Posts tagged as:

Pay-per-Click

Google Valentine's Day 2009Jobless claims are on the rise, housing foreclosures are spiraling out of control and our government is at odds about what to do to straighten things out.  In times like these, companies often find themselves paralyzed, trying to guess how consumers will react, and more importantly where dollars will be spent.  How can search engines help us make some rational, informed online marketing decisions?

In the book The Search author John Battelle describes Google as “a database of intentions.” If you prescribe to that classification, the Google tools I’m going to employ will provide some interesting insight into shopper intentions and how that information can be leveraged.  The first tool I’m going to use is Google Insights for Search.  Insights for Search is another Google Experiment, this time one that allows one to peer inside the volume of keyword (or phrase) searches over time and geographical regions.  Let’s see what we can learn.

What can Google tell us about Valentine’s Day shopping?

Our hypothesis will be that people are still shopping online, but they’re likely looking to get a bargain.  The hypothesis ins’t a stroke of genius, but the devil is in the details.  If we’re going to launch a campaign or put some copy on our homepage regarding our holiday deals, let’s use words that resonate with online shoppers.  Further, since we’re theoretically doing this exercise the week before the holiday, Pay-per-Click is a definite medium we would target.  We’d want to know not only what keywords we might want to focus on for our ads to display, but also what keywords to place in generalized ads to get Internet searcher’s attention.

Let’s take a look at the frequency of terms being searched upon in the United States over the past couple of years using Insights for Search.  The search phrases I’m going to take a look at are:

  • Valentine’s Day
  • Valentine’s Day roses
  • Cheap Valentine’s Day gift
  • Valentine’s Day specials
  • Valentine’s deals
  • Valentine’s discount

Search volume for “Valentine’s Day”

Let’s start by looking up a generalized term about the holiday to use as a baseline for interest overall around the topic over time.  The graph below shows search volume for “Valentine’s Day” from January of 2007 until February of 2009 in the United States.  To be sure we’re focused on shopping, we’ve restricted our inquiry to the “Shopping” category.   The February ‘09 data for this year, term and region is reported to the current week, but we’ll focus on the week before the holiday for all of our analysis.

Google Search volume: Valentine's Day

  • 2007: 60
  • 2008: 48
  • 2009: 53

Before we move forward, let’s be clear about what these numbers mean. The numbers on the graph do not allow us to understand the total number of searches for this term in the United States. I’ll let Google tell you what the numbers mean as opposed to paraphrasing:

The numbers on the graph reflect how many searches have been done for a particular term, relative to the total number of searches done on Google over time. They don’t represent absolute search volume numbers, because the data is normalized and presented on a scale from 0-100; each point on the graph is divided by the highest point, or 100. The numbers next to the search terms above the graph are summaries, or totals.

If I check the points on the graph, last week’s number (the week before Valentine’s Day) registers 60. The week before Valentine’s Day in ‘08 is lower, at 48, and that week in ‘07 clocked in at 53.  This shows an increase in the volume of shopping related searches for “Valentine’s Day” for the week before Valentine’s Day this year in the United States as compare to the previous two years.

For the purpose of this exercise, I’m also going to scale data to a 100 point scale when our results fail to do so to make comparisons easier.  Here’s what that will look like for the aforementioned data:

  • 2007: 60 (100)
  • 2008: 48 (80)
  • 2009: 53 (88)

As above, when data is extrapolated to a 100 point scale I’ll include it in parenthesis.  Graph data will not be changed.

Not following the trend

So, we’ve established that the volume of searches for Valentine’s Day gifts the week before the holiday has increased considerably in comparison to the two previous years.  To help illustrate our point regarding the discount terms, I’m going to run an example non-discounted term: “Valentine’s Day roses.”

Search volume for “Valentine’s Day roses”

Below is our result.  Search volume is fairly close to 2008 levels, both of which years are lower than 2007.

Google Search volume: Valentine's Day roses

  • 2007: 62 (100)
  • 2008: 43 (69)
  • 2009: 42 (68)

So, what about the thrifty shopper?

Moving on to bargain hunting, let’s run the same time period but try some phrases that would show people searching with the intent of finding discounted Valentine’s Day gifts. After trying a few phrases and seeing volume increases that were generally aligned with the increase in searches for “Valentine’s Day,” I found several that also showed strong upticks, specifically around the idea of getting a bargain.

Search volume for “Cheap Valentine’s Day gift”

This first graph is for “Cheap Valentine’s Day gift.” For the weeks preceding Valentine’s day, 2007’s interest level is at 40, 2008’s is 36, and 2009 holds the top end (100). So, while shopping-related searches have increased for the term “Valentine’s Day,” searches for those looking for a cheap Valentine’s Day gift have also increased, but to a much more significant degree.

Google Search volume: Cheap Valentine's Day gift

  • 2007: 40
  • 2008: 36
  • 2009: 100

Let’s look for more terms and see if we can find higher variances while still reflecting intent.

Search volume: “Valentine’s Day specials”

Another term I thought that might indicate an intention to find a deal was the phrase “Valentine’s Day specials.” Again, the result shows the same trend.

Google Search volume: Valentine's Day specials

  • 2007: 31 (62)
  • 2008: 28 (56)
  • 2009: 50 (100)

Search volume: “Valentine’s deals”

Bingo. “Deals” seems to be a word that people are using far more when shopping for Valentine’s Day this year and looking for a bargain.  Do note that I dropped “Days” from the phrase as I wasn’t getting results, but felt “Valentine’s” would be enough of a qualifier.  Take a look:

Google Search volume: Valentine's deals

  • 2007: 19
  • 2008: 29
  • 2009: 100

Search volume: “Valentine’s discount”

“Valentine’s discount,” the last phrase I’m including, follows suit with a considerable uptick.

Google Search volume: Valentine's discount

  • 2007: 41
  • 2008: 42
  • 2009: 100

Do we have any actionable data yet?

Not really.  We still need more information to paint the full picture.  If we were going to use this information to understand linguistics and what words were being used more frequently when shopping online for Valentine’s Day compared to previous years, this data is helpful.  But, we really need to get a better idea of how much search volume we’re talking about.

If a phrase was searched on three times during the week before Valentine’s Day in 2008 and 10 times the week before Valentine’s Day this year, we’d see a huge volume increase year-over-year, but creating a marketing campaign based upon that information wouldn’t be the wisest move.

In my next post I’ll take what I’ve learned so far and leverage another of Google’s tools to show how this information could be used to make online marketing decisions.

{ 0 comments }

And the winner is…

by Scott McAndrew on September 25, 2008

A few weeks back I created a little contest that would award the best online marketing mishap story with a shiny new iPod Touch (not just new as in retail boxed, but the brand spankin’ new iPod Touch Apple just released).

After receiving a healthy dose of entries, I enlisted a few online marketers from different disciplines I work with to pick the winner.

Congratulations to Steve for the story he contributed regarding some suspiciously high PPC bills received by a credit union he works at for an unlikely phrase: “es sex.”  Steve, your iPod touch was ordered on the Apple Store online this evening and is en route to you.

New iPod Touch

Here’s Steve’s story in his own words:

I work in the marketing department of a mid-sized credit union. We hired a paid search firm out of Austin that had been recommended to us by another credit union in Dallas.

Our initial set-up was about $15K and our monthly spend was determined to be in the $25-30K range.

Shortly after kick off the firm provided us with a massive list of keywords/phrases to review and approve. Not having any real experience doing this we asked some questions about the list but trusted the firm knew what they were doing.

About two weeks after the launch of the program our webmaster noted some peculiar visitor data. We were getting a huge amount of traffic from the phrase “es sex”. Not surprising those visitors had a near 100% bounce rate.

When we contacted the agency they assured us they would look into it and get back to us. About a week later we still hadnt heard back from them but still saw the massive amounts of traffic coming to the credit unions website from that term.

About 23 days past the launch they called to tell us our budget had depleted quickly and we should consider increasing our spend the following month. When we demanded to see some reporting we found that nearly $8K had been spent to drive people to our site for the term “es sex”.

It turns out there is large credit union named Essex. When they did their keyword research that term came up and they decided to target it. They were never able to explain exactly how Essex became es sex or how the ads they were running were even relative enough to the term to cause so many people to click through to our site but needless to say we refused to pay for their mistake and dumped them for other similarly stupid mistakes about two months later.

Thanks again to everyone who participated, and look for another contest in a month or two.  I’ll be posting a few of the other entries that finished close behind Steve’s in the upcoming days; hopefully you’ll enjoy them as much as I did!

{ 3 comments }

23 May 2008

Live cashback a desperate move?

Microsoft’s offers searchers cash back in times of desperation. Is it nothing more than just paying customers to use Live search?

Read the full article →
17 February 2008

Google AdWords on trademarks: Who wants to know?

Google’s AdSense trademark policy prevents bidding on a competitor’s company name? Or does it? Some companies seem immune to the trademark policy on the AdWords site.

Read the full article →
27 January 2008

AdWords testing increased relevance for advertisers

Google looks to get more specific with Google AdWords Demographic bidding.

Read the full article →
21 March 2007

Google pay-per-action for AdWords

Google announced the launch of a beta program to begin testing a new pricing model based not on clicks, but on conversions.

Read the full article →