Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
That's correct. The more freedom you give the engines to match your keywords to "related" queries, the less relevant your average click will be, which will drive down conversion rate and thus revenue per click. So, in summary, the more broad the keyword the less you should be paying per click (99% of the time).
This reminds me of a funny blog post I read today that shows how ridiculous some of the matches can be when using broad match -- http://www.ppchero.com/wtq-do-the-creep/
fidelityim makes a good suggestion. You should definitely bid according to performance of your keywords match types. In all but the most rare cases advertisers' performance will match the tiers fidelityim has mentioned exact > phrase > broad (not including the near exact, near phrase, and broad modified match types Google has added).
There is one point that fidelityim made that I don't agree with... I think it's worthwhile to create separate ad groups and even campaigns for different match types. The main reasons being that it allows you to:
1. View performance by match type at a glance in the absence of sophisticated tools like Kenshoo or Marin Software. This performance will vary by a huge margin so making it easy to see your winning buckets is very helpful given that everyone's time is limited.
2. You can budget your match types based on performance. By analyzing your search query reports, broad and phrase matched queries can be great feeders for your exact match campaigns, so you'll probably want to limit your spend on those terms until you are sure about the performance at a query level. This can only be achieved by separating these match types into their own campaigns.
Cheers,
KT
Hi CarIS,
This isn't currently a feature in SEOmoz but it's in their queue of features that they would like to add. Check out this thread for more info:
Hi eXia,
This probably isn't the answer you're hoping for but Facebook is a relatively new platform. Given that, even the big ad automation SaaS providers with millions in funding (Kenshoo, Marin Software, Acquisio and others) have just recently in the last year or so launched worthwhile toolsets for managing Facebook ads at scale. I think you will need to be in a higher spend tier to get to a point where it makes sense to use a 3rd party tool for managing your Facebook ads. That goes for Paid Search as well.
I personally have not seen any free third party tools for managing Facebook ads.
We use Kenshoo and have had a great experience with them on both the Paid Search and Facebook ads.
Here are the minimums I can remember for the tools I've heard of/used:
Kenshoo: not sure the min on social, but to make the pricing worhtwhile, you'll need to be spending deep 5 figures on Facebook monthly
Marin Software: $20k
Acquisio: $10k min
SearchManager (a joint venture btwn American Express and Clickable. A strange union, I know.): I'm not too familiar with this product but they do appear to integrate with Facebook and the pricing starts at $150/month/5% of spend whichever is higher.
It would also help to know: what you are hoping to get out of the tool that you plan to use?
This has happened to me recently as well. However for me it was for seemingly more disparate queries related to coupons. I don't remember the specific merchants but I had searched for something like 'finish line coupons' and subsequently searched for 'target coupons' and was still seeing ads for finishline coupons on the SERP for the latter query. Clearly, they have some work to do on this.
I'll add a vote for BigCommerce. They recently launched a big push to get developers to create plugins and apps for their cart. Also, their UI is very intuitive. For a newbie to e-commerce it's a great first start. Volusion is a very comparable alternative to BigCommerce based on the research I did before deciding to move forward with BC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers Data from a few different sources is listed there.
I took a quick look at your backlink report using opensiteexplorer.org and noticed that a large percentage of your backlinks are coming from www.computerwords.com. www.computerwords.com's site is inactive as of me writing this. I'm not sure how long the site has been down but if it's been a while and Google also noticed that it's been down f, that coor some time, that could have caused your rank to drop. At a glance it appears that 50% of your links were from that site.
The full crawl diagnostics and rank reports are only generated once per week. So, I would give it at least 7 days before you see full data reported in your new campaign.
Sorry about that. I typed the response out too quick! To summarize: Yes, you do want followed links. They will help you rank higher in the search engines.
However, according to Google, paid ads should never be made to be followed links. Google says that paid ads should be designated as such, by giving them a rel="nofollow" attribute.
The link I posted in the previous response as well as the one below explain it pretty well.
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66736
Gotcha. I did some searching around and you will not block the AdWords bot unless you explicitly block AdsBot-Google. A wildcard user agent disallow will not block the AdsBot-Google. Hope that helps!
Hi CarIS,
This isn't currently a feature in SEOmoz but it's in their queue of features that they would like to add. Check out this thread for more info:
Great question. I think you are fine with having the same content on two sites in different languages. Google I smart enough to see that you are targeting difference audiences, locales, etc. The queries that would drive traffic to each site are completed different (language-wise) so the two sites are not even in competition with each other generally speaking. I would personally move forward with the two sites without worry.
I would suggest using hand-written translations though, rather than auto translations, which should also help differentiate, if you are super worried.
I'll take a stab. I like the big and more varied imagery of the new page.
I will say that opinions don't really get you all the way there. I would suggest (maybe you already are) testing the new paging for improved conversion, or other KPIs using Google Website Optimizer (free), or Visual Website Optimizer (my favorite and pretty cheap). I love to prove my own opinions wrong through testing!
Those were a few things I noticed right away. I'm sure others will chime in as well.
Relevant Links:
www.google.com/websiteoptimizer
fidelityim makes a good suggestion. You should definitely bid according to performance of your keywords match types. In all but the most rare cases advertisers' performance will match the tiers fidelityim has mentioned exact > phrase > broad (not including the near exact, near phrase, and broad modified match types Google has added).
There is one point that fidelityim made that I don't agree with... I think it's worthwhile to create separate ad groups and even campaigns for different match types. The main reasons being that it allows you to:
1. View performance by match type at a glance in the absence of sophisticated tools like Kenshoo or Marin Software. This performance will vary by a huge margin so making it easy to see your winning buckets is very helpful given that everyone's time is limited.
2. You can budget your match types based on performance. By analyzing your search query reports, broad and phrase matched queries can be great feeders for your exact match campaigns, so you'll probably want to limit your spend on those terms until you are sure about the performance at a query level. This can only be achieved by separating these match types into their own campaigns.
Cheers,
KT
The biggest thing is that, if you can avoid it, you don't want a link profile that looks starkly different than the average for your category. Otherwise you might trip some red flags at the 'plex.
In my opinion, diversifying in everything you do that's SEO related is not a bad plan to minimize risk, even absent the red flag threat from Google.
SEOmoz has a list of directories that they find to be above average quality:
http://www.seomoz.org/directories
Here is another resource to help point you in the right direction as far as link building goes:
http://www.seomoz.org/beginners-guide-to-seo/growing-popularity-and-links
Was there something specific that you are having trouble with in regards to link building?
That's correct. The more freedom you give the engines to match your keywords to "related" queries, the less relevant your average click will be, which will drive down conversion rate and thus revenue per click. So, in summary, the more broad the keyword the less you should be paying per click (99% of the time).
This reminds me of a funny blog post I read today that shows how ridiculous some of the matches can be when using broad match -- http://www.ppchero.com/wtq-do-the-creep/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers Data from a few different sources is listed there.
You're correct. These links definitely used to be dofollow. It appears YouTube may have changed the links to nofollow when they redesigned the YouTube Channel pages in the last couple of months.