By Admin
Monday, December 14, 2009
|
Station Four owner Chris Olberding was quoted in an article in 904 Magazine about marketing strategies for the upcoming year.
On the cost effectivness of online advertising Chris said, "It's a lot easier to 'buy' business at a loss through paid search than it is to generate a profit. With more business jumping in the search marketing game, this has lead to steadily rising costs on a per-click basis."
On the search engine friendliness of Flash-based websites: "Search engines, notably Google, have gotten a whole lot better at indexing Flash-based websites. [However], just because search engines can index Flash, doesn't mean that they do it particularly well, and there are still a host of technical challenges to creating a Flash-based site that will rank well in search engines."
Check out the full article at http://904mag.epubxpress.com/link/ninmag/2009/nov-dec/28?s=0
On Wednesday I receive a call in the office from someone telling me that they are with Google and needed to confirm my address on my local business listing. The caller had a thick accent and their phone connection kept dropping. After confirming my address it seems that the caller wants to call back later in the week. Through the garbled connection he asks if Friday at 2pm would be okay. I say sure.
On Thursday I ignore a call from an 800-number, the speaker leaves a message trying to confirm something for Friday at 2pm without mentioning her company or a callback number. I shrug it off.
More...
What do you do when search results for your name or company prominently returns results that contain negative or otherwise undesireable infomation? Can you remove these from the search index or otherwise prevent interested parties in uncovering the information contain therein?
More...
As covered on Slashdot and elsewhere, Adobe annouced today that it has provided technology to search giants Google and Yahoo! that will enable them to crawl and index flash (swf) files. It seems that the 'crawlable content' within flash movies are limited to the text elements and links and doesn't include images and videos.
More...
By Chris Olberding
Thursday, December 27, 2007
|
A study reported by MediaPost and conducted by Simmons, a division of Experian Research Services, over the last year concludes that consumers are significantly more engaged in online advertisements than those watched on television.
The study defines 'engagement' through a battery of characteristics
participants identified with media such as 'inspirational', 'life enhancing'
and ad receptivity.
Though the most significant findings involved ads run during television
shows watched online the study also had implications for 'on-site' online ads.
On significant finding was the people are more receptive to ads on frequently
visited sites.
None of the findings reported by MediaPost are earth-shattering however;
studies and surveys showing the shift from tradition to online marketing
channels are ubiquitous as are claims of the effectiveness of these online
channels.
The more interesting question is, where do these trends lead? That is,
what is the future of online advertising?
Are consumers simply inundated and more accustom to ignoring television ads
and online advertisement can expect to see a decline in value over time as
consumers grow used to it? Or is the increased effectiveness a virtue of the
nature of the medium, the interactivity and opportunities for delivering targeted
advertisement inherent in the online experience? I don't expect to answer such
questions here but the questions are definitely worth discussion and study.
By Chris Olberding
Thursday, December 27, 2007
|
A study reported by MediaPost and conducted by Simmons, a division of Experian Research Services, over the last year concludes that consumers are significantly more engaged in online advertisements than those watched on television.
The study defines 'engagement' through a battery of characteristics
participants identified with media such as 'inspirational', 'life enhancing'
and ad receptivity.
Though the most significant findings involved ads run during television
shows watched online the study also had implications for 'on-site' online ads.
On significant finding was the people are more receptive to ads on frequently
visited sites.
None of the findings reported by MediaPost are earth-shattering however;
studies and surveys showing the shift from tradition to online marketing
channels are ubiquitous as are claims of the effectiveness of these online
channels.
The more interesting question is, where do these trends lead? That is,
what is the future of online advertising?
Are consumers simply inundated and more accustom to ignoring television ads
and online advertisement can expect to see a decline in value over time as
consumers grow used to it? Or is the increased effectiveness a virtue of the
nature of the medium, the interactivity and opportunities for delivering targeted
advertisement inherent in the online experience? I don't expect to answer such
questions here but the questions are definitely worth discussion and study.
By Chris Olberding
Monday, November 26, 2007
|
Search engine companies such as Google and Yahoo are constantly changing the algorithm that determines which pages appear where in their search result pages in an attempt to deliver better and more reliable results to visitors using their search engines.
What the search engines are interested in is providing search results that match up with what their users are searching for. In order to do this they examine dozens of characteristics of a website to determine essentially two things: 1) What is this page about? and 2) How important is this page compared to other pages about the same thing?
To determine what a page is about, search engines will use contextual clues such as what the title of the page is, what text is in the headings of the page, what text is in the content of the page, and even what text on other websites is used to link to the page.
To determine how important a page is Google will look at a number of characteristics such as how old the domain is and how important other websites linking to the page are: Are they just a collection of small personal sites? or are they well-known 'authority' sites such as CNN, Slashdot, and so on?
Despite all the intricacies involved in how webpages are ranked, I find that following a relatively simple principle will at least provide a very good basis for ranking well in search engines:
Sites with well-written and unique content of interest to the target market and are well-coded rank well.
Of course it’s not as simple as it sounds, let’s take a look at what some of the phrases in the above ‘secret’ actually entail.
Well-coded sites
A well-coded site is a site where the site’s content is easy to read and parse, the relationships between the content is made clear by the use of semantic html. This entails the following:
- Externally linked scripts such as CSS and Javascript
- Tableless, CSS-based layouts
- Compliant with web standards and coded semantically
- Appropriate use of meta-tags. Different title and description tags on each page.
Original, useful
Ideally a site should have original content, search engines penalize for duplicate content within the same domain and across the entire web using increasingly sophisticated methods. Moreover content that is original and useful is more likely to retain visitors to your site and entice owners of other sites or blogs to provide a link to your content or to your site.
Well-written…Target Market
The site content should contain terms and speak to the target market. Site copy should be written to include and incorporate keywords without sacrificing readability. Accomplishing these goals requires analyses to determine the target market and the appropriate keywords to use on the particular page/site.
By Chris Olberding
Monday, November 26, 2007
|
Search engine companies such as Google and Yahoo are constantly changing the algorithm that determines which pages appear where in their search result pages in an attempt to deliver better and more reliable results to visitors using their search engines.
What the search engines are interested in is providing search results that match up with what their users are searching for. In order to do this they examine dozens of characteristics of a website to determine essentially two things: 1) What is this page about? and 2) How important is this page compared to other pages about the same thing?
To determine what a page is about, search engines will use contextual clues such as what the title of the page is, what text is in the headings of the page, what text is in the content of the page, and even what text on other websites is used to link to the page.
To determine how important a page is Google will look at a number of characteristics such as how old the domain is and how important other websites linking to the page are: Are they just a collection of small personal sites? or are they well-known 'authority' sites such as CNN, Slashdot, and so on?
Despite all the intricacies involved in how webpages are ranked, I find that following a relatively simple principle will at least provide a very good basis for ranking well in search engines:
Sites with well-written and unique content of interest to the target market and are well-coded rank well.
Of course it’s not as simple as it sounds, let’s take a look at what some of the phrases in the above ‘secret’ actually entail.
Well-coded sites
A well-coded site is a site where the site’s content is easy to read and parse, the relationships between the content is made clear by the use of semantic html. This entails the following:
- Externally linked scripts such as CSS and Javascript
- Tableless, CSS-based layouts
- Compliant with web standards and coded semantically
- Appropriate use of meta-tags. Different title and description tags on each page.
Original, useful
Ideally a site should have original content, search engines penalize for duplicate content within the same domain and across the entire web using increasingly sophisticated methods. Moreover content that is original and useful is more likely to retain visitors to your site and entice owners of other sites or blogs to provide a link to your content or to your site.
Well-written…Target Market
The site content should contain terms and speak to the target market. Site copy should be written to include and incorporate keywords without sacrificing readability. Accomplishing these goals requires analyses to determine the target market and the appropriate keywords to use on the particular page/site.
By Chris Olberding
Monday, November 26, 2007
|
SEO is a relatively new field, in order to fully understand and best price our services we conducted a short survey of existing firms' pricing for their seo services. The prices below are real prices posted online but names have been withheld.
Top Firm
Well recognized, popular web site in SEM circles, active in conference, occasional national publicity such as Washington Post, Newsweek, etc.
- Site Reviews $15k - $50k
- Link Building Campaign: 10k+
- 4.5 months, 45h of consultation, a comprehensive report 45 days in $30k
- Full Package: $120k (Note: full package generally includes a site redesign but in most cases probably not any development costs.)
Middle of the Road Firm: 1
Mid to small web design company rebranded as a web marketing company. Design poor, contains a lot of information, site doesn’t inspire trust, probably do decent business.
- Site Reviews $2.5k and 1 month
- Full package (not including link budget) $12k
Middle of the Road Firm: 2
Pricing models based around inclusion of a mishmash of services.
- Packages range from 3000 – 5000 with Custom Packages starting at $7500
- Link Building $2400
Web Development Firm
Web development firm, clients begin asking for and are sold marketing services secondary and in addition to a web development project.
- $250 – $400/month Full Package. Redesign, development extra.
Bottom of the Barrel
Scams, ineffective services and overseas company fall into this category. Generally charging a flat rate for a year of less than $1000, sometimes as low as $60.
There are many of these kinds of companies and web sites. Many are borderline scams, usually with guarantees and false claims. Many confuse the client about what SEO and PPC are. Some promise 100 leads which translates into 100 clicks via PPC.
Analysis of Pricing Structures
Written by Christopher Olberding
Most of the firms above use a static up front price with differing pricing schedules. However the exception, the Web Development Firm, is not unusual, charging a monthly flat rate in a non-terminating contract is underrepresented above. It seems that the more successful and prominent SEO firms tend to use a flat fee spread over the life of a fixed term contract. Cheap and scam sites tend to charge a small fee for a years service that is all paid up front for obvious reasons. Companies with their primary business in web design and development tend to be the group that charges on a monthly basis, perhaps this is due to uncertainty of what the market will bear, the lure of recurring revenue, or something else.
Flat Monthly Rates
In almost every instance the bulk of hours spent in a new internet marketing project will be in the first few months. Many firms that charge a flat monthly rate even acknowledge this to the public and clients. This results in a) the marketing firm making the choice between not achieving timely results or essentially providing services on speculation that the client will not terminate the contract and b) the client becoming dissatisfied with the lack of timely results or realizing, after 5 – 6 months that there is little incentive to continue to pay the monthly fee as the bulk of the work has already been performed. In my experience this often leads to a deteriorating relationship between the firm and the client, which can, and often does spill over into other projects.
Alternative Pricing Structures
A number of other pricing structures for SEO service are used and/or have been suggested, these include performance-based measures, based on traffic, conversions and/or sales, or even through quasi-affiliate kind of arrangements. While interesting there are a number of logistical problems with these pricing structure, especially for smaller clients, and would require a lot of experience to evaluate beforehand if taking on a client would be profitable. Additionally this pricing structures shift the nature of the relationship between the firm and client closer to an affiliate, or outside sales position.
Fixed-Rate Fixed-Length Contracts
The most common pricing structure at least among reputable firms is a (more or less) fixed-rate contract of a limited amount of time. The payment schedule varies greatly between firms but I generally prefer a large up front payment with the remaining balance being paid in monthly installments over the life of the contract. This ensures the client is locked into the process, the total amount of the contract is guaranteed, the firm receives a sufficient portion of the contract to cover the initial time investment. Because the client pays the remaining balance over the rest of the contract there should be little incentive for the client to withhold payment at the end of the contract as could be the case if the final payment is large. At the end of this type of contract a second maintenance, reporting, and/or link building contract could be drafted, which could be on a monthly basis but would contain a smaller scope of services. It is also possible that more work would be needed or an opportunity was identified in the course of the first contract that would result in a second flat-fee limited-term agreement.
Conclusions
From the above discussion it is apparent that billing SEO services on a fixed-rate fixed-length contract is favored. Structuring contracts in this manner avoids many of the pitfalls and potential dangers to the client relationship that a flat-monthly rate encourages. I dislike the idea of using a pricing model that is based on reaching a point where you are overcharging clients. The amount charged should be directly linked to the hours of work performed and the payment structure should reflect the hours worked during the billing period as closely as possible.
By Chris Olberding
Monday, November 26, 2007
|
SEO is a relatively new field, in order to fully understand and best price our services we conducted a short survey of existing firms' pricing for their seo services. The prices below are real prices posted online but names have been withheld.
Top Firm
Well recognized, popular web site in SEM circles, active in conference, occasional national publicity such as Washington Post, Newsweek, etc.
- Site Reviews $15k - $50k
- Link Building Campaign: 10k+
- 4.5 months, 45h of consultation, a comprehensive report 45 days in $30k
- Full Package: $120k (Note: full package generally includes a site redesign but in most cases probably not any development costs.)
Middle of the Road Firm: 1
Mid to small web design company rebranded as a web marketing company. Design poor, contains a lot of information, site doesn’t inspire trust, probably do decent business.
- Site Reviews $2.5k and 1 month
- Full package (not including link budget) $12k
Middle of the Road Firm: 2
Pricing models based around inclusion of a mishmash of services.
- Packages range from 3000 – 5000 with Custom Packages starting at $7500
- Link Building $2400
Web Development Firm
Web development firm, clients begin asking for and are sold marketing services secondary and in addition to a web development project.
- $250 – $400/month Full Package. Redesign, development extra.
Bottom of the Barrel
Scams, ineffective services and overseas company fall into this category. Generally charging a flat rate for a year of less than $1000, sometimes as low as $60.
There are many of these kinds of companies and web sites. Many are borderline scams, usually with guarantees and false claims. Many confuse the client about what SEO and PPC are. Some promise 100 leads which translates into 100 clicks via PPC.
Analysis of Pricing Structures
Written by Christopher Olberding
Most of the firms above use a static up front price with differing pricing schedules. However the exception, the Web Development Firm, is not unusual, charging a monthly flat rate in a non-terminating contract is underrepresented above. It seems that the more successful and prominent SEO firms tend to use a flat fee spread over the life of a fixed term contract. Cheap and scam sites tend to charge a small fee for a years service that is all paid up front for obvious reasons. Companies with their primary business in web design and development tend to be the group that charges on a monthly basis, perhaps this is due to uncertainty of what the market will bear, the lure of recurring revenue, or something else.
Flat Monthly Rates
In almost every instance the bulk of hours spent in a new internet marketing project will be in the first few months. Many firms that charge a flat monthly rate even acknowledge this to the public and clients. This results in a) the marketing firm making the choice between not achieving timely results or essentially providing services on speculation that the client will not terminate the contract and b) the client becoming dissatisfied with the lack of timely results or realizing, after 5 – 6 months that there is little incentive to continue to pay the monthly fee as the bulk of the work has already been performed. In my experience this often leads to a deteriorating relationship between the firm and the client, which can, and often does spill over into other projects.
Alternative Pricing Structures
A number of other pricing structures for SEO service are used and/or have been suggested, these include performance-based measures, based on traffic, conversions and/or sales, or even through quasi-affiliate kind of arrangements. While interesting there are a number of logistical problems with these pricing structure, especially for smaller clients, and would require a lot of experience to evaluate beforehand if taking on a client would be profitable. Additionally this pricing structures shift the nature of the relationship between the firm and client closer to an affiliate, or outside sales position.
Fixed-Rate Fixed-Length Contracts
The most common pricing structure at least among reputable firms is a (more or less) fixed-rate contract of a limited amount of time. The payment schedule varies greatly between firms but I generally prefer a large up front payment with the remaining balance being paid in monthly installments over the life of the contract. This ensures the client is locked into the process, the total amount of the contract is guaranteed, the firm receives a sufficient portion of the contract to cover the initial time investment. Because the client pays the remaining balance over the rest of the contract there should be little incentive for the client to withhold payment at the end of the contract as could be the case if the final payment is large. At the end of this type of contract a second maintenance, reporting, and/or link building contract could be drafted, which could be on a monthly basis but would contain a smaller scope of services. It is also possible that more work would be needed or an opportunity was identified in the course of the first contract that would result in a second flat-fee limited-term agreement.
Conclusions
From the above discussion it is apparent that billing SEO services on a fixed-rate fixed-length contract is favored. Structuring contracts in this manner avoids many of the pitfalls and potential dangers to the client relationship that a flat-monthly rate encourages. I dislike the idea of using a pricing model that is based on reaching a point where you are overcharging clients. The amount charged should be directly linked to the hours of work performed and the payment structure should reflect the hours worked during the billing period as closely as possible.