eantics logo
 
Follow us on Twitter  Subscribe to our Blog  Linked in

Archive for the 'Seo' Category

Organic Search and Paid Search: Not always a panacea for online success

Thursday, May 13th, 2010 | Read full post

Often we see clients who are setting up a new website who look to the search engines as the must-do element of their marketing. 

They might have jumped into bed with a Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) company who's persuaded them that they can optimise their website and deliver page 1 rankings, or they might be using a Search Engine Marketing (SEM) company to manage "paid for" search campaigns on their behalf; the inference is always that organic search and paid search, via systems like Google Adwords, are the must-have ingredients in any business's marketing mix.

Sometimes we find these approaches, whilst they might deliver against their stated goals, are not the most effective use of marketing spend for businesses - particularly those which serve other businesses.

SEO and SEM are both reactive marketing approaches; reactive since they attempt to capture the eyeballs and satisfy the needs of "someone" looking for "something" online.  At the root of any SEO/SEM campaign should be an understanding of audience; "how" people might be trying to find your product/service online, and most importantly "how many" people this might consititute.
 
Unfortunately, this often isn't properly understood, particularly by the website owner, the result being that the measurables of the campaign, those "stated goals" mentioned above, are misleading measures.

For example, obtaining top of page 1 in Google for keywords relevant to your business might be a measure of success - but if nobody uses those keywords in their search, the exercise is unlikely to be beneficial to your business.

If the keywords are right for your business and people use those keywords to search but there are very few online searches for your product or service, it's the same story - little benefit to your business.

You can have your page 1 ranking in organic search and show good click through rates in your paid search, both of which are likely to be "measures of success" put forward by SEO and SEM companies, but which can actually disguise the fact that people aren't using the internet to search for your products or services, at least not in any volume. You can succeed against both those measures, and still not drive any real traffic to your website.

So in what circumstances might reactive online marketing be ineffective? Consider the following scenarios:-

The Incumbant Provider.

Not limited to Business to Business (B2B); what if customers in your target market already have an incumbant supplier. Will they be searching online for your product/service? Possibly, but only if they are looking to replace that supplier. If their perception is that they are getting value for money, they won't be market testing.

Traditional Procurement Processes.

Many company's believe they already understand the supplierscape in their markets and their procurement processes which use tender/request for proposal, may not always cast their net beyond the known suppliers. If you're a new supplier, there's a good chance they don't know about you and aren't trying to find you.

Audience demographics.

What if your target audience isn't 'net savvy.  Even today there are elements of the population that are not as connected as others.  Even those that are connected, may not be using internet search to look for your specific products/services instead using other channels like newspapers and television.

Niche Products.

Niche products offer a competitive advantage, but also a huge disadvantage. Suppliers of specialist or niche products typically have lower competition but often also a more difficult to identify target market.  Online search volumes may be very low in these sectors.

As a web design company, we believe that every business can benefit from having an online presence, but that not all buinesses need to be found via online search in order to leverage their online presence. In the above scenarios a more proactive approach to marketing might represent better use of your budget, and deliver higher return on investment(ROI).  With a proactive approach you're not relying on someone searching for your products/service instead you strive to get your business and your website in front of people. A good example is the use of direct mail to bring your services to the attention of the appropriate person. Door to door drops and newspaper advertising are other methods.  Basically the way we did it before the internet, though opt-in email marketing might work just as well.

If you do want to try SEO and SEM, first consider if it is the right fit for your business using the above criteria, and when working with SEO and SEM agencies, make sure that YOU understand the keyword search patterns being used to find your products or services, and, the projected search volumes.

Considering the above criteria coupled with having the "how" and "how many" information means you are more likely to set the correct measures of success and see results to your bottom line.


 

First page of Google, great for directory websites

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010 | Read full post

I was doing some keyword research yesterday after a client mentioned that they weren't as prominent in Google for a valuable "search term", as they would like.  What I found when I replicated the search was perplexing.

Not only was the client not on page 1, 2 or 3 but bizarrely very few relevant local companies were! Instead, the first three pages of search results were predominantly occupied by other directory style websites. 

So Google the greatest spidering and search engine in the world seems to be passing the buck; instead of indexing and serving quality websites owned by the local tradesmen themselves, they're serving results for other directories which themselves contain a list of the tradesmen concerned.

Why would this happen?  Well after giving it a lot of thought I came up with the following possible reasons:-

1) Not enough local tradesmen have a website, so there isn't anything to index.  Indexing a directory allows access to telephone numbers?

Possibly, but shouldn't businesses that do have a website and are providing relevant and quality content to visitors, get a lookin?

2)   The directories are indexed based on pagerank, since many command a link back to them in return for a free listing?

Can't see this, well I hope this isn't the case though it's an easy conclusion to jump to.  Linking back to the directory is how they build their pagerank, but Google should be discounting this form of linking, after all it is link solicitation, geared to manipulate pagerank. 

3) The directories get indexed based on their keyword useage.

Fair enough, geographically tailored URIs are useful in the context of a directory, whereas for an other website they might be considered spammy doorway pages but as with Point 2. there shouldn't be a benefit to be had from a ranking perspective.  If there should be, then the future looks bleak for non-directory websites.

4) Google can't do human search, so it's effectively saying human search is best here. 

This makes some sense; many of the directory sites have reviews and scoring mechanisms, which, if you are looking for a local tradesman are certain to be of value.

I honestly don't know what factors are at play here; some or all of the above, or some I've missed completely, but if you do please get involved in the comments!  What I do know is the fact this happens, doesn't help me or the client when trying to promote their website, and it doesn't seem particularly fair or useful to have the listings dominated by other directories.  What next? Google listing Bing and Yahoo in its own results!


 

Does Google think we just got off the boat?

Saturday, October 10th, 2009 | Read full post

12 months or so ago, I was blogging about how we as a company had decided to follow the straight and narrow; we'd ditched even the borderline SEO practices in favour of following Google's Webmaster guidelines. We'd focused on writing standards compliant web pages, full of quality content and stopped designing pages for Bots.  Indeed we've been advising our Clients to go the same route, advising them strongly against trying to game Google, and we've been building their websites in the same vein - standards first, content second, and nothing naughty third.

For the record: I absolutely believe this is the right approach to website design; cater for your readership not the search engines. My gripe back then was that some businesses (actually make that "many" in our business sector (web design)) were still employing grey to black hat techniques i.e. spamming the search engines, and actually getting away with it.

My advice back then to all and sundry was - you see a spammy website then report it; keep the mantra of "good content" in mind; and trust in Google to know good from bad, honest from spam.

I even went so far as writing an app (www.oopsydoorway.co.uk) that identifies UK doorways pages (engineered to rank on specific keywords, or most commonly the same keyword, just geographically tailored i.e web design warrington.) so folk could be proactive and identify/report the abuse.

That was 12 months ago...

Today, sadly, it appears not much has changed. Whilst we're still playing a straight bat and advising our Clients to do likewise, we're watching some of our competitors employ the same old spammy doorway page crap and get away with it. In using the techniques that we consider to be spam they rank higher than us or threaten our position in Google. Nice.

A simple database of keywords or towns and some server side code, still appear to float Google's boat despite their spam detection measures and Webmaster guidelines. That's a real shame, since businesses like ours can't wait forever for Google to differentiate the spam from the honest/quality in their results. 

Again, let me reiterate, websites should be built for people to read - not the bots, but when so much is at stake commercially, if Google continues to rank the spam above or even on the same page as the honest, the honest development companies will inevitably go native (again); all of us have databases of keywords and all of us know how to write the server side code that seems to work for Google.  

With Clients to satisfy, people to pay and families to feed, unless Google can be seen to be addressing this,  playing the straight bat, might be a luxury we can't afford.


 

From Bing to Bust

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009 | Read full post

I love Microsoft, I do.  Microsoft have "enabled" most of what you and I are doing at home, in our offices, and on the web today. The fact I can post to my blog relies on Microsoft in so many different ways.

My problem is with Bing - their new MSN Live search engine revamp which they've named "Bing".

For me, Bing does nothing new.  I can punch search terms into Bing and Google  - and Google still brings me the results that have more meaning and utility to me. Why would I switch to Bing?

It is early days however, but a cursory look at Bing presents nothing special.  I think Microsoft have substantially missed the mark with their MSN Live search revamp - in my view the future rivals to Google will turn search into a different beast (perhaps a twitter beast?)

Microsoft should hang up it's hat in the search arena and focus on application development - open source or otherwise. Like Visual Web Developer 2008 for example,  an app that is free to download, comes with SQL Server 2008 Express, and IIS 5, and one I can't speak highly enough of.


 

Post on web design or not at all?

Tuesday, June 2nd, 2009 | Read full post

I've nothing web design topic related to say at the moment,  should I keep quiet on my blog which is web design related?

Interesting question that.. most folk say keep your blog on topic - keep it relevant.  

I've ventured off topic in many of my posts, and put up what I think is valuable information based on many of my tech but not necessarilly "web design" related experiences.

Does it help my website? I honestly don't know. It is frustrating to see people land on my pages looking for info on, for example,  the Nokia E71 which i mentioned a few posts back, rather than web design, but equally if that post wasn't to inform other users of that model phone, what was the point of it?  Don't forget also that "that" someone on your site, if what you had to tell him/her about the E71 helped them out, might mention your site to others, which might lead to where...no one knows!?!

But if we are discussing whether you should limit your blog posts to on topic posts...well, there are many who say keep your blog posts on topic, and that doing otherwise might impact your site's credibility on your chosen topic. I used to subscribe to this notion, but I'm not sure now.

Since I've been blogging on general tech items - my site has held a consistent 2nd place in the SERPS on a relevent search term that generates business for me, previously it was up/down/all over the place.

Longshot...Could google identify who is contributing new content and reward them for their efforts, despite their posts not relating to their business area?  My view is yes...

Remember, Google is massively adept at recognising natural from unnatural...For me to wander off in to related and even unrelated  subject areas is natural, and my guess is that Google see's this as perfectly natural too.  If I steadfastly blogged about Web design, day after day after day, my guess (and it is a guess) is that Google might recognise that I was engineering content to fulfill certain search criteria.

Just a thought but one to ponder.


 
eantics just tweeted:
FOLLOW US