in order.

    "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."

    Everyone has an expertise - ours is divergent!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9571443].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ronrule
      Originally Posted by serpyre View Post

      Perhaps a read of "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" is in order.

      "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."

      Everyone has an expertise - ours is divergent!
      I'm pretty sure that at this point your expertise is specifically in the movie Divergent...

      Everyone here has something to sell, we get it man. A dose of intellectual credibility will get you a lot further than making crap up to promote your product. You're probably smarter than half of the people on this forum - the other half see exactly what you're doing and will run circles around you.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9572660].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author serpyre
        Originally Posted by ronrule View Post

        the other half see exactly what you're doing and will run circles around you.
        Excellent - but you see there is a problem with that little statement - we'll just wait like we have for the past year watching the whole small business ecosystem implode on itself. It's a great litmus test - as the service providers throw their toys out of the pram the clearer it all becomes - survival of the fittest and all.

        We're only interested in 700-1,000% sites - give away the information for free for people to implement themselves 300-500% sites (causing most here to have a turn) - and have no interest in 100-200% which 99.9% of the service providers here base their business on.

        So as no-one here knows how to build a 300-500% commerce system and as we have no interest in that level (too time consuming and generates too little revenue) - we'll just provide that information - the build plan is a good example - if retailers want to start their own discussion we'll guide them through the process. Now, given that ppc is 17% of marketing which is 8% of revenue - we are not doubting your ppc experience - just that there is another 98.64% to go!!!

        So go ahead and do what you need to do - as we know overall how 99% of the complete revenue chain sits together we don't need to do anything - only wait - we'll watch the show which unfortunately will take out most small business retailers going forward. Hopefully the odd one or two will use the information to their advantage and make it to the next level! On which note we're off for cocktails!!!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9572743].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author powerofschool
    Hi Going with SEO and PPC are required for your business. But initially to boost your leads definetely you need PPC .
    Signature
    Download Good Morning Images Here
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9572762].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    In conclusion - which is better SEO or PPC - you need both but in context of the overall business taking in to account the view from the retailer and the service provider.

    Let's take a retailer with a 60% gross profit margin who uses the standard 8% of revenue for marketing. As PPC is 19% of the overall sales channel you have 1.52% of revenue to allocate to PPC. Now, a PPC provider whose sole job is that market can 'soft' or 'hard' persuade a client to spend 5% of revenue on a campaign - that would mean a 328% increase in revenue for them. Would that translate to a 328% increase in retailer sales from a baseline - for the majority absolutely not.

    A retailer needs to compete against all companies, Amazon have a 30% gross profit margin at 4% of revenue for marketing - so on this basis if a small business allocates 100% of marketing to ppc the retailer would need a 526% increase in sales to justify the costs. It is the same is for SEO, email marketing, social media, affiliate and so on.

    So on the extreme fat tail you have a retailers view covering 1-2% - and on the other side the service providers view covering 98-99%. A retailer generating $100,000 at 30% gross profit margin with 4% marketing at 0.76% allocated to ppc (19% of 4%) is $63/mth to cover both the service provider fees and the actual ppc.

    Then there is the detail of the discussion which continued for 5days, let's assume there is a conclusion, even at 8% marketing it would take a retailer 6-9mths to gain any traction with their site due to the small part PPC & SEO plays in the overall revenue generation stream.

    Why are we different, we take a 99% diversification view across the complete revenue generation (divergent). Small business as now being squeezed by the efficiency of corporates running at 700-1,000%, this is filtering down so service providers are finding it increasingly harder to persuade retailers to pay their 500% increased revenue for 100-200% sales increases. Basically most service providers have been charging for mid-market efficiency but providing small business gains.

    So it is always in the interest of dedicated service providers to load the effects of that service - now if they can guarantee an equal percentage of sales increase from a baseline then it is a win:win, anything less and the retailer will foot the bill which covers the majority of cases. The increasing difficultly will lead the service providers being forced to diversify their skills – but they are going to fight it all the way. There is a reason 95% of all startups fail when both time and cost are taken in to account - this is it!

    If a retailer uses the figures of 19% of marketing for PPC (~1% of revenue), 24% of marketing for SEO (~1% of revenue), spends 4hrs doing both using a ‘best guess’, and takes the same approach with the complete install – the site will be live and running in 120hrs or 3wks. It is then down to the retailer whether they fail or not – most of the external influencing factors have been neutralised.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9578880].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author juk123
    Neither. Web design keywords cost a lot and getting a ranking for web design keywords with any volume ...well good luck with that. I'd look at alternatives to SEO and PPC. Why not advertise your web design services right here on the forum?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9578978].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jarvis Edwards
      Originally Posted by juk123 View Post

      Neither. Web design keywords cost a lot and getting a ranking for web design keywords with any volume ...well good luck with that. I'd look at alternatives to SEO and PPC. Why not advertise your web design services right here on the forum?
      Not true. Good PPC strategy is all the OP needs. A good PPC strategy wouldn't necessarily entail bidding on costly keywords. An experienced PPC'er knows how to find unique angles to present an offer or service, and thus choose lower competition keywords that cost only a fraction. Not to mention there are several PPC sources out there to choose from.

      It's all about strategy and experience.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9581842].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    Since a number of PPC advocates , managers and PPC only people have been crashing the SEO section I figured its fair game to return the favor

    and here looks like an appropriate thread.

    By all means do PPC first and only do PPC if you never want to touch SEO but don't be lulled into nonsense arguments like the one "Alexa" made. It makes ZERO sense

    The person clicking on google adword ads is the SAME person on Google's site doing searches. To say that they convert when they click the side bar but don't when they click the organic listings is just TOTAL nonsense.

    I know Ron tries to make the argument that you can't convert well and rank but that too is waaaaay off. Millions of ecommerce pages rank and make serious bank. Will you rank just a sales page? probably an up hill climb but really if you never do more than sales and squeeze pages you will not get serious repeat traffic and thats a huge loss (I don't care what garbage anyone claims people don't keep coming back to a sales page) for anyone who wants to be around for awhile.

    SO I'd definitely go with those who say do both. As you research and grow you are going to find keywords(long tail) that convert well here and there and with little to no competition. With the right links you can rank those in no time. To me its just beyond dumb as dirt to commit to forever paying for every visit for every term because you are afraid of all SEO.

    When ever you see somebody claiming they only do one thing , are only going to do one thing and getting organic traffic from a top three traffic providing site is a bad thing - Mark em and ignore em.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9580442].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Hi Mike,

      I tend to agree with the idea of using both PPC, and SEO, everywhere it makes sense to do so. However there are some keywords, and even a few niches that just perform way better on the ads verses the organic listings.

      Let me give you an example that hopefully provides a little clarity.

      In some cases people are actually using the search engine specifically for the ads, and totally ignore the organic results.

      Let's say you have a shopper that is interested in purchasing new carpeting for their living room. And let's say this shopper is on a budget and is looking for a store that is running a sale. They might type something in search like "sale on carpeting". A term like that is almost always going to perform way better for sponsored listings than for organic. We often see the sponsored listing garnering as much as 95% of all clicks on keywords that are similar to that, and this type of keyword often converts way above average.

      Every website is unique, and each keyword can be perform differently, there is never one channel that is always best in every situation. The key is to test, analyse the data, gain insights and apply those insights. There may be entire niches that perform significantly better, based on ROI using PPC, while there are niches that don't perform well at all on ads.

      One good thing I can say about PPC is it forces people to become more competent markers since you are literally paying for every click. For example, if you asked a group of PPC marketers what is the Cost Per Acquisition of a customer, most will know that number like the back of their hand. Not just the overall average CPA, mind you, they will be able to tell you the individual CPA for any and all important keywords. Ask the same question to a group of SEO marketers and typically half, or more, of the group will shrug their shoulders because they have no idea.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9580630].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

        Let's say you have a shopper that is interested in purchasing new carpeting for their living room. And let's say this shopper is on a budget and is looking for a store that is running a sale. They might type something in search like "sale on carpeting". A term like that is almost always going to perform way better for sponsored listings than for organic. We often see the sponsored listing garnering as much as 95% of all clicks on keywords that are similar to that, and this type of keyword often converts way above average.
        So? For every customer shopping only on price for carpet for their home you will have far more caring about a bit more than that plus the reason you would click that specifically is not because they say "ooooh let me click the ads" but because the title of the result is more targeted to their search. Have the right titles for your pages and you ALWAYS see click through rates increase. You might try getting a professional SEo if you try SEO again. they will know things like tht well established fact. Furthermore on competitive niches the only way you will get some customers who will never click any ad to the right is pay top dollar to appear in the organic column

        Every website is unique, and each keyword can be perform differently, there is never one channel that is always best in every situation. The key is to test, analyse the data, gain insights and apply those insights. There may be entire niches that perform significantly better, based on ROI using PPC, while there are niches that don't perform well at all on ads.
        Unfortunate as usual Don you are writing things just to write and sound like you are saying something.- everyne knows every site is unique. No one thinks the web is full of copies

        One good thing I can say about PPC is it forces people to become more competent markers since you are literally paying for every click. For example, if you asked a group of PPC marketers what is the Cost Per Acquisition of a customer, most will know that number like the back of their hand. Not just the overall average CPA, mind you, they will be able to tell you the individual CPA for any and all important keywords.
        knowing your cost per acquisition is not what makes you a competent marketer. Its a miniscule piece of the pie. Any competent marketer will end up looking long term, build relationships with customers over straight sales and provide service and support. That nowadays involves having a full website and once you have that you will want organic traffic flowing to it. No brainer why not? If anything SEo makes people think longer term which leads to more competency generally - but not necessarily either.

        Ask the same question to a group of SEO marketers and typically half, or more, of the group will shrug their shoulders because they have no idea.
        Well first

        Please present the data behind your claim that typically half or more don't know or admit your are making up numbers. IF you claim its anecdotal to your experience then let us know who you asked or its a claim that has no substance.

        Second

        You are not thinking. you have that cost more readily before your eyes because you pay for every eyeball. Has next to nothing to do with competence in marketing. Any advertising that doesn't pay that way will be in the same situation. Television you will not have those numbers as readily available. Neither radio, newspapers or magazine or billboard ads etc. they all give you much wider exposure but they don't directly cost per view. Thats their plus not their minus.

        Claiming that forces you to be a more competent marketer as if peope who utilize television, radio and newspaper are less competent is sorry - just rambling nonsense
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9581131].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author dburk
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Well first

          Please present the data behind your claim that typically half or more don't know or admit your are making up numbers. IF you claim its anecdotal to your experience then let us know who you asked or its a claim that has no substance.

          Second

          You are not thinking. you have that cost more readily before your eyes because you pay for every eyeball. Has next to nothing to do with competence in marketing. Any advertising that doesn't pay that way will be in the same situation. Television you will not have those numbers as readily available. Neither radio, newspapers or magazine or billboard ads etc. they all give you much wider exposure but they don't directly cost per view. Thats their plus not their minus.

          Claiming that forces you to be a more competent marketer as if peope who utilize television, radio and newspaper are less competent is sorry - just rambling nonsense
          This is actually an old argument. Please allow me to defer to one of the worlds most renowned marketers, David Ogilvy, that has written volumes of books about it. He has plenty to say about the differences in approach for direct response advertisers verses the "creative" radio, TV, newspaper and magazine camps.

          In the world of Internet marketing, PPC is the modern day equivalent of the direct mail response of the past. The same argument was made by Ogilvy for the exact same reason. Just as he could instantly recognize radio and TV ads that were created by experienced direct response marketers, one can identify SEO campaigns managed by experienced PPC marketers. They know their numbers and they use scientific approach with a lot of data analysis. They know their costs and you never hear them refer to SEO as "free".

          In all the years I have been a reader here at WF I think I could count the discussions about CPA, value per click, and cost per click for SEO on one hand, perhaps on one finger. It is painfully obvious that most SEO marketers, that do SEO exclusively, have absolutely no interest in knowing that kind of data, most certainly do not discuss it often, or ever, in public forums like here at WF.

          SEO marketers that have been trained in PPC bring to that channel of marketing a set of skills and practices that seems relatively rare within the SEO workers' community. That was, and remains my point. Ogilvy has written about it extensively in his books. Here is a short video where he touches on the same concept:


          Just as Ogilvy argues for the integration of Direct Response departments with general advertising, I likewise argue for the combining of PPC with SEO for a fully integrated SEM marketing strategy, for roughly the same reasons.

          Please don't take me wrong on this, I am not implying that no SEO marketer ever learns and uses these skills, only that on the rare occasions you see it, it almost invariable turns out to be a person that has been trained and experienced in PPC marketing. There is something to be said for that.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9581827].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by dburk View Post

            This is actually an old argument. Please allow me to defer to one of the worlds most renowned marketers, David Ogilvy, that has written volumes of books about it. He has plenty to say about the differences in approach for direct response advertisers verses the "creative" radio, TV, newspaper and magazine camps.
            Olgivy never said tracking cost per click forces you to become a good marketer. Trying to solicit him on another point to back up that failed point is just more empty pontification from you. LOl. its like you can't stop spouting nonsense as if you are imparting gems.. If Olgivy would have heard you make that claim he would have rapped you on the head with a folded up newspaper

            Just as he could instantly recognize radio and TV ads that were created by experienced direct response marketers, one can identify SEO campaigns managed by experienced PPC marketers. They know their numbers and they use scientific approach with a lot of data analysis.
            Yep so olgivy was saying exactly what you were not - that nothing forces you to become a good marketer and certainly not PPV. becoming a good marketer depends on other things which you can utilize regardless of methodology. So sad that you always have to be instructed on the obvious. I mean lol everyone else reading this knows that your point that PPC forces you to become a competent marketer is nonsense but still you weather on.

            They know their costs and you never hear them refer to SEO as "free".
            Lying by innuendo will get you nowhere . I never stated SEO was free shucks I charge to do it you silly person so why in the world would I? I merely pointed out that the people who were referring it as free were talking about cash not time costs. thats not a denial of time costs as you seem incapable of understanding but a correction to their usage of the word free you were maligning.

            In all the years I have been a reader here at WF I think I could count the discussions about CPA, value per click, and cost per click for SEO on one hand, perhaps on one finger.
            Sigh .... must I explain everything to you? Can't you just find a good tutorial on SEO and come back when you are ready to intelligently discuss the issue? Its certain that time is not now because you aren't. The reason why you don't see that discussed openly often on the forums is because with SEO you cannot nail the variables down before hand. With PPC you can calculate exactly how many clicks you wish to pay for and cap it. With SEO you can exceed your projections because with SEO you don't play for each click. calculations are therefore made on the back of the campaign and also have to be averaged over a longer time period because SEO has residual traffic effects where PPC traffic ends when you stop paying. SInce you can get traffic coming in for some time then the real cost per visit. continues to slide downward. People rarely talk about past successful campaigns and calculating cost per click because the SEO forum is more given to addressing future or ongoing campaigns and how to rank

            Elementary

            Incidentally I seldom see any discussion about accounting and book keeping on WF either. That doesn't mean no one utilizes it. Trying to make projections of how much people do things merely by whether they talk about doing it on a forum is shoddy in regard to understanding scientific methodology

            It is painfully obvious that most SEO marketers, that do SEO exclusively, have absolutely no interest in knowing that kind of data, most certainly do not discuss it often, or ever, in public forums like here at WF.
            So um the answer to my question is no you don't have any data and you can't name a SEO that you polled. Thats okay . It was always "painfully obvious" you were pulling your numbers out you ears. .

            Heres the thing though. every post you just add to your blunders. Why? I don't know any regular at WF who talks SEO who only does SEO. Most marketers here do at least two forms of promotion. I do four and SURPRISE!!! one of them sometimes is PPC.


            Just as Ogilvy argues for the integration of Direct Response departments with general advertising, I likewise argue for the combining of PPC with SEO for a fully integrated SEM marketing strategy, for roughly the same reasons.
            I already have stated people can do both. Where you are getting your head handed to you is not on using both but the ridiculous claim that PPC forces people to become competent marketers. Can you give me the time stamp in the video where Olgilvy states that? or are you hoping just putting up a video where he doesn't back you on that will fool people that he is backing you on that point?

            My bet is the latter eh?
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9582313].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author dburk
              Here we go again.. more distortions, and non sequiturs. Nothing you said merits a response.

              Let's just agree that we have very different viewpoints and stop trying to twist my words into your own demented monologue. I said what I said, let my words stand on their own. Tell us what you think not what you think I think.

              If you happen to decide to discuss the topic without all the over-the-top vitriol I'm game, but not going to stoop to addressing the name calling tantrums.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9582428].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Doesn't need a response but still responded....against vitriol and name calling but i am "demented". The perfect self rebuttals. As I recall I never addressed you in this thread but you just felt you had to engage me again and um you talking about monologues? Seriously?

                No one twisted your words. Stop lying on me because you can't defend your statement that

                One good thing I can say about PPC is it forces people to become more competent markers since you are literally paying for every click.
                PPC does no such thing. Like any other marketing strategy you can be totally incompetent using it. Knowing cost per click does not make you more competent as a marketer. People have known they are paying for every click and still are lousy marketers with no improvement. What PPC will do if you suck is push you out of the game real fast because you are paying for every click. IF that forced people to become more competent then so many people would not lose their shirt with PPC (and plenty lose their shirt with SEO as well)

                Anyone can see in my first post in this thread me stating that PPC is fine and if you don't want to ever do SEO then go for it but your game all over WF is to malign whoever does like and advocate SEO as you have so CLEARLY proven again by making statements about what most people who do SEO don't know about or only do to allege superiority for you because you are trying to get more people to use you to manage their PPC.

                Its stupid. Thousands of businesses are doing great concentrating on SEO and thousands are doing great with PPC.

                Like I said before I will say again to anyone reading. Whenever you see someone claiming that something/someone is wrong, inferior, less competent for choosing to concentrate on getting traffic from a top 3 traffic generating site mark em and avoid them because they don't know what they are talking about. People have and will continue to make money doing TV, Radio magazines, SEO, direct mail PPC and on and on and only a "demented' soul claims by virtue of choosing one to concentrate on they are inferior marketers and don't know basics of marketing.

                Like I said ...thats just too stupid and its unworthy of anymore of my time.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9582569].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author walkerking
    I think SEO is the best way of increasing the website ranking. you can use the quality content post relevant website posting and high page rank submission. Zero and N/A website are not effect of your ranking. best strategies for increasing the website ranking are given below:
    1. Blog Posting
    2. Article Submission
    3. Press Release
    4. Forum Posting
    5. Yahoo Answers
    6. Classifieds Ads
    7. Image Sharing

    PPC ads are more successful when they involve planning. You need to do some thorough research on your target demographic. This will help you learn what type of messaging you'll need to use in order to get people to click through. You also need to research what keywords will be the most effective for your company. Think of a list of keywords that people will use to locate your business, products or services and write them down. Then use Google's Keyword Tool to help you learn which of these keywords is the most successful as well as help you learn other keywords that you may have overlooked.
    Signature

    Looking for Long distance movers, Use Movers Quote services when you move long distance as NJ, NY, MD. It is among recognized long distance moving companies to bring your items.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9580675].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author berz
      PPC to find keywords that work then try to rank on them. That's if your product is a long term one. Otherwise just PPC.

      Just my 2 cents
      Signature

      If you think you can, or you think you can't, you're probably right.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9580700].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Datangle
    According to me. SEO is the best way to get strong visits and back links as well rankings.
    Signature

    I am the owner of this Dallas Ad Poster . I am here to know about SEO process to develop this website.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9581004].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seopnc
    PPC and SEO both are good techniques.Both has own advantages.PPC provide quick result but it is paid ans SEO is free and long term process.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9581283].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dhanakncet
    For instant lead you need to prefer PPC but its premium. for low budget people SEO is the best one - it will take time to get positions & Traffic.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9582907].message }}
  • Neither. SEO traffic is free and PPC is paid.
    Cost of SEO is indirect. You cannot pay to get to the first page but you may have to pay for SEO services if you cannot do SEO yourself. For PPC, you pay only when people click on your ad. You can use the Google keyword tool to calculate how much you can pay.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9583024].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jac0b
    An illustrated article about differences between SEO and PPC PPC vs. SEO - Quick Results or Sustainable Effects? - Positionly Blog
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9583035].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BritishMike
    PPC - quick results, almost guaranteed (if you know what you're doing)
    SEO - slow results, not guaranteed (even if you know what you're doing)

    Only one winner for me...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9583511].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by BritishMike View Post

      SEO - slow results, not guaranteed (even if you know what you're doing)
      Correction. If you know what you are doing then SEO IS guaranteed. Why?

      If you know what you are doing then you should always be targeting 10-20 or more terms and only after competition and keyword research.

      If you don't rank for a few or even one then you didn't know what you were doing. The biggest problem with SEO nowadays is that its usually the person who doesn't know about competition research that is determining the keywords to go after.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9586287].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dburk
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        The biggest problem with SEO nowadays is that its usually the person who doesn't know about competition research that is determining the keywords to go after.
        Hear, hear.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9586670].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Malachi Terry
          The debate between SEO or PPC is always going to be somewhat of a heated conversation but the thing to keep in mind is that regardless, they both drive traffic. With out traffic you can't optimize for conversions. In all honesty the two methods work hand in hand if approached properly because SEO should be your foundation. PPC cost money and in return you get almost immediate results with highly targeted traffic, as opposed to SEO being organic and in most cases slower results but also highly targeted traffic. The main thing to focus on is testing to see what source of traffic works best for you, not what works for someone else. Any experienced marketer will tell you that in order to stay ahead, you need to be innovative and think outside the box. Remember, what works for someone else doesn't always work for you!
          Signature

          If your Affiliate Manager sucks or is costing you money, then you need to see this! ==>Click Here<==

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9586804].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author austyn13x
    thanks for the helpful post warriors!
    Signature

    $1 5+ google rank backlinks, 100k real safe youtube views for 65$,100k traffic for 40$
    blackhatgoods.com/

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9585287].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Brandboyz
    Banned
    seo and ppc both are good
    Pay Per Click is one of the fastest ways to jump-start your business with traffic today.
    Search Engine Optimization is also important but will definitely take a lot longer to generate results and traffic. If your website is brand new, you're going to be trapped in the "Google Sandbox" for at least the first few months of your website's existence. SEO is going to bring you the best kinds of traffic and the most qualified leads.
    Plus, your SEO efforts is all going to help your PPC results as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587383].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author PaulMeyer
    Start with ppc first, it is the fastest way to get traffic
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587482].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author digitalfidz
    Hi Geek,

    Initially you can go with both, use ppc for instant result and as well as continue with seo so after some month you will also rank organically on web.
    Thanks
    Signature

    ---------- SEO Hindi Video Tutorials ---------

    SEO video tutorial in Hindi for beginners See Now

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587980].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Popche
    PPC is way faster than SEO so you will get quicker results and more traffic but if you get the SEO right you will crush down everything but as they said it takes a lot of time ,effort and knowledge to make the right decisions and get the right information...

    But it is just a perspective its your call
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590815].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author techstrong
    SEO is the best way to get the more traffic from the search engine .if you started a new business then you prefer the PPC because PPC gives the instant result.but for the long time SEO is good
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591169].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ste Murphy
    PPC would be my prefered option as SEO is not a strong point of mine. Thanks guys some great info here!
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591675].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Shkoczhek
    seo always work better than ppc in my opinion, its cheaper!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595230].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Hena2019
    I want to increase my knowledge on seo. Could you tell what should i do?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596825].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author OnTheRun
    You should start reading SEO blogs, seo books, follow seo experts on social media.
    But don't limit yourself to just reading about it, learn by doing!
    It's what I did, and I'm no expert, but I tried, failed, tried again, failed successfully (..again) but after a while you'll learn what you should do, what you shouldn't and you'll see results.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596883].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author razorz18
    Test with PPC and then when you have big traffic you could start reduce PPC budget and focus on SEO. SEO take time. During your PPC campaign, you could use some SEO tactics in order to get best conversion for your product.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9598109].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MWatson
    Let's look at this way...

    SEO --> takes a long time, but once set you will FLOOD your site with targeted visitors.
    PPC--> fast results, obviously paid advertising, what will work today won't necessarily work Tommorow.


    My choice, SEO. But I like to have a good mix of both.


    Cheers,
    Mark
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9598139].message }}
  • I don't understand your "SEO is not per click" statement. The object is to get traffic. Clicks. If your efforts don't get ranking, you don't get clicks. So SEO is per click. Any marketing effort is per click or per customer coming into your store. And these can be tracked. Once tracked, a cost per acquisition and ROI can be calculated.

    The guessing part is partly removed because you have hard evidence that doing A brings X. It does not mean that doing A again will bring exactly X. But I would rather try A than B which did not bring as good results. The more information you have, the better your chances at success.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9600324].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by LucidWebMarketing View Post

      I don't understand your "SEO is not per click" statement.
      What's not to understand?? Your cost does not go up with every click as with PPC. Pretty basic stuff not to understand.

      The object is to get traffic. Clicks. If your efforts don't get ranking, you don't get clicks
      And who are you informing as if they said otherwise??? Did I say anywhere the objective was to get love or peace on earth?

      And these can be tracked. Once tracked, a cost per acquisition and ROI can be calculated.
      Yes well after the fact with SEO so thanks for agreeing with me.

      The guessing part is partly removed because you have hard evidence that doing A brings X. It does not mean that doing A again will bring exactly X. But I would rather try A than B which did not bring as good results. The more information you have, the better your chances at success.
      Like I said and flew over your head again. You CAN get some metrics as to conversions. they are dubious however for SEO because organic often shows different conversion rates in MANY niches.

      Organic vs. Paid Search Results: Organic Wins 94% of Time - SEW

      Google Organic Click Through Rate Statistics | BrandonGaille.com



      What you CANNOT do with any degree of accuracy (not even a matter of being exact) is determine ROI going in to SEO because you did PPC.

      A) you generally get more traffic per impression with organic than PPC
      B) your overall traffic will depend on placement
      C) your actual cost will depend on competition regardless of traffic

      In addition your logic is shoddy

      Doing A is PPC
      resulting in X ( a fixed ROI)

      SEO is not A because it is not PPC its SEO so its B

      and therefore you cannot claim B will bring x because A did so you are STILL in fact guessing. You, like I noticed Don was trying to do, are pretending that PPC is an indicator of the future for SEO which in too many cases is just false.

      Its very clear that you two PPC focused service providers (i looked you up) just don't understand SEO very well at all or you would not be making the ridiculous claim that beyond conversion rates PPC is going to give you ROI data on organic.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9600484].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dburk
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        You CAN get some metrics as to conversions. they are dubious however for SEO because organic often shows different conversion rates in MANY niches.

        Organic vs. Paid Search Results: Organic Wins 94% of Time - SEW

        Google Organic Click Through Rate Statistics | BrandonGaille.com
        I see nothing dubious at all with those stats. You seem to be pointing to the differences in conversion rates across a range of different keywords. What Lucid and I and talking about are conversion rates from the exact same audience that click through from the exact same page, that was displayed from the exact same keyword search term, and arrives at the exact same landing page. All the significant variables are controlled, you can't get a much more valid form of testing then this. Many actual real-world tests have supported the results as valid and extremely accurate. Go ahead give it a try if you do not believe any of us that have actually tested this.

        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        What you CANNOT do with any degree of accuracy (not even a matter of being exact) is determine ROI going in to SEO because you did PPC.

        A) you generally get more traffic per impression with organic than PPC
        As was pointed out by the sources you yourself cited above, that is simply not true for high commercial intent generic keywords. You own citation claims that nearly two thirds of all clicks for high commercial intent keywords go to paid ads. Most SEO activity centers around high commercial intent generic keywords, right?


        B) your overall traffic will depend on placement
        C) your actual cost will depend on competition regardless of traffic
        I don't think anyone has argued against those points, nor are they relevant to the points that were made by Lucid.

        In addition your logic is shoddy

        Doing A is PPC
        resulting in X ( a fixed ROI)

        SEO is not A because it is not PPC its SEO so its B

        and therefore you cannot claim B will bring x because A did so you are STILL in fact guessing. You, like I noticed Don was trying to do, are pretending that PPC is an indicator of the future for SEO which in too many cases is just false.
        While I cannot speak for Lucid, I did not take that statement to mean what you are asserting was meant. It seemed quite clear to me that he was referring to calculating a ROI for your SEO campaign using valid data for value per click from a PPC test and applying that to the estimated cost of your SEO campaign. Perhaps you misinterpreted what he meant? Why not ask for clarification before jumping to malicious comments?

        Its very clear that you two PPC focused service providers (i looked you up) just don't understand SEO very well at all or you would not be making the ridiculous claim that beyond conversion rates PPC is going to give you ROI data on organic.
        Perhaps you are wrong abut that as well, as usual, you are trying to add your own twist by redefining what was actually stated to some perversion of what you, in your own mind, imagined was meant. You don't get to redefine what we meant by our words that is just distortion of the truth. Let our words stand for what we meant, if it doesn't make sense to you then please ask for clarification. Please don't try to twist and distort the meaning of our words into something unintended.

        Absolutely none of your attempts to impugned the true efficacy of our methods have born fruit, that's what happens when you argue against the truth. A truth by the way that you yourself have never even put to the test.

        Again I cannot speak for Lucid, but I will say that he has posted advice on this board for years and his knowledge is clearly way above the average when it comes to SEM. I must confess that I do indeed offer Search Engine Marketing services on a professional basis that includes both PPC and SEO (along with other website promotional services). I do not have a preference of one over the other, I use both and enjoy a great deal of synergy from integrated strategies.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9600921].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by dburk View Post

          I see nothing dubious at all with those stats. You seem to be pointing to the differences in conversion rates across a range of different keywords
          Nope.... I didn't say there was anything dubious at all. Look whose trying to twist?? I merely pointed out one of MANY links/studies that show differences of conversions between organic and PPC which illustrates in some instances why you cannot use PPC conversions to project organic. Simple Don. Now you are showing you are not even up on PPC.

          What Lucid and I and talking about are conversion rates from the exact same audience that click through from the exact same page, that was displayed from the exact same keyword search term, and arrives at the exact same landing page.
          Wrong again Don. They are not the exact same audience. Sheesh you are very bad at this. Theres a whole segment of people that will NEVER click an ad link. The act of clicking on an ad as opposed to organic filters those people out when you do PPC. This is elementary stuff and its one of the reasons why organic in some instances is projected to close better and in some cases worse. Seh la vie

          As was pointed out by the sources you yourself cited above, that is simply not true for high commercial intent generic keywords.
          I said the ratio for higher commercial intent was closer days ago Don. that goes whether for per impressions or for conversions on page . Not the issue . The issue is that your idea of using a PPC campaign conversion rate (be it higher or lower) to project organic in that and other cases would be entirely flawed. sometimes it does work out some times not so much. Incidentally I cited two to show there are differences from one study to another. You just skipped over the other one

          http://searchenginewatch.com/article...ins-94-of-Time

          Either way the point is crystal clear. Using PPC, (much less claiming PPC should be used For SEO calculations of cost to value) as some reliable way of projecting organic ROI is nonsense.

          Most SEO activity centers around high commercial intent generic keywords, right?
          They center around commercial intent but not high commercial intent. It seems you don't understand what that means. A guy looking to research life insurance to make a purchase has commercial intent. while a guy gone past that stage and looking who to buy it from has high commercial intent

          as usual, you are trying to add your own twist by redefining what was actually stated to some perversion of what you, in your own mind, imagined was meant.s.
          Do you have any other tactic? an honest one perhaps? You use this one very often and it doesn't and will never work with me. You were the one that claimed that SEos on this forum do not use cost value calculations simply because they do not discuss it much. I presented why they don't speak about it much because its done on the backend and the cost cannot be ascertained before hand and said it was a guess going in and you and Lucid claimed that it need not be.

          Now you are forced to admit that yes there are a number of variables and you can only estimate (same as a guess) and cannot explain how cost is going to be determined heading into a campaign so you go to fudging that you never said what you said and I am twisting. Totally dishonest ploy on your part.

          So again Don please tell the class how you are going to determine cost value of SEO based on PPC when you do not know the cost of positioning the page
          organically or if you can't at least have the integrity to withdraw your accusation that SEOs here do not use cost value calculations just because, it being different in organic,they do not discuss it as much going into a campaign.

          Absolutely none of your attempts to impugned the true efficacy of our methods have born fruit, that's what happens when you argue against the truth. A truth by the way that you yourself have never even put to the test.
          Utter drivelling nonsense. Go do some research. No one needs to take your or my self attested anecdotal evidence. The differences with how you can and cannot calculate value to cost in organic SEO as opposed to PPC are well known , have been tested multiple times and are available on the net for anyone who wished to look. Your game is to constantly critique SEOs here even going into the SEO section to do so. Your criticisms have been debunked again so all you have are self proclamations
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9600985].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Yes, Mike, if you are able to establish a conversion rate, and you know that value of what you are selling, then you have everything you need to calculate the value per click, it's just simple math:
      Value Per Conversion * Conversion rate = Value Per Click

      And you can even put away your calculators and spreadsheets, you don't even need to do the math because AdWords reports have a column that displays the exact Value Per Click. This makes it quick and easy to test thousands of keywords and have precise value per click data for each keyword.

      Since you also have monthly search volume and CTR for ads at various positions on the SERP you can easily extrapolate an estimated total value based on anticipated clicks after reaching specific positions within the organic listings. And while this isn't going to predict the precise value, it definitely gives you enough data to predict within a reasonable range, and certainly a number for comparing relative value within a group of keyword candidates.

      To get the other side of the equation, "cost", which has many more unknown variables, you must rely on your own experience and knowledge and, as you pointed out, competitive metrics, to formulate a rough estimate. If you are anywhere near as good at SEO as you would have us believe you shouldn't have any difficulty estimating that within a reasonable range. VoilĂ , everything needed to make a data driven decision is now at your disposal.

      You can try to pick that apart, but it is a fact that many advanced SEO practitioners currently use these techniques in real live campaigns, this isn't a hypothetical, it is real-world current day practice employed by hundreds, perhaps thousands of marketers.

      While I realize that math, science and probability statistics may be over the head of many SEO workers, it seems to me, Mike, that you are smart enough to learn this if you were only willing to try. Why not set aside your non scientific skepticism and give it a go? If you get stuck, just post on this forum and some of us will gladly help you get past whatever you get stuck on.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9600556].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

        Yes, Mike, if you are able to establish a conversion rate, and you know that value of what you are selling, then you have everything you need to calculate the value per click, it's just simple math:
        Value Per Conversion * Conversion rate = Value Per Click
        Don since you insist on responding when I am not even talking to you let me relate - I am sorry You are just too dense.on this issue. If you do not know traffic to cost of the SEO campaign due to competition (which you always leave out because you just don't get SEO) you cannot calculate how many clicks you will get and therefore you cannot calculate overall ROI. As I repeated to your other wannabe PPC management provider. THAT was the issue. Value per click is not in dispute except as everyone who does both knows PPC conversion rates are not necessarily conversion rates of organic. Fool yourself and the newbies with that. People behave differently when they click ads as opposed to organic listings (I've presented two links to that and it has been researched many times. You should look it up) and thats well known but again conversions are not the issue as ROI is not determined solely by conversion rates Don. Read up some more basic business books.

        Since you also have monthly search volume
        ROFL....see? you do no amount of SEO to know better. Every SEO knows that the monthly search volume provided is wildly off in many instances . The best you do is use that as a very general guide but here comes your biggest issue why you just can't grasp ROI calculations in SEO ---


        and CTR for ads at various positions on the SERP you can easily extrapolate an estimated total value based on anticipated clicks after reaching specific positions within the organic listings.
        and um how will you determine what it will cost to get to that position eh Don? Its not PPC where you can set a bid price to get to a position. Light bulb going off yet on why you can't approach SEO ROI the same way as with PPC? Finally Don?? saying "after you reach a specific position" just jumps right over what it will take to get that position which is entirely different from PPC and drastically affects the final ROI calculation. But please in your next post tell us all how you will derive the numbers of what it will cost to get to the position organically based on PPC. it should be very entertaining.


        To get the other side of the equation, "cost", which has many more unknown variables, you must rely on your own experience and knowledge and, as you pointed out, competitive metrics, to formulate a rough estimate
        Ah......LOL.... so in others words like I said....You have to Guess. So a little light did get through and why SEOs would do real ROI calculations on the back end (explaining why its discussed less on the forums). You just want to save face so won't admit it.

        If you are anywhere near as good at SEO as you would have us believe you shouldn't have any difficulty estimating that within a reasonable range. VoilĂ ,
        Voila I am good enough not to blow smoke at my clients and tell them ROI numbers that I can't tell them. My estimates (your fudge word to avoid saying "guess") will give them a reasonable estimation of whether sales will increase and profit will be made but thats not any seasoned businessman's idea of ROI numbers.

        it is a fact that many advanced SEO practitioners currently use these techniques in real live campaigns, this isn't a hypothetical, it is real-world current day practice employed by hundreds, perhaps thousands of marketers.
        .
        The fact is that you are not a professional SEO Don. I've read you enough to know that (your claim link outreach is not SEO was the clearest example of ignorance on the subject)and whats real world is what I have been telling you in the differences between SEO and PPC that you clearly don't and it seems never will understand. NO professional SEO would talk about ROI and cost to value of SEO without addressing the competition level in a serp like you did and its a dead giveaway you do little SEO to understand it..
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9600871].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author dburk
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Don since you insist on responding when I am not even talking to you let me relate - I am sorry You are just too dense.on this issue. If you do not know traffic to cost of the SEO campaign due to competition (which you always leave out because you just don't get SEO) you cannot calculate how many clicks you will get and therefore you cannot calculate overall ROI.
          Wow mike, you just keep arguing abouts points on which we do not disagree, while ignoring the points that we are actually asserting.

          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Value per click is not in dispute except as everyone who does both knows PPC conversion rates are not necessarily conversion rates of organic. Fool yourself and the newbies with that. People behave differently when they click ads as opposed to organic listings (I've presented two links to that and it has been researched many times.
          Now I will disagree on that assertion.

          The average conversion rates across all organic keywords is indeed different from the average for PPC, when looking at the 2 groups in aggregate. That is due to the fact that most clicks on organic searches are informational and not high commercial intent keywords. But we are not talking about averages of aggregated totals, we are talking about specific keywords that are targeted presumably for high commercial intent.

          We are referring to the exact same audience who searched for the exact same term, and clicked through from the exact same Search result page, and landed on the exact same landing page. There is rarely any meaningful statistical difference in conversion rates between organic and sponsored listings in that data.

          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          You should look it up) and thats well known but again conversions are not the issue as ROI is not determined solely by conversion rates Don. Read up some more basic business books.
          Again no one made that assertion, so no need to look it up and it is just an irrelevant assertion (classic Mike non sequitur).

          ROFL....see? you do no amount of SEO to know better. Every SEO knows that the monthly search volume provided is wildly off in many instances . The best you do is use that as a very general guide but here comes your biggest issue why you just can't grasp ROI calculations in SEO ---
          You do realize that it is so obvious when you are just making things up as you go as it often starts with "Every SEO knows" or similar. This is a technique known as "Argumentum ad populum" and appears to be one of your favorite goto fallicy arguments.

          I challenge you to provide a single example of the search volume being wildly off. I'm not asserting it has never ever happened, just that it is extremely rare to ever see inaccurate search volume data from the AdWords keyword tools.
          and um how will you determine what it will cost to get to that position eh Don? Its not PPC where you can set a bid price to get to a position. Light bulb going off yet on why you can't approach SEO ROI the same way as with PPC? Finally Don?? saying "after you reach a specific position" just jumps right over what it will take to get that position which is entirely different from PPC and drastically affects the final ROI calculation. But please in your next post tell us all how you will derive the numbers of what it will cost to get to the position organically based on PPC. it should be very entertaining.
          Again I didn't make that assertion, you did. And then you pretend to argue with me against it.You are only arguing with your own assertions. Let me know how that works out?

          Ah......LOL.... so in others words like I said....You have to Guess. So a little light did get through and why SEOs would do real ROI calculations on the back end (explaining why its discussed less on the forums). You just want to save face so won't admit it.
          There you go again... arguing against your own assertions. I did not make that assertion, you did. Go ahead and argue with yourself some more, I'll just stand by as you make your imaginary argument. (classic Mike non sequitur)

          Voila I am good enough not to blow smoke at my clients and tell them ROI numbers that I can't tell them. My estimates (your fudge word to avoid saying "guess") will give them a reasonable estimation of whether sales will increase and profit will be made but thats not any seasoned businessman's idea of ROI numbers.
          Again, there you go arguing against your own assertion while pretending it was made by someone else.

          My point has always been about data driven decision making, using data to inform our marketing decisions. You insist on trying to distort other people's words to a different meaning by taking them out of context and attributing them to things that were not implied.

          The fact is that you are not a professional SEO Don. I've read you enough to know that (your claim link outreach is not SEO was the clearest example of ignorance on the subject)and whats real world is what I have been telling you in the differences between SEO and PPC that you clearly don't and it seems never will understand. NO professional SEO would talk about ROI and cost to value of SEO without addressing the competition level in a serp like you did and its a dead giveaway you do little SEO to understand it..
          Again twisting and distorting. You implying things that were not said. Argue with yourself, I am not going to participate in your delusions.

          Regarding website promotional activities, like link building, I am not pulling this concept out of thin air, the precise definition of what is considered SEO has been debated in forums like WebmasterWorld for a long time. I personally favor the more precise definition that SEO is something we do to content to allow search engines to properly understand the relevant keywords for the page.

          Please allow me to quote a 3rd party source:

          "Search engine marketing (SEM) is a form of Internet marketing that involves the promotion of websites by increasing their visibility in search engine results pages (SERPs) through optimization and advertising.[1] SEM may use search engine optimization (SEO), which adjusts or rewrites website content to achieve a higher ranking in search engine results pages, or use pay per click (PPC) listings."

          source: Search engine marketing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

          I happen to agree with that description.

          Other activities like "link building" is technically website promotional activities. I don't deny that many SEO folks do link building with the intent of manipulating search results. But it doesn't change the fact that the activity is promotional in nature.

          Link building activity predates the earliest SEO efforts and originally was exclusively website promotional activity. And even today there are many links built purely for website promotional benefits, without regard to search engines. The fact that we can perform SEO on content used in links does not change the nature of the activity from that of promotional. So it is my opinion that link building and other similar activity is promotional in nature whether or not the content is also optimized for SEO. That is my opinion and I am not alone in this opinion,

          Many link builders and web spammers prefer to call their activities SEO, I get why the do. SEO is generally a more respectable term for marketing purposes. Technically speaking, from my perspective, it would be accurate to call link building, or "link outreach", SEM. It doesn't always include SEO and it seems more promotional in nature. While I do understand that it is very popular to call it SEO, I just quibble a bit with the technical accuracy of that label. When it comes to SEO, I usually do not follow the crowd mentality, I prefer accurate labels and don't go in for the deceptive marketing terms just because they are "popular".

          You can call me all the names you want because I don't conform to your notion of what is popular and common. As long as I continue to get tens of thousands of transactions from search engine traffic each month I can live with the name calling. Just please stop trying to distort what I wrote. Let my words speak for themselves and use your words to speak for you.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9601142].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Don I scanned the first part of your last post and it bored me too much to go on reading. Looks like your same ole same ole nonsense. better luck next time
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9601152].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Del
    Both are great. PPC would be more quicker to set up than SEO. You gotta keep an eye on your PPC campaigns tho, making adjustments here and there and scaling up what is working well

    :-)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9600934].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Softeclabs
    When Is It Best To Use SEO?

    SEO refers to a classification of techniques that are aimed to propel a particular website to the first page of the major search engines.

    SEO is very important for online businesses, as statistics show that 80% of the traffic that can be generated for any website will come from the search engines. The biggest search engine is undoubtedly Google, which garners more than 400 million searches per day, hence, most SEO campaigns target this specific search engine.

    So, when should you use SEO techniques? Below are some circumstances when SEO would prove highly beneficial for an online business.

    When Is It Best To Use PPC?

    Now we go to the other side of the SEO vs. PPC debate.

    Pay-per-click marketing is a method of advertising on search engine results pages. Basically, you bid to have your ads appear in the sponsored results when someone types in a query including your keywords.

    Why is it named "pay per click"? Because you have to pay for every user who clicks on the ad you are promoting.

    Popular PPC systems include Google AdWords, Yahoo Advertising, and Facebook's advertising platform. Niche-specific PPC systems also abound. One good example is PlentyOfFish.com's advertisement option, which works wonderfully with dating offers.

    So, when should you use PPC marketing? Below are some circumstances when PPC would prove highly beneficial for an online business.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9600954].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author abrahamkornel
    Banned
    Exactly, SEO is very long...so if you must choose from these two, then PPC, but...if you ask me i would not pay for it, but find a way how to promote better...blog, review site, etc is much better.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9604188].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author PaulMeyer
    Ppc is the fastest way to get traffic
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9604892].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rotomds
    Banned
    I think SEO is best for marketing a website on online.
    Coz, SEO is a effective marketing system. But ppc is ot effective marketing system like SEO.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9607478].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Josh Mayers
    Originally Posted by Geek3000 View Post

    Im looking to advertise my web design business. I am leaning towards PPC but don't know where to start. I would prefer to hire a company to do my PPC for me. Any recommendations? The other option is SEO but I don't want to wait around for rankings. It seems like PPC will be good for immediate results. What are your thoughts? Thanks
    **************************************

    Hey Geek3000

    I have found that focusing on SEO FIRST, and then scaling with PPC has gotten me the best results.

    Plus, it only makes sense to have free traffic on autopilot and generating you commissions that you can invest back in to paid traffic. :-)

    Hope this helps!

    -Josh
    Signature
    Learn How I Went From A Dreadful Day Job To $1,000+ Paydays Online...
    ~ www.LimitlessLivingEnterprises.com ~
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9607533].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author leilapearse
    Banned
    Hi there Geek3000! A combination of both is quite a good one. For PPC, I would say that the best option for you is to outsource.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9610288].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author arindamroy
    Both PPC and SEO have their strong points. But I would prefer to do some SEO work first and then go for PPC. This way I would get some traffic and then put my money on PPC.
    Signature

    Above All Advertising,Inc. - custom inflatable advertising and signage provider

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9613883].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jarvis Edwards
      Originally Posted by arindamroy View Post

      Both PPC and SEO have their strong points. But I would prefer to do some SEO work first and then go for PPC. This way I would get some traffic and then put my money on PPC.
      So you don't mind spending a TON of time doing SEO, that may or may not get you any more visitors to your site, BEFORE doing PPC?

      How about learning PPC as much as possible while doing SEO? Even if you just start by only reading best practices, but not yet spending money on it, you will benefit.

      SEO is like going to Vegas with the attitude:
      "I'm going to win some money...eventually. I don't know how much I'll win, or even IF I'll win.
      "

      PPC is more like going to Vegas thinking:
      "I'm going to learn how to play as best as I can so I can eventually gain an advantage over the house and win my money back."
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9615766].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by Jarvis Edwards View Post

        So you don't mind spending a TON of time doing SEO, that may or may not get you any more visitors to your site, BEFORE doing PPC?
        Hey Jarvis if you know what you are doing SEO will ALWAYS get you traffic. What you said above is a myth.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9616060].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Jarvis Edwards
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Hey Jarvis if you know what you are doing SEO will ALWAYS get you traffic. What you said above is a myth.
          I said "may or may not get you more visitors".... how is that a myth?

          I'm sure there are many people out there who were pretty sure they "knew what they were doing," until one Google algorithm proved otherwise.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9628254].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Glenn Rodgers
    PPC is for short term just for pushing your website and SEO for the long term period.
    Signature

    Find and post Free Classified Ads in UK. Free online advertising, Buy and Sell Cars, property and your desirable pets in just one click distance. Visit at clickinn.co.uk and get solution.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9617523].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jarvis Edwards
      Originally Posted by Glenn Rodgers View Post

      PPC is for short term just for pushing your website and SEO for the long term period.
      If you're looking to brand your company and/or your PPC campaign(s) is giving an ROI, PPC can be a long-term solution as well.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9628265].message }}

Trending Topics