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
Friday, September 09, 2005

Cerf = Googlenet

Putting the pieces of the puzzle together, Om Malik astutely connects Google's recruiting of Internet pioneer Vint Cerf with something Malik dubs "GoogleNet." *If* Google were to offer new communications services such as unlimited free Wi-Fi connectivity, goes the scenario, they'd be able to pinpoint users' exact locations and become an even stronger force in the advertising business.

The flipside of this future vision is that Google currently cannot pinpoint users' locations as often as it would like.

Moving from a simple search engine company to a much more powerful infrastructure player who controls access points is no mean feat. It looks like Google is about halfway along that road.

Posted by Andrew | | | Permalink

Subscribe: +RSS | +My Yahoo | +Newsgator | +Bloglines | +Rojo

 

Thursday, September 08, 2005

$77 CPM - A Bargain, in the Right Place

It's all well and good to speculate (as I recently did) about whether $1 or $2 is a fair minimum CPM rate for ads near online content.

But it's also interesting to benchmark going CPM rates for search, by calculating the effective CPM rates on keywords that do well in a paid search account (even though the actual payment method is "per click").

Glancing at a recent tracking report for one client, I see that one of our "go-to" keywords has an effective CPM of $77. This just emphasizes the key difference between search and nearly every other type of advertising. The market will continue to push effective CPM rates higher on the most valuable inventory.

Importantly, this inventory isn't deemed valuable by virtue of glowing adjectives or spin. The advertiser makes sufficient money from the ad that the $77 is gladly paid with an easy-to-read ROI report in hand. It's valuable not because the ad is near "trusted content" or a "flagship something-or-other," but because it has real, proven value.

When there are so many publishers now out there willing to take 25 cent CPM's or less for their advertising (in other words, admitting their inventory is virtually worthless), it makes you wonder what some publishers are selling, exactly... and why it's even considered advertising.

Now I must go raise my bid on that "go-to" keyword. We'll gladly pay $85 CPM. I'll keep the CPC confidential, though. :)

Posted by Andrew | | | Permalink

Subscribe: +RSS | +My Yahoo | +Newsgator | +Bloglines | +Rojo

 

They Listened, Again

In a recent issue of Page Zero Advisor, I argued (in part) as follows on the subject of Google's new Site Targeting version of the content targeting program:

...I think two things have to happen for Site Targeting to work for us (and you): (1) Price drop. Sorry, but I'm getting below $1 CPM's on any of the content campaigns I'm running under the old program, and that's why they work. So $2 minimum means the minimum is at least double what is going to be economically feasible. At least. Many of the publishers currently participating in the program simply don't merit $2 CPM's. A very select few are worth $5, $10, or $50, but they are a tiny minority. Google should do what they did with the paid search program in 2002: listen to reason and get rid of the minimum. Drop it from $2 to something like 10 cents, just to see what happens...

Well, they just dropped the minimum CPM in this particular program from $2 to $1, which is better than a kick in the pants, though rather far from 10 cents. Then again, who ever heard of a ten cent CPM? I must be crazy like a fox to have suggested that.

Site targeting seems to have a ways to go yet as a platform that would fully satisfy advertisers. Mainly, it's about the publishers and how advertisers can gather info on them. As it stands, there is a little tool to help advertisers find appropriate sites to show their ads on. Now all Google needs is a tool to help them sign more quality publishers. :) But seriously, I think the tool is going to have to improve over the next couple of years.

Another thing I want to stress is along the lines of "Google was right." We, the advertisers, are pretty bad at choosing the pages and sites to show our ads on. Part of the problem is the limitations of the process... and the fact that not all the sites we want participate in AdSense and have available inventory. But basically, a "pure" site targeting program is up and running more as a response to advertisers who didn't like the "lack of control" as it is a really workable, effective program in its own right. If it were me, I'd want to combine that control somehow with the (widely-dissed) clever matching technology that governed and still governs the original content targeting program. That matching technology helps me as an advertiser. It helps me (and Google, and publishers) achieve scale.

For many advertisers, the main question isn't whether you have control or whether Google is matching the ad placements to the right AdWords accounts, etc. It's more about (a) transparency and disclosure of publisher info, and most of all (b) price.

Posted by Andrew | | | Permalink

Subscribe: +RSS | +My Yahoo | +Newsgator | +Bloglines | +Rojo

 

Wednesday, September 07, 2005

You Can't Tell People they "Don't Really Want" Stuff

Maybe it's an occupational hazard of having a front-row seat as a marketer helping companies test new products with targeted online campaigns, but once you get the hang of how today's consumer mind works, it's painful to observe those who still want to communicate with people (to paraphrase Godin's latest free ebook, Who's There) "like it's 1969."

(BTW, for those keeping score, there's nothing wrong with 1969. In fact it was a high-water mark of sorts, given that humans haven't walked on the moon since. But the fact that it was a good year shouldn't govern the way you think today.)

It doesn't have to be complicated. "Palm rallies on Treo smartphone sales." Give 'em what they want.

It's been less than a month that the story came out about the engineer who modified his Prius to get 250 mpg (using more electricity, to be sure), and the Toyota spin-meisters who want us to think that this kind of tinkering is of interest to only a tiny minority of consumers. (True - we don't want to modify our own engines. We want you to build a better one.)

Top-down marketing (or "constellation" marketing, as Jeffrey J. Fox puts it) gathers all the rational reasons why people want what they want. It revels in focus groups, meetings, production cycles. It tells people what they want. But in Godin's underestimated book Survival is Not Enough, we learn that zooming companies don't plan that way. They get into the marketplace and just find out what customers want, and adapt to that. Then they adapt again.

As a car buyer, there are many things I want, and can't have, just to continue with the automotive example. Why do cars come in so few colors, for example? Why do we have to pay an extra $650 for a color that isn't crappy?

Now that the price of gasoline has shot up 30-40% even from our conversation of three weeks ago, I'm thinking that 250 mpg hybrid would be even more attractive to my wallet. Millions of consumers agree. The reason people aren't buying the 250mpg car is not because they don't want it... it's because they can't get it!

Now from the environmentalist and anti-consumption side of the ledger, you have pundits and puritans asking the whole population to give up their fascination with SUV's. Here again, it isn't going to happen. People know what they want. An SUV is irrational for many. You buy it because you think in your mind it's your ticket to freedom. And there you sit, stuck in gridlock. Granted, it was pretty funny to see the Ford Escape sitting next to me at a dead stop next to me on Lake Shore Blvd. yesterday. But that doesn't mean you don't buy it. Irrational, but you want it. That's how markets work. Amazing that in this day and age, big companies (and the no-logo crowd) try to tell people to be "rational" and to start wanting the stuff they "should" want.

I'm like anyone else. I want both. I want it all. I want the 250 mpg hybrid. I want the 2008, moon-walking, avant-garde concept SUV being planned by Toyota. And I want one in burnt orange and the other in metallic silver with a hint of blue.

The car companies will tell me I really don't want a crazily modified electric car, when actually, I do. Anti-consumers will tell me I'm a freak for wanting a giant truck thing that looks like it could collect moon rocks (when in fact I'd just be acting like an 8-year-old boy, and what's so wrong with that?).

Sure, we can overcome our wants and think better of certain anti-social decisions, or just adjust to whatever is available. But increasingly, consumers will have the power to ignore or circumvent those old limitations. I can listen to a million songs at the touch of a button, and that's not supposed to affect the way I think about other things I want?

The era of mass customization, instant gratification, open communications, and relentless marketplace feedback is upon us. For companies to survive this... well, Seth said it. Survival is not enough.

So what's going to happen? First, the typically comic reaction as large companies hold back the pace of change for their own convenience. And the endless, puritanical, economically incoherent, freedom-hating, missing-the-point diatribes against consumption in anti-consumer mags and such will carry on in their quixotic quest to tell me the metallic silver-blue 2o07 Moon Walker is something I don't really want.

Then, the dams will finally burst. People will start getting what they want. It always happens.

One type of want isn't mutually exclusive to another. Krispy Kreme - got huge fast. Whole Foods Markets - same deal. When it comes to analyzing such trends, why fancy it up? It's called freedom of choice.

In a couple of years, we're going to see something very predictable (it's starting already). People will want both the hybrid and the cool moonwalker thing, so they'll clamor for vehicles that incorporate both. The current crop of hybrid SUV's gets crummy mileage and is far from cool enough to satisfy either urge. You'd be better off with either an old Jeep or an old Honda Civic. (Or walking more.) But eventually, the power of those demands will be enough to force the big automakers, kicking and screaming and five years late, to come out with products that are both incredibly cool and incredibly energy-conscious.

That delay is what interests me now. That holding back aspect. The tragedy and the comedy of these attempts to ignore consumer demands for new products, and then, the opportunity that awaits startups and nimbler companies who simply accept those demands at face value and serve them.

That, in a nutshell, will be the subject of my next book, whose working title is one of:

Demand: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Markets

OR

Peanut Butter that Won't Kill You: Harrowing Tales of Actual Consumer Demand

I guess that's what happens when your first book finally hits the shelves. You start planning the next. I'm looking for a publisher. And maybe an agent. :) But I plan to take a good six months away from writing and another six planning that next project. After all, just ask the folks at Toyota. There's no hurry.

Posted by Andrew | | | Permalink

Subscribe: +RSS | +My Yahoo | +Newsgator | +Bloglines | +Rojo

 

View Recent Posts

 

Speaking Engagement

See Andrew Goodman speak at eMetrics Chicago 2014

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 Blog Archive ::
June 30, 2002
July 21, 2002
July 28, 2002
August 04, 2002
August 25, 2002
September 01, 2002
September 08, 2002
September 15, 2002
September 22, 2002
September 29, 2002
October 06, 2002
October 13, 2002
October 20, 2002
October 27, 2002
November 03, 2002
November 10, 2002
November 17, 2002
November 24, 2002
December 01, 2002
December 15, 2002
December 22, 2002
December 29, 2002
January 05, 2003
January 12, 2003
January 19, 2003
January 26, 2003
February 02, 2003
February 09, 2003
February 16, 2003
February 23, 2003
March 02, 2003
March 09, 2003
March 16, 2003
March 23, 2003
March 30, 2003
April 06, 2003
April 13, 2003
April 20, 2003
April 27, 2003
May 04, 2003
May 11, 2003
May 18, 2003
May 25, 2003
June 01, 2003
June 08, 2003
June 15, 2003
June 22, 2003
June 29, 2003
July 06, 2003
July 13, 2003
July 20, 2003
July 27, 2003
August 03, 2003
August 10, 2003
August 17, 2003
August 24, 2003
August 31, 2003
September 07, 2003
September 14, 2003
September 21, 2003
September 28, 2003
October 05, 2003
October 12, 2003
October 19, 2003
October 26, 2003
November 02, 2003
November 09, 2003
November 16, 2003
November 23, 2003
November 30, 2003
December 07, 2003
December 14, 2003
December 21, 2003
December 28, 2003
January 04, 2004
January 11, 2004
January 18, 2004
January 25, 2004
February 01, 2004
February 08, 2004
February 15, 2004
February 22, 2004
February 29, 2004
March 07, 2004
March 14, 2004
March 21, 2004
March 28, 2004
April 04, 2004
April 11, 2004
April 18, 2004
April 25, 2004
May 02, 2004
May 09, 2004
May 16, 2004
May 23, 2004
May 30, 2004
June 06, 2004
June 13, 2004
June 20, 2004
June 27, 2004
July 11, 2004
July 18, 2004
July 25, 2004
August 01, 2004
August 08, 2004
August 15, 2004
August 22, 2004
August 29, 2004
September 05, 2004
September 12, 2004
September 19, 2004
September 26, 2004
October 03, 2004
October 10, 2004
October 17, 2004
October 24, 2004
October 31, 2004
November 07, 2004
November 14, 2004
November 21, 2004
November 28, 2004
December 05, 2004
December 12, 2004
December 19, 2004
January 02, 2005
January 09, 2005
January 16, 2005
January 23, 2005
January 30, 2005
February 06, 2005
February 13, 2005
February 20, 2005
February 27, 2005
March 06, 2005
March 13, 2005
March 20, 2005
March 27, 2005
April 03, 2005
April 10, 2005
April 17, 2005
April 24, 2005
May 01, 2005
May 08, 2005
May 15, 2005
May 22, 2005
May 29, 2005
June 05, 2005
June 12, 2005
June 19, 2005
June 26, 2005
July 03, 2005
July 10, 2005
July 17, 2005
July 24, 2005
July 31, 2005
August 07, 2005
August 14, 2005
August 21, 2005
August 28, 2005
September 04, 2005
September 11, 2005
September 18, 2005
September 25, 2005
October 02, 2005
October 09, 2005
October 16, 2005
October 23, 2005
October 30, 2005
November 06, 2005
November 13, 2005
November 20, 2005
November 27, 2005
December 04, 2005
December 11, 2005
December 18, 2005
December 25, 2005
January 01, 2006
January 08, 2006
January 15, 2006
January 22, 2006
January 29, 2006
February 05, 2006
February 12, 2006
February 19, 2006
February 26, 2006
March 05, 2006
March 12, 2006
March 19, 2006
March 26, 2006
April 02, 2006
April 09, 2006
April 16, 2006
April 23, 2006
April 30, 2006
May 07, 2006
May 14, 2006
May 21, 2006
May 28, 2006
June 04, 2006
June 11, 2006
June 18, 2006
June 25, 2006
July 02, 2006
July 09, 2006
July 16, 2006
July 23, 2006
July 30, 2006
August 06, 2006
August 13, 2006
August 20, 2006
August 27, 2006
September 03, 2006

 


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