Marcela a.k.a. 2_Much still needs help...

It isn't tax deductible (as far as I know) but I'm sure their medical bills are growing and they could use some help...

Remember Marcela? a.k.a. 2_Much...

http://www.greeneyewire.com/help-marcela-aka-2_much

Search can be painful

Looking over the shoulder of somebody searching for something to buy can be a very painful experience. Watching them click on MFA arbitrage sites or sites that do not have the keywords they enter is frustrating because I know that I could find it much faster.

Then again, search is supposed to be easy, but this experience pointed out how painfully frustrating the entire search experience has become. Even though I could parse through the spam sites and find relevant sites more quickly, there is still no easy way to comparison shop.

Try a search for "double sided tape" when your intention is to use it to mount photos, and it becomes very clear that this will take a very long time to find. You first have to eliminate all the sites that sell carpet tape, automotive mounting tape, etc. Then, there are many, many sites out there competing for "eyespace" and they are willing to buy PPC ads for those keywords, even if they have nothing to do with the searcher's intent.

I had to explain that any site can bid on keywords, even if they do not appear at all on their landing page. This shifted the focus to the natural results, but even these are now filled with "shopping" sites that just have PPC arbitrage links to other sites, which were not very helpful at all. Actually, they are worse because they are merely arbitrage sites under the guise of "natural" results.

The worst part about it is the argument that ensued as a result of this failure to find the desired results. It's not my fault that the #1 natural site just has PPC links to other sites that have nothing at all to do with the original search. But, in my defense - I don't control the SERPs - anymore than Matt Cutts does when a site is suddenly dropped by Google...

Ho, Ho, Ho!

Merry Christmas! And, to all a good night!

Yahoo versus Google

Yahoo is trying to "monetize" their search product, and they are now pushing their "Panama" interface, which includes an ad testing tool, which is essentially the ability to "optimize" an ad so a person will click on the link. More clicks means more money spent, which translates into more money for Yahoo.

Google, on the other hand, is featuring a "Website Optimizer" which is a tool to help webmasters get their customers to convert, once they have clicked on the link. This means more money for the webmaster, which translates into more money that can be spent in a PPC campaign.

I like both tools, but I'm much more excited about Google's approach. Both companies are "monetizing" their SERPs, but there is a basic difference that I see that makes me predict that Google will continue to dominate the search industry for a long time to come.

Yahoo's tool really does nothing for me, except get me to spend more money with them. Google's tool, on the other hand, will help me make more money, so I will have more to spend.

In fact, Google is providing webmasters with more tools than all of the other search engines combined. This helps webmasters in both the SEO and SEM areas of their work. Yahoo comes in a distant second in working together with webmasters, while MSN moves even further away. Ask.com doesn't even bother with webmasters at all, and seems to have adopted an attitude that they are so smart that they don't need to communicate with web site owners.

I will take advantage of every tool that comes along, because I know they will help me improve my skills as a search engine marketer. However, I have to ask this rhetorical question again, even though I've asked it before in this blog:

Which search engine should get my extra PPC spend?

More on Google's Website Optimizer

One of the nicest things about the Website Optimizer is that you can take your time setting up a test, since it saves your progress at each step of the way. The interface is a little quirky, since there is no way to delete a test once you create it, and there does not seem to be any way to change the "Original" content.

The biggest addition that I would like to see is a way to delete some of the "Worst" combinations, since it becomes quickly apparent that these do not convert, and they tend to drag the overall conversion rate down because these "worst" combinations keep getting shown.

Warning! There is no way to re-start a test! Once you stop a test, it is all over. The only option seems to be to stop the test and start a completely new one without the "Worst" combinations. That's too bad, since it would be nice to fine-tune things and see the actual conversions increase at the same time.

Also, the "conversion" page (typically a "Thank You" page) needs to have multiple versions of the JavaScript code if you run more than one test. It would be nicer if you only had to touch this page one time and track any test page, but that is a minor wish.

One tip I can offer when setting up a new test to replace an existing test, is that all you need is to get the "utmxkey" number from Google and replace the existing number in a few places of the JavaScript on both the test page and the conversion page. You'll see what I mean if you try and set up concurrently running tests.

Another minor wish is that the "Combination" numbers in the report matched the numbers in the Preview screen, which are 1 number off (the report starts off with "Original" but it calls that "Combination 1" in the Preview screen). This means that you always have to remember to subtract 1 from the count in the Preview screen, but as I said, it's a minor wish.

The only other thing I would warn you about is to avoid adding "global" items to a test, such as an image in a footer that appears on every page in the site (especially for ASP or .NET sites). Even though those other pages are not part of the test, when the test page starts to show an "alternate" image it appears on every page in the site. So, if the image happens to be one of the "Worst" combinations, it is shown repeatedly during the test and appears on every page in the site, which may drag down your overall conversions while the test is running.

Even with these drawbacks, I still think that it's the best tool for webmasters of 2006. I just hope that they don't abandon it until I'm done testing...

Google Website Optimizer is Fantastic!

A quiet but revolutionary release by Google of its Website Optimizer is nothing short of fantastic for anyone who wishes to be successful at marketing anything online. A better name for it would be Web Page Optimizer, since it basically works with one web page at a time.

So far, the BETA (Better Eat Two Aspirin) release is by invitation only, and you need to log into a client Adwords account to even see the link (it does not appear in MCC accounts, or in client accounts within an MCC account).

However - do anything you can to get access to this new tool! You will not be disappointed! It is not that easy to set up, but WOW! Once you have figured out how to use this tool, it will change everything you think that you know about online marketing.

If you have ever wondered how people react to a page, this tool will tell you exactly what gets people to convert, or better yet - what turns them off and chases them away.

One of the biggest challenges of online marketing is understanding what the person on the other side of the screen wants to do, and this tool lets you see that better than anything else out there!

It works via JavaScript, so anybody with a browser that has JavaScript turned off will see your default content, but you can change the content on any part of a page and then monitor the results to see what works best to get viewers to take the action that you want.

You do need a simple landing page and a resulting "conversion" page, so it won't work in a Flash site or a dynamic site - but who needs that nonsense anyway? Those things just make life easy for a programmer, but they do nothing to make life easy for a visitor. So, run your test with simple pages, and then when you are getting your desired results, convert the pages into Flash if that makes you feel better.

My first test clearly showed me a huge increase in the conversion rate after only two days of testing, and this was just a simple change in the content. I'm going to let that test run for a few more weeks, but I can already see changes that I am going to make, and have many ideas for future tests. I am taking the weekend off, but I just can't wait to get back to work!

Read more about it here:

http://groups.google.com/group/websiteoptimizer

SEO is dead?

While Google and Yahoo argue about copying each other's work, I keep thinking about the comment by the president of Did-it that SEO is dead because it's a very simple one-time effort. This comes from a firm that specializes in PPC management, so it is really no surprise to hear that from its president.

I wish that were true, but I got several calls from clients last week that they had suddenly dropped to page 2 in Google's natural SERPs after holding the #1 spot for the past few years. Upon examination, I could see that they were not alone, since their competitors had also dropped to page 2, and the natural SERPs were filled with newcomers that none of us recognized.

Apparently, nobody bothered to let Google know that SEO is a one-time effort, and that they should just leave things alone. So if you'll excuse me, I have to go figure out why a one-time effort is no longer working...

city.ask.com - Wake up, Barry!

After two minutes of playing around with http://city.ask.com/ I found the help section, with the FAQ:
How do I create an Offer for my own business on Citysearch?
To create an Offer for your business, please fill out the form located here.

Unfortunately, the form located here generates an Internal Error #

Of course, there is no corresponding number to go with the error, so I am once again left to my own as to how to communicate with ask.com.

Hey, Barry Diller! Wake up! Nobody wants to see cryptic error messages! What's worse, is that it took me a while just to find the right keywords to bring up a business that is located right in the center of the ZIP code that I entered.

How does a webmaster get a site correctly listed? Is advertising the only way? If it is, you can forget about increasing your market share because nobody will use your search engine if all they see is paid advertisements. After all, I know that business exists, but if it doesn't show up for its most basic search terms, why would I want to waste my time when I suspect that most businesses are not going to appear in your SERPs?

If I can't trust you to find a business that I know exists, why should I trust you to find anything?

MSN Live Search share drops

MSN Live Search continues to drop its market share, as this chart (many thanks to Danny Sullivan) clearly shows.

I predict that this downhill slide will continue unless they do something soon to fix their SERPs.

A name change from MSN to Live is not going to do it. A color scheme change won't make a difference. Nor will adding cool 3D images of cities, because even though it's fun to play with, it has nothing at all to do with "search."

Online "Search" is about finding something, and trusting the search engine that you are using to find what you are looking for. If you can't find what you're looking for, you will switch and try using a different search engine. Or, give up and walk away from your computer.

Usually, Search is about finding information, and you will settle into using a search engine that delivers the correct information quickly. Then, when it's time to make a purchase, you will use the same search engine that you regularly trust to deliver accurate information about your purchase.

No amount of funny TV commercials, or cool graphics will make up for a failure to deliver the searcher's desired results. It amazes me that so much time and money is spent on TV ads, "Cool Interfaces" and "Shopping" search engines.

"Search" is about finding things. Period. The end.