Traffick - The Business of Search Engines & Web Portals
Blog Categories (aka Tags) Archive of Traffick Articles Our Internet Marketing Consulting Services Contact the Traffickers Traffick RSS Feed

HOME » TRAFFICK ARTICLES » ARTICLE

Inktomi May Not Be Such a Bad Deal After All as Web Search Space Narrows

By Andrew Goodman, 2/25/2001

Just as troubling as the loss of the Go Guide was to those who
used it and worked on it is the uncertain future for one of the
Net's grand old search engine franchises, Infoseek. And as we know,
that's not the only one on the wane.


Leading search engine analyst Danny Sullivan points out that although
the situation in the search space looks bleak today, "we have lost
search engines before." [See The
End for Search Engines?
.] But, concedes Sullivan, it is troubling
that so many services, including NBCi , Excite, and Altavista,
are struggling all at once. On the flipside, MSN, AOL, Yahoo, and
Lycos are still feisty players, and Google is stronger than ever.


Sullivan implies that the new era will entail a much heavier dose
of paid search listings, but that this may provide opportunities
for marketers. We agree. For my previous thoughts on the changing
trends, recall this trilogy of Traffick articles:


"Scientists Baffled by Strange GoTo Phenomenon"

href="http://www.traffick.com/story/08-2000/goto.asp">http://www.traffick.com/story/08-2000/goto.asp


"Why Search Engine Marketing Works"

href="http://www.traffick.com/story/10-2000/search_engine_marketing.asp">http://www.traffick.com/story/10-2000/search_engine_marketing.asp


"Why Search Engines Must Continue to be Referees"

href="http://www.traffick.com/story/11-2000/referees1.asp">http://www.traffick.com/story/11-2000/referees1.asp


One sea change we haven't yet quite come to terms with is the
new Inktomi regime, in which site owners pay on a per page basis
to guarantee a presence in the Inktomi web index. It doesn't seem
like there is a consensus on how effective this is; more than a
little grumbling can be heard from unhappy webmasters. As long
as Inktomi's staying power in the industry, and its standing with
partners, is in question, we would take everything with a grain
of salt. (Remember, Yahoo! dumped Inktomi for Google.)


We test-drove the Inktomi pay-for-indexing scheme for our site,
paying to list ten pages. We didn't see much action at first from
any of the usual Inktomi partners (such as Canada.com, Hotbot,
or AOL), but suddenly this week, a couple of our pages were getting
50 hits a day from AOL, and Inktomi seems to be the reason. This
may not be scientific, but that's the best we can tell you right
now about the Inktomi "lottery." A "lottery ticket" for ten pages
to be indexed (and refreshed every 48 hours) by Inktomi will run
you $110. If you can score 350 page views a week from AOL for a
year, it’s almost worth the money.


Or is it? Let’s do the math. That comes to around 16,000
annual impressions. What would 16,000 impressions cost if you were
to run banner, newsletter, or similar advertising on a CPM basis?
At a CPM of $10, it would only cost $160, not far different from
the Ink scheme, for that many impressions.


However, we’re saying that we might actually get 16,000 clickthroughs a
year from Ink, not just impressions. Let’s say you were paying
.06 per click on average for 16,000 clicks to your site.
This would come to $960! Seen in that light, the Inktomi scheme
is clearly a bargain for many marketers, and would seem to blow
impression-based advertising out of the water. After all, these
are clickthroughs and they are search engine
driven and hence to some degree targeted and pre-qualified visitors.
Not all webmasters, of course, will get lucky enough to have Inktomi
give them first-page rankings on AOL searches for popular keywords.
We think it’s probably worth risking $110, but we wouldn’t
go much higher than that. If you happen to sell high end items
like luxury world cruises, adjust your thinking accordingly and
spend up to $500 on the Inktomi plan if you have to. And of course,
don’t take my word for it – listen to a variety of
SEO gurus, like ClickZ’s Paul Bruemmer, as the situation
unfolds.


In their Inktomi placement, some savvy marketers will likely want
to submit pages whose content is updated regularly. The frequent
refresh promised by Inktomi means that frequently-changing pages
will place well on some keyword searches in some weeks, and not
so well in other weeks. At least you might not be stuck permanently
in page eight of the search results on your coveted keyword, as
is the case with some infrequently-updated web indexes. Since the
whole index is theoretically changing as pages are refreshed, crafty
search engine optimizers won't be able to gauge the best means
of maintaining a first page ranking for certain coveted keywords.
Though they might not like it, the major search indexes are getting
better at keeping SEO professionals off balance, and this should
offer a more level playing field for everyone.


The search company most people associate with pay-for-placement
is GoTo.com. Yet its future is far from secure, either. Major competitors
like Yahoo! and Google are now offering programs that encroach
slightly into GoTo-like territory. One of the controversial aspects
of paying for traffic at GoTo - and a controversy that will not
die - is the problem of fraudulent clicks. Anecdotal accounts of
such problems are mounting, and most of them are attributable to
questionable affiliate partners that GoTo made deals with in the
days before they had major portal partners like AOL and Lycos.
Our take - as it has been for some time - is that GoTo no longer
needs the majority of its fly-by-night affiliates. They should
dump them and focus on further entrenching themselves in the search
results of reputable branded partners. Unless they signed a stinker
of a deal, GoTo is going to be reaping major revenues from the
AOL partnership alone.


Some advertisers have been hoping that GoTo would offer the advertiser
a choice of which partner sites a listing would appear on (for
example, yes to AOL and Lycos but no to AltaVista and CNET). But
that's probably a long way off. In spite of the bumps in the road,
it seems that many advertisers have figured out that pay-for-performance
advertising of the kind GoTo offers can provide a healthy return
on the investment.

Andrew Goodman is Editor of Traffick. 

 

Speaking Engagement

I am speaking at SMX West

Need Solid Advice?        

Google AdWords book


Andrew's book, Winning Results With Google AdWords, (McGraw-Hill, 2nd ed.), is still helping tens of thousands of advertisers cut through the noise and set a solid course for campaign ROI.

And for a glowing review of the pioneering 1st ed. of the book, check out this review, by none other than Google's Matt Cutts.


Posts from 2002 to 2010


07/2002
08/2002
09/2002
10/2002
11/2002
12/2002
01/2003
02/2003
03/2003
04/2003
05/2003
06/2003
07/2003
08/2003
09/2003
10/2003
11/2003
12/2003
01/2004
02/2004
03/2004
04/2004
05/2004
06/2004
07/2004
08/2004
09/2004
10/2004
11/2004
12/2004
01/2005
02/2005
03/2005
04/2005
05/2005
06/2005
07/2005
08/2005
09/2005
10/2005
11/2005
12/2005
01/2006
02/2006
03/2006
04/2006
05/2006
06/2006
07/2006
08/2006
09/2006
10/2006
11/2006
12/2006
01/2007
02/2007
03/2007
04/2007
05/2007
06/2007
07/2007
08/2007
09/2007
10/2007
11/2007
12/2007
01/2008
02/2008
03/2008
04/2008
05/2008
06/2008
07/2008
08/2008
09/2008
10/2008
11/2008
12/2008
01/2009
02/2009
03/2009
04/2009
05/2009
06/2009
07/2009
08/2009
09/2009
10/2009
11/2009
12/2009
01/2010
02/2010
03/2010
04/2010

 


Traffick - The Business of Search Engines & Web Portals

 


Home | Categories | Archive | About Us | Internet Marketing Consulting | Contact Us
© 1999 - 2013 Traffick.com. All Rights Reserved