Online Marketing Performance » Monetization

What’s a clever Facebook Status go for nowadays?

Scott McAndrew — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 23:06:05 +0000

Both Venture Beat and Mashable had coverage last week of a Facebook feature currently being tested called “credits.” I thought “credits” was a April Fool’s Day joke that just wasn’t all that amusing. Apparently, it wasn’t.

Here’s an excerpt from the Venture Beat coverage that explains how it works:

When you leave a comment on an item, you’ll see a field where you can enter the number of credits you want to give the person who created the item. You’ll also see the number of credits you have available to give — you can choose to give up to the number of credits you possess. You can only get credits by buying them in Facebook’s virtual gifts store — $1 for 100 credits — or by receiving them (or by getting some free when you start using credits, although Facebook is testing how many to make available that way).

Once you’ve left a comment with credits, you’ll see the credits appear next to the comment, following the feature’s green plus symbol icon. There’s no other way to create credits at this time. This means people need to think twice before giving their credits away.

“No brainer” or “no brain”?
For Facebook, it’s a no-brainer. Getting users to exchange real cash for virtual compliments doesn’t have a downside. And, they’re the coolest social networking site on the block. They’ve proven that they are adept at rolling out ideas then, if they tank (or worse, aggravate people), they can backpedal without too much damage.

For Facebook users? My guess is that the average Facebook user’s response is “thanks, but no thanks.” The idea is, well, clunky. While there’s likely far more behind this than what’s being exposed at this point, in response to one’s status giving someone a quick text retort or clicking a ‘like’ link feels natural. Giving them ‘money’ they can spend on tchotchke or re-credit to someone else’s clever status does not.

What do you think? How will Facebook users respond?

Photo by chrispulo

5 troubling Second Search results

Scott McAndrew — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:18:10 +0000

“Second Search” is a technique being tested by Google which allows searching a specific web site for content without leaving Google. It all sounds innocent, but businesses aren’t seeing it that way. Here’s a few examples which illustrate their worries:

Note: A few of the results I’ve described below are not consistently showing up – I’ll add screen shots to this post today or tomorrow.

Craigslist – Jobs

One of the very few things that Craigslist charges for is the placement of help wanted ads. They don’t do so across the board, just in select cities. Regardless, the performance that Craigslist gets from its help wanted ads is important them as a business. Here’s where Second Search gets in the way:

Google Second Search: “Jobs” – Competitors Google Presented:

Jobbing.com
Career Builder
The Ladders

HGTV – Mortgage Refinance

Home and Garden Television covers a variety of topics from working on a home you already own as well as the process of buying or selling a home. When a user searches on the word “mortgage” on their site, the page that is returned displays Google Ads for which HGTV generates some revenue (as does Google). Second search cuts to the chase, and cuts HGTV out.

Google Second Search: “mortgage refinance” – Competitor Ads Include:

Lending Tree
Countrywide
Quicken Loans
Ditech
Wachovia

Best Buy – Laptop

Best Buy sells just about anything electronic you can think of. One of the largest areas in their physical store is their computer section. Inside that section, laptops likely take the cake for showroom square footage. It’s safe to say Best Buy wants to sell laptops. Google’s Second Search provides consumers with some options Best Buy likely wouldn’t be a fan of:

Google Second Search: “laptop” – Some Competing Retailers Displayed:

Dell
Toshiba
NextTag
HP

Microsoft – Email Server

Microsoft’s Exchange mail server is popular. It also generates lots of money for Microsoft. It might surprise them that the ads displayed by Google’s Second Search on the term isn’t giving a nod to Exchange Server:

Google Second Search: “Email Server” – Non-Microsoft Exchange Alternatives in the Google Ads:

Google Business Email
IMail Server
Cold Spark

B&H Photo Video – Nikon D200

If you’ve shopped for camera or video camera equipment online, and missed B&H’s site you probably had to try. They sell just about anything you can think of. Example: Nikon’s D200 digital camera. The body runs about $1,300 dollars. Kits range from $1,600 up to over $2,000. B&H wants you to buy a Nikon D200 from them. Especially if you looked for their site first, and then searched on that item. Unfortunately, Google peppers the Second Search results page with an overwhelming amount of competition:

Google Second Search: “Nikon D200″ – A Sampling of Buying Alternatives in the Google Ads:

Abes of Maine
Broadway Photo
Ritz Camera
Amazon
BHPhotoVideo.com (adding insult to injury!)

Elsewhere on the web:

While I provide problematic examples, Janel Landis gives online marketers a clear-headed approach to Second Search – Search Insider
Vasanth Sridharan over at Silicon Valley Insider has a different view on Second Search:if a site’s own search is better people will use that instead of Google’s. Basis of the second search conversation: missed. – Silicon Valley Insider
Google: No, no, it’s called “teleportation!” – The Official Google Blog

Google second search: What’s in it for Google?

Scott McAndrew — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 06:46:45 +0000

Google has been testing out some new ways of ‘enhancing’ their search results lately. One tactic that I’ve been monitoring is the ability to search an individual web site and view results without leaving Google. Here’s an example:

I searched on ‘hollywoodvideo.com’ in Google (this also worked at the time of testing by searching on ‘hollywood video’). Here’s what I was presented with:

The first result, as expected, is Hollywood Video. There’s the usual result (and for this example what Google calls “Sitelinks”, the links directly to specific sections of the web site) and then there’s something you might not see to often (yet at least): Another search box whose submit buttons reads “search hollywoodvideo.com.”

It seems harmless enough. You enter something you’re looking for, and you get results right on Google as opposed to clicking on the link to Hollywood Video and searching on their site. But, if you’re Hollywood Video, you probably don’t like this tactic. And if you’re a marketer whom this is new to, you’ll likely start paying more attention to Google’s experiments. Why?

Google is testing monetizing these results
Never mind that the next step from that initial search is usually a click-through to the branded experience you’ve created for visitors to your site.

While currently only happening for the strong minority of these second searches, Google is displaying AdWords ads on these results. On searches that I tested this with over the past week or two, it is quite possible for AdWords ads to display from ad publishers who are your direct competition.

Continuing from the previous example: From the search box that Google provided, I searched on ‘new releases’ which is what I was actually looking for. The first result on the natural/organic side was Hollywood Video’s New Release Calendar. The results page also included two AdWords ads. One was for Blockbuster, the second for Movies.AOL.com. The Blockbuster one obviously being the most troublesome.

This is just one of several tactics Google is currently experimenting with. While marketers (and site owners) have been shaking their fists at Google as suspect strategies appear, the general public likely isn’t noticing a difference, nor would they theorize a change in Google’s ways. Why would they? A change is, however, quite well underway.

Sampling of mentions elsewhere on the web:

New Google Search Tool Finds Web Publishers’ Concerns – Washington Post
Google introduces search within search – etre.com blog
Google Offers Secondary Search Boxes – TechCrunch

Making money how?

Scott McAndrew — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 19:03:35 +0000

At the SXSW Conference, one of the sessions I attended was a panel discussion called Turning Projects Into Revenue Generating Businesses. There were representatives from various online web sites who had tried various ways of making money with their web sites. A good amount of the chatter was to be expected:

If you think you’re going to get rich off of Google AdSense ads, good luck—you’re going to need a hell of a lot of traffic (and most likely a web site about asbestos lawsuits) for that to pan out. By the way, if you see any Google Ads on my web site, feel free to click on them.
Selling and managing your own advertising space is another option. It sounds kind of cool—you’re in the driver’s seat of your own advertising outlet. It stops being cool and exposes itself as work when you realize you must serve as the (a) marketer, (b) sales person, (c) bill collector, (d) accountant, and (e) customer service extension of this cool new facet of your web site.

And of course there were the usual suspects (you can sell your own merchandise, you can sell others’ merchandise, etc.). And then… the not so to-be-expected topic…

Virtual Gifting

Virtual gifting is exactly what it sounds like: One web site member sends a virtual gift to another web site member. The gifts are virtual. The price to purchase them, however, is not. In the U.S. market the runaway sophomoric hit turned dating site Am I Hot or Not is widely credited for bringing virtual gifting to the table. Other popular web destinations including Facebook, Dogster (and Catster) are also offering virtual gifts.

Send a Virtual What?

On the “Am I Hot or Not” site, the virtual gifts are flowers. The prices aren’t that different than the real variety.
On Dogster and Catster, there are free virtual gifts that are awarded to members to hand out, but one can also purchase ‘Zealies‘ (Dogster and Catster’s currency) which can be used to send virtual rosettes to their favorite pets (Dogster and Catster are social networking sites for dogs and cats—er, I mean, dog and cats’ owners).
Facebook, who implemented virtual gifting this year, allows users to send various virtual gifts to one another.

Is This a Viable Way to Make Money?

I would have thought not. How many people would send someone virtual flowers? According the the panel, quite a few. Ok, but how many people would buy and send virtual kitty chachki from their cat to another? There can’t be volume there-or could there be? In our virtual worlds, we have virtual places and virtual identities; maybe virtual ways of expressing ourselves isn’t that far fetched after all.

Google pay-per-action for AdWords

Scott McAndrew — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:50:58 +0000

Yesterday in a press release Google announced the launch of a beta program to begin testing a new pricing model based not on clicks, but on conversions. The “Pay-Per-Action” model allows advertisers the ability to set up specific actions (or conversions) along with how much they are willing to pay for that action.

The new ads are for Google AdSense for content sites. AdSense publishers can decide if they want to participate in the program or not. Participants will be able to review details of the advertisements which will appear on their site and decide if the ads are appropriate for their site or not.

One would assume that the amount paid for an actual conversion will be far higher than what one gets for a click under the current PPC model-especially as the amount will be able to be determined by the Advertiser, setting up a affiliate-like relationship, brokered by Google.

The program introduces new challenges for those managing a web site with the ads. With PPC, the user had little control over what went on their site and only had to rely on ad copy driving a click. Now, they’ll have to consider if the web site the user will visit as a result of a click has the potential of closing the deal.

Update: Google’s Inside AdWords blog has a post specifically about the Pay-Per-Action beta.