And while most pay per click (PPC) advertisers are probably already doing a fair job at targeting a large number of relevant searchers through their existing keyword lists, there are massive opportunities for PPC advertisers who take the time to research thousands more keywords than their competitors.

Let’s find out why.

1. More Impressions

To illustrate the first reason, let’s consider Google’s phrase match for a moment. By bidding on the keyword ‘sony bravia tv’, and setting it to phrase match, you are essentially saying to Google:

“Show my ad whenever someone mentions the word ‘sony bravia tv’ in their search query”.

The job of phrase match is to show your ads for searches that mention your keyword phrase. You might therefore think this will enable your ads to appear whenever someone mentions the phrase ‘sony bravia tv’ in their search query.

Wrong.

Just because you have chosen to bid on the keyword ‘sony bravia tv’, does not mean your ad is guaranteed to show for any search containing the phrase ‘sony bravia tv’. You are competing with thousands of other advertisers for Google’s search results page real estate, and Google can only show a finite number of ads at any one time (10-12).

When deciding which ads to show, Google will display the ads that are most likely to generate a high click through rate (CTR), and those that have a relatively high Quality Score.

So when someone searches for ‘sony bravia 50 inch tv black’, PPC advertisers who have chosen to bid on a keyword close to ‘sony bravia 50 inch tv black’, and are able to display an ad which is relevant to Sony Bravia 50 inch TVs, is more likely to be awarded the chance to appear on Google’s search results page, than your generic keyword ‘sony bravia tv’, which triggers a more generic ad message.

The percentage of impressions your keywords receive for all ‘available’ searches is counted in Google’s Impression Share metric. The higher your Impression Share, the higher the percentage of available searches in which your ads appear.

The crucial point is this – by researching thousands of relevant keywords, all other things equal, you are more likely to show for a greater number of relevant searches. By researching thousands of keywords, your impressions and click volume will increase considerably.

2. Increased Relevancy

The second benefit of having a comprehensive keyword list is increased relevancy.

If you allowed a huge number of very different search terms to match to a single keyword ‘sony bravia tv’, your ad messages will have to be somewhat generic to cater for the wide range of different search terms. Your ‘sony bravia tv’ ad may appear on Google for searches such as ‘sony bravia 40 inch’, ‘sony bravia 42 inch’, and ‘black sony bravia 52 inch’, so your ad needs to be generic enough to be cater for all these very different searches.

On the other hand, if you had separate keywords and ads for ‘sony bravia 40 inch’, sony bravia 42 inch’, and ‘black sony bravia 52 inch’, you can provide more relevant and tailored ad messages to each search requirement. For example, whenever someone searches for ‘sony bravia 40 inch’, your ad message could mention ’40 inch’ and take visitors directly through to the ‘sony bravia 40 inch’ products page on your website. Similarly, if the searcher is looking for ’42 inch’ or ’52 inch’ Sony Bravia TVs, you ads and landing pages can be more tailored to these phrases.

Under a more comprehensive keyword and ad message strategy, click through rates will increase, as your ads appear more relevant to the searcher’s specific requirements. Quality Score will also increase, resulting in lower cost per click (CPC) prices. And since the user journey is more relevant, efficient and targeted, conversion rates are also likely to increase.

The crucial point is this – by researching thousands of relevant keywords, you can display thousands of tailored ads, and realize the benefits of higher CTR, lower CPCs, and higher return on investment.

3. Better Measurement

The third and arguably most important benefit of having a comprehensive set of keywords is better measurement.

Even through your keyword ‘sony bravia tv’ may be phrase matched to searches such as ‘sony bravia tv deals’ and ‘cheap sony bravia tv’, having thousands of different keywords in your Google AdWords campaigns will allow better measurement and analysis of different search terms.

Even if we ignore for a moment the benefits of increased relevancy (point 2 above), let’s see how separating out your keywords can provide an increased amount of insight into how different types of keywords perform.

SCENARIO 1:

In scenario 1 (below), suppose your keyword ‘sony bravia tv’ receives 6,000 clicks and generates 60 sales, resulting an a conversion rate of 1.0%. It’s delivering a good return on investment, so you decide to keep the keyword running without making any changes.

SCENARIO 2:

Now consider scenario 2, where your 6,000 clicks are now spread out over a greater number of keywords. Like scenario 1, your keywords continue to deliver a total of 60 sales.

However, unlike scenario 1, since you have multiple keywords, you can now see exactly where your sales are coming from. You can see that the keyword ‘sony bravia tv deals’ is performing very well, achieving a conversion rate of 1.6%, while people looking for ‘cheap sony bravia tvs’ tend to convert very poorly (conversion rate of only 0.4%).

You can then take these findings, adjust bids and budgets accordingly, and carry out further analysis as to why searches containing the word ‘deals’ perform considerably better than searches containing the word ‘cheap’. Remember – without splitting out your keywords, this would not have been possible.

The crucial point is this – by researching thousands of relevant keywords, your campaign performance data will be spread over a greater number of keywords, allowing more insightful analysis and optimisation. You can filter out poor performers, push high performers, identify opportunities for keyword expansion, and ultimately deliver a higher return on investment for your PPC marketing budget.

Conclusion

When researching keywords for your Google AdWords campaigns, don’t think:

“I only need to add generic keywords such as ‘sony bravia tv’ and ‘sony bravia televisions’ – everything else such as ‘discount sony bravia tv’ and ‘40 inch sony bravia tv free shipping’ will automatically match to my generic keywords”.

Instead, think:

“I need to add as many long-tail keywords as possible, so I can better see how each type of keyword is performing and provide more relevant and tailored ad messages”.

The best campaigns are those that contain a huge number of relevant medium and long-tail keywords, targeting searches containing differing amounts of qualification. The best campaigns are those that are structured across thousands of granular ad groups, so that thousands of tailored ad messages can be presented. The best campaigns are those that aim to maximise relevancy, engagement, and chance of conversion at each stage of the buying cycle.

When you think you have finally created the ultimate Google AdWords campaign, think again.

It’s All Relative

Since CPC prices are often closely linked to the potential profitability of a sale from that keyword, the CPC price is often a mute point. A ‘bad credit history remortgage’ could be worth $15,000 profit to a remortgage broker, so having CPCs in excess of $50.00 can deliver a strong return on investment.

On the other hand, the keyword ‘New York weather’ has little commercial intention, so keywords such as this tend to benefit from low CPCs.

While this relativity of CPC prices makes CPC comparisons across sectors rather meaningless, most PPC advertisers would jump at the chance to pay lower CPCs. So below are 4 strategies I’ve found useful for achieving lower CPCs, while still maintaining a strong conversion rate.

Source: Wordstream

1. Use Long Tail Keywords

Long-tail keywords are those highly-specific, infrequently searched-for phrases such as ‘all inclusive holidays to Paris from Sydney’, which turn up in your search query report. Since they tend to have less advertiser competition, they can be considerably cheaper than more generic keywords such as ‘Paris holidays’.

What’s more, since people making long-tail searchers have arguably carried out the large majority of their pre-purchase research, and are often further along in the buying cycle, long-tail searches can have a considerably higher conversion rate.

Cheaper CPCs and higher conversion rates were exactly what I found when analysing search queries containing different numbers of words. Searches containing 4 or more words performed consistently better than searches containing fewer than 4 words.

Recommendations:

• Use Google’s Keyword Tool to research keywords which have approximately 100 searches/month. These tend to get overlooked by a large number of PPC advertisers.
• Take advantage of the ‘more like these’ feature in Google’s Keyword Tool to continue to build your list of long-tail keywords.
• Run a search query report to look at the search queries which get matched to your keywords. If they are relevant, and have a decent click volume, add them as new keywords and give them their own tailored ads. This way, instead of long-tail searches being matched to your more generic keywords, they will now be matched to longer keywords, giving you more control over ad messages and bid optimisation.

2. Research Uncompetitive Themes

Keywords which have less competition often have lower CPCs. Finding keyword with less competition often requires you to think outside the box, although with the right tools and approach you can be diversifying your keyword portfolio in no time.

Recommendations:

• Plug the URL of a competitor’s website into Google’s Keyword Tool and see what comes up. If their products and services are worded differently to yours, it can uncover some previously-overlooked terminology.
• Mine your search query report to uncover themes which you previously overlooked. Don’t worry if a search query has only a handful of clicks –you’re trying to research new themes from searches which have matched to your existing keywords, so click volumes would likely be much greater if they are added as new keywords.
• Look for numbers which frequently crop up in your search query report. If you’re selling holidays, consider how people type the dates into their search, such as ‘France holidays December 2011′, or ‘winter 2012 skiing deals Queenstown’. If you can provide tailored ads which cater for these date searches, you will likely receive high click through rates (CTR), high Quality Scores, and low CPCs.
• Use Google Insights for Search to find breakout searches. These are searches which have recently increased in popularity by at least 400%, and can be excellent opportunities for highly-profitable keyword targeting due to their relatively low competition and relatively low CPCs.
• Ask friends or family how they might search for your products and services.

3. Use Modified Broad Match

Modified Broad Match is a variation of broad match, but allows you greater control over the types of search queries which trigger your ads. By placing a plus (+) sign in front of certain words in your keyword, Google will only match your keyword to searches which contain all of the words with a preceding plus sign.

So if your keyword was ‘+cheap +deals to +Rome’, you can be sure than any searches matching to your keyword must contain the words ‘cheap’, ‘deals’, and ‘Rome’.

Modified broad match is a great way to improve the quality and profitability from your AdWords campaigns. In some recent research I carried out on modified broad match keywords, keywords with a greater amount of broad match modification tended to have considerably higher CTRs and significantly lower CPCs.

Recommendations:

• Take advantage of modified broad match. It allows you greater control over the types of searches which trigger your keywords.
• Be mindful that restricting the match types of your keywords may reduce your click volume, so compensate for this by researching additional keywords and themes.
• Broad match generation can also be a useful tool to allow your more generic non-modified broad match keywords to catch relevant search traffic which have not yet been added as modified broad match keyword.

4. Be Relevant

Despite PPC often being dubbed as saturated and highly-competitive, the truth is there are massive opportunities everywhere for PPC advertisers to achieve high profitability by providing highly-relevant and helpful ads, which engage with their target audience.

Searches on Google are now becoming increasingly diverse, complex, and unique, and users are expecting a higher degree of relevancy and helpfulness from search results. If you can be the advertiser which caters for the specific needs and requirements of searchers, visitors will reward you with their wallets. And since click through rate (CTR) is a large component of Quality Score, if you can achieve a high CTR, low CPCs will naturally follow.

Recommendations:

• Create hundreds of highly-granular ad groups, each containing only a handful of very similar keywords.
• Tailor your ad messages to your ad group’s keywords. If the ad group contains keywords related to ‘Winter 2012 Queenstown holidays’, ensure your ads also mention cater for Queenstown holidays in Winter 2012.
• Run an ad group report and find your ad groups which receive a large number of clicks. Changes are those ad groups are being matched to a large number of very different searches, so could benefit from being split out. The 10% Clicks Rule is a useful tool for quickly and efficiently identifying your ad groups which could benefit from being split out. Follow the 3 part guide for step-by-step instructions of how to do this.
• Examine your ad groups with high CPCs and low CTRs. Consider how closely your search queries match to that ad group’s ads. If a gap exists between the ad group’s searches and the ad group’s ads, consider how you can make changes to boost your relevancy.

Return on Investment is the Goal

Quality Score doesn’t sell anything. Click through rate doesn’t sell anything. CPCs don’t sell anything. Improving these metrics should not be the objective of your campaign. Improving ROI should be.

All other things equal, if you reduce your CPCs by 20%, great!

But are all other things equal? In trying to reduce your CPCs, have your sacrificed volume? Have you sacrificed quality? Are paying lower CPCs simply because visitors are now less relevant and less likely to convert? Are you now missing out on more relevant and potentially more profitable searches?

CPCs or Quality Score or CTR should not be the end goal of your PPC campaign. Return on investment should be. There’s no harm in paying 50% higher CPCs if your profit increases by 60%. So only use CPCs as a guide.

By all means use long-tail keywords, search query reports, and modified broad match as a means to lower your CPCs. But make sure your sales volume and ROI also rises as a result.

Alan Mitchell is a Google AdWords certified PPC specialist based in Melbourne, Australia, with over 4 years running successful PPC campaigns for businesses in Australia and overseas. Find out how the specialist PPC management such as the 4 PPC strategies above can help you improve your return on investment from PPC marketing, or get in touch for more information.

But while ad scheduling in Google AdWords can be extremely powerful in boosting campaign performance, it is essential that ad scheduling decisions are reliable and informed. Since so many internal and external factors can bias your day of the week analysis, advanced ad scheduling strategies are best reserved for mature and relatively stable PPC campaigns with a large amount of conversion data.

Below are three tips for getting the most out of ad scheduling, and suggestions to help you make reliable and informed decisions to take advantage of this powerful feature of Google AdWords.

1. Beware of Diluted Data

You’re dividing your conversion data across 7 days, so each day will considerably less data than if you look at your campaign on the whole. Keep this in mind, and avoid jumping to conclusions based on insufficient data.

Recommendations: If you’re identified Friday as being a high-performing day, only make slight adjustments to your ad scheduling. Just because Friday has worked better than Saturday does not mean Friday should have bids 100% higher than Saturday. Exaggerated changes to ad scheduling can turn an otherwise high-performing campaign into a poor-performing one.

2. Look for Trends

Avoid getting caught up in the detail. You’re right – Wednesday did perform better than Thursday, but is it really significant? A handful fewer sales on Wednesday and a handful more on Thursday would result in both days performing exactly the same.

Recommendations: Take a step back and look for more general and reliable insights. It is clear that Mondays – Fridays performed much better than Saturdays and Sundays, so make that your only finding from your analysis. Trying to distinguish between individual days where performance is so similar is unnecessarily complicating and confusing your ad scheduling strategy.

3. The Past is Not the Future

Just because Saturdays and Sundays have performed poorly in the past, and Thursdays have performed well, does not mean they will continue to do so in the future. Perhaps a PR campaign caused a sudden increase in sales one Thursday which is biasing the results? Perhaps you tested some new high-volume keywords one weekend which were paused after the weekend due to few sales?

Recommendations: Where possible, repeat your analysis using different date ranges, to see if your findings are recreated. If certain days consistently and significantly outperform other days across different periods, then feel free to incorporate that into your ad scheduling. But avoid making changes to ad scheduling if too many external factors could have influenced day of week performance.

Slow and Steady Wins the Race

Ad scheduling can be extremely useful for mature PPC campaigns which have benefited from a steady period of ad visibility, with limited changes to keywords, bids, ads, and landing pages. If a PPC campaign is in its early growth phrase, where multiple testings and optimisations make reliable day of week analysis difficult, keep day of week analysis for another time.

Does ad scheduling help you boost PPC profitability? Do weekdays consistently perform better than weekends? Share your thoughts and comments below.

But after a while, you realise your PPC campaigns are not delivering the desired return on investment. You start making changes to bids, budgets, and keywords. Still no improvement, so you make more changes.

And so on.

It’s not long until you’ve lost track of what’s working and what’s not. Your keywords and ad groups become disorganised, your Quality Scores start to fall, and you start paying excessively high CPCs to chase after visitors and sales.

If any of this sounds familiar, perhaps you need to take a step back and review your campaign optimisation strategy. Are you making intelligent and informed decisions based on reliable, insightful, and unbiased data? Or are your bids being changed and keywords paused in a random and haphazard fashion in a drastic effort to improve results?

Below are 5 optimisation mistakes I’ve found myself guilty of from time to time, and some tips on how to avoid these common pitfalls.

1. Basing decisions on too little data

Data is a PPC advertiser’s best friend. Without knowing which keywords, ads, and landing pages perform better than other keywords, ads, and landing pages, it is almost impossible to create and maintain a profitable PPC campaign. But when assessing the performance of your campaigns, it’s all too easy to make uninformed changes to keyword bids and unnecessarily pause keywords and ads based on insignificant and unreliable data.

A keyword which has received 1 click and delivered 1 sale is not a high performing keyword. Similarly, a keyword which has received 50 clicks and delivered no sales is not a poor performing keyword.

Recommendations:

• 200 clicks is a good rule of thumb – it gives the keyword or ad a fair chance to show its true worth, and any freak anomalies are likely to be cancelled out over a decent-sized data set. So avoid writing off keywords and ads with less than 200 clicks
• Use larger data sets, but keep track of the time ranges used during your analyses (point 4)

2. Being too granular

Another common mistake is placing too much emphasis on the performance of individual keywords and individual ads, and failing to see the bigger picture. If you look at only keyword data, you will fail to spot how each of your ad groups and campaigns are performing.

Recommendations:

• If your individual keyword data is too small, look at your ad group data – you’re sure to uncover greater insights. And if you ad group data is too small, look at your campaign data.
• Same with ads. If you have the same ad messages across multiple ad groups, run a pivot table in Excel to benefit from a larger data set
• Try to only make optimisation changes when you have at least 200 clicks, so keep moving up a level until you have enough data set to make informed decisions – any changes you make will them be more likely to have a positive impact on your account performance.

3. Assuming that just because a keyword or search query has converted in the past, it will convert again in the future

Because it won’t. Well, not always anyway.

People make a wide range of unique searches, so just because you made a sale after someone searched for ‘cheap Bahamas deals summer 2012′, does not mean that bidding on the keyword ‘cheap Bahamas deals summer 2012′ will deliver another sale in the future.

Recommendations:

• Try to view your more obscure long-tail keywords as a whole, rather than individually
• Pick out themes from your search query reports to get more insightful understanding on what types of keywords and searches are working, rather than the individual searches and keywords

4. Optimising the same data twice

One of the easiest yet most dangerous mistakes to make when optimising campaigns regularly is to overlap your date ranges. You’ve selected data for the ‘last 30 days’, made your keyword bid changes, then carry out another bid optimisation 2 weeks later, again using the ‘last 30 days’ of data. Your bidding decisions will be based on overlapping data, so your changes will be made with poor judgement.

Similarly, if you’ve changed bids in the middle of the month, but then view data for the whole of the month, your CPC, CTR, and average position data will not be representative of the current state of the campaigns.

Recommendations:

• Record the date you make changes to your campaigns, and view data from that date onwards – it will then be more representative of the current state of the campaigns
• Download campaign statistics using AdWords Editor – when you come back to optimise your campaigns on a later date, you can see what date range was previously used and select a new date range from that date onwards
• Try to make routine changes such as bid adjustments at the same time each week or month, to get in the habit of selecting reliable date ranges (e.g. ‘last 7 days’)

5. Being afraid to walk away

There’s nothing more frustrating than investing huge amounts of time and effort into carrying out detailed analysis on your campaigns, only to find no findings whatsoever. After carefully compiling results to compare the profitability of prices versus non-prices in ads, or compare visitor engagement and returning visits of landing page A to landing page B, you secretly hope one proves to be a clear winner.

Really, you do.

But all too often, different ad messages and landing pages will perform exactly the same. When faced with such inconclusive and frustrating results, it’s often difficult to walk away and make absolutely no changes whatsoever to your campaigns. Despite the difficulty in doing so, walking away is essential to avoid making unnecessary and often detrimental changes to your campaigns.

Recommendations:

• Realise that making changes based on insignificant data can worsen your campaign performance
• Create two identical copies of each ad style within the same ad group, and let them rotate – only if both ads AA clearly beat both ads BB (or vice versa), can you be confident of a clear winner

Less is sometimes more

PPC campaign optimisation is an art. Especially when you want to include engagement metrics such as time on site and returning visits. Changes to keywords and ads should not be made haphazardly – they should only be made after careful thought and analysis, using reliable and significant data sets.

Not only does efficient and informed PPC optimisation require a good understanding of data analysis, but it also requires a good intuition and experience on when to make changes and when to walk away. Sometimes the best work you can do to a PPC campaign is to do no work at all.

What strategies do you find useful for optimising PPC campaigns? How do you ensure your optimisations are reliable and efficient? Share your comments and suggestions below.

Unfortunately, there is no definitive rule on the types of keywords which are relevant (which you should show your ads), and which are  not relevant (which you should avoid). After all, what’s relevant to a large advertiser may be irrelevant to a small niche advertiser. This lack of a boundary can make it extremely difficult to decide where to draw the line when researching possible keywords.

But as long as you consider the principle of keyword qualification, everything will be fine! If you understand how different keywords in your AdWords account naturally have different levels of qualification, keyword research and ad group organisation become a whole lot more effective.

Let’s see how.

Suppose you want to sell your luxury apartment in Melbourne. What keywords should you target? Perhaps you might want to show ads for the phrase ‘luxury apartments in Melbourne’? But people making this search might be looking for luxury rental apartments in Melbourne, and you’re obviously only concerned with apartment sales.

So you might want to instead target the phrase ‘luxury apartments for sale in Melbourne’. This would no doubt be a highly-relevant keyword, and surely deliver ideal visitors to your site. And you’d be right – the keyword is qualified on four separate counts:

• It contains the word ‘luxury’ – qualifying the visitor as looking for high-end property
• It contains the word ‘apartments’ – qualifying the visitor as looking for apartments rather than houses or offices
• It contains the words ‘for sale’ – qualifying the visitor as looking to purchase, rather than rent
• It contains the word ‘Melbourne’ – qualifying the visitor as looking for apartments in Melbourne, rather than Sydney

But highly-relevant as this keyword may be, search volume may be very limited. If you only target keywords which are fully-qualified by description, type, purchase intention, and location, you might as well give up hope of ever selling your luxury Melbourne apartment. Only 38 people searched for ‘luxury apartments for sale Melbourne’ in March 2011, so even with a strong click through rate (CTR) of 10%, you would only receive a handful of visitors to your site each month. There just isn’t the search volume to focus only on the most highly-qualified keywords.

So let’s get more visitors!

The Art of Qualification

In order to open up your property to a greater visitor base, you need to be less strict with your keyword qualification. While it is of course great to have only highly-qualified visitors clicking through to your site, to increase the reach of your property, you will also need to target slightly less-qualified keywords.

But while targeting these less-qualified keywords may increase your risk of getting irrelevant visitors to your site, this can be minimised by intelligent separation of different types of keywords.

To see how your keyword can be separated, let’s once again consider the multiple ways in which a property keyword can be qualified:

1. Description – the searcher has specified they are looking for ‘luxury’, ‘world class’, ‘spacious’, or ‘waterfront’, rather than ‘cheap’, ‘first home’ or ‘small’
2. Type – the searcher has specified they are looking for ‘apartments’, rather than ‘houses’, ‘land’, or ‘offices’
3. Purchase Intention – the searcher has specified ‘buy’, or ‘for sale’ in their search, rather than ‘rental’, ‘hire’, or ‘for party’
4. Location – the searcher has specified they are looking for property in ‘Melbourne’ or ‘St Kilda’ (a suburb of Melbourne), rather than ‘Paris’ or New York’

Your most highly-qualified keywords would contain all four qualifiers, such as:

• world class Melbourne apartments for sale (1234)
• buy waterfront apartment in Melbourne (1234)
• exclusive Melbourne apartment sales (1234)

But to increase the reach of your website, you might also want to target keywords which do not include a description qualifier, such as:

• Melbourne apartments for sale (234)
• buy Melbourne apartment online (234)
• apartments for sale in Melbourne (234)

Or keywords which don’t mention the words ‘for sale’:

• Melbourne waterfront apartments (124)
• luxury apartments in Melbourne (124)
• spacious Melbourne apartment units (124)

Heck, why not even target keywords which don’t mention a location. You could always geo-target your ads:

• world class apartments for sale (123)
• apartments for sale over $1 million (123)

But why stop there. We could also target even less-qualified keywords:

• luxury apartments (12)
• apartments for sale (23)
• apartments in Melbourne (24)

And if we really wanted traffic, we could take it even further:

• apartments (2)

As you can see, as we select keywords which are slightly less qualified, they become vaguer, and it becomes more difficult to determine the searcher’s requirements.

So where do you stop?

I would suggest somewhere before you start broad-matching to ‘apartments’, but it is entirely up to you. However far you decide to take your keyword research, what’s important is to keep different types of keywords separate.

The Art of Separation

Your keyword ‘waterfront Melbourne apartments for sale’ will no doubt perform extremely differently to your keyword ‘apartments for sale’ or ‘Melbourne apartments’. Of course it would! So why should you mix different types of keywords together?

You shouldn’t.

Keep your different types of keywords separate, and tag your ads group names based on their amount of qualification:

• 1234 | Waterfront | Apartments | for Sale | Melbourne
• 123 | Waterfront | Apartments | for Sale
• 124 | Waterfront | Apartments | Melbourne
• 12 | Waterfront | Apartments
• 234 | Apartments | for Sale | Melbourne
• 23 | Apartments | for Sale
• 24 | Apartments | Melbourne

By keeping your different qualified keywords separate, you can:

• Create different ads based on the qualification of the ad group’s keywords (if the keyword does not mention a location, then perhaps you should mention the location in your ads)
• Set different bids and budgets based on the level of keyword qualification (you might want to bid higher for highly-qualified 1234 keywords, and bid much lower for less-qualified 23 and 24 keywords)
• See at a glance how your different types of keywords are performing, and adjust your bids and budgets accordingly
• Have a logical pecking order depending on how your campaign is performing (your high-priority 1234 keywords might always be showing, with your low-priority 23 and 24 keywords turned on and off depending on desired visitor volume)
• Use negative keywords more intelligently depending on the ad group’s keyword qualification
• Have a clear keyword ad group organisation strategy to help with future keyword expansion

Since your highly-qualified keywords will no doubt perform very differently to your less-qualified keywords, it makes complete sense to keep them separate. Try researching and organising your keywords based on the amount of qualification they contain, and you see if your campaigns don’t improve.

How do you like to organise your keywords and ad groups? Please share your thoughts and experiences in the comments section below.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia improve their return on investment through best practice PPC techniques. To find out how strategic keyword qualification can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

1. Identify irrelevant keywords which can be added as negatives
2. Identify new keyword opportunities for keyword expansion

The difficulty, however, is efficiently and reliably pulling out trends and insights from a raw search query report. According to Google, 25% of searches made each day are completely unique, and 70% of searches lie outside of Google’s Keyword Tool. While this suggests that the large majority of your search queries will have received only a handful of clicks (making trend-spotting extremely difficult), it also presents a great opportunity for identifying new keywords outside of the Keyword Tool.

This article will explore the techniques which can be used not only to identify negative keywords from a search query report, but also identify new opportunities for practical keyword expansion.

Not Enough Data

The main problem with a raw Google search query report is the sheer variety of searches. Each search query has minimal data, making it difficult to spot trends and insights. Suppose we had the following search queries amongst the mass of other search queries in your report:

• holiday paris for winter 2011
• holiday in winter 2011 to paris
• paris winter 2011 package holiday

It is hard spot the opportunity ‘winter 2011′ amongst the noise of the search query report. It is hard to see the wood through the trees.

Something more is needed.

Search Query Aggregation

If instead, search queries were pulled apart into their individual words, and click data was then aggregated based on these individual words, we would be able to make more sense of search query reports. For example, suppose we could now identify the following search query themes:

• holiday
• paris
• winter
• 2011
• package

We can now see that ‘winter’ and ’2011′ are popular themes within our search query report. And by aggregating click and conversion data for these search query themes, we can quickly and easily identify the types of themes which are converting well, and those which are converting poorly.

Similarly, if the word ‘free’ was hidden amongst multiple search queries, it would have been difficult to realise that the word ‘free’ was a drain on your AdWords budget. But being able to look at the aggregate click cost and conversion data for all searches containing the word ‘free’, you could quickly and easily determine whether ‘free’ should be added as a negative keyword.

If you’re willing to hand over your search query data, Query Miner has developed a tool which allows you to see the words which are converting poorly, and should be added as negative keywords.

But search query analysis shouldn’t stop at identifying negative keywords.

Oh no.

The real power of search query is in identifying new keyword opportunities – the 70% of searches outside of Google’s Keyword Tool. Although looking at one-word phrases can be useful for identifying negative keywords, doing so would ignore other words in the user’s search query which may be crucial to determine the searcher’s intent.

For example, suppose you identified the following themes within your search query report:

Aggregating your click, cost, and conversion data for each of these themes would suggest that the words ‘cheap’, ‘discount’ and ‘weather’ are prime candidates for negative keywords, due to their poor conversion rates.

Similarly, such analysis might show that keywords containing the words ‘kids’ or ‘children’ are converting extremely well, and suggest that keywords containing the words ‘kids’ or ‘children’ should be expanded or have their bids increased.

But while this insight may be interesting, it is of little use in helping you expand your list of keywords. Just because searches which contained ‘kids’ or ‘children’ performed well for your existing keywords, does not mean they would perform well if you added new keyword variations of ‘kids’ and ‘children’.

Something more is needed.

Multiple Word Search Query Aggregation

Suppose that instead of analysing performance for each 1-word theme, you analysed performance for search queries containing 2-word phrases:

Looking at longer phrases, you are now able can now better understand the searcher intent. You can now see that the performance of search queries containing ‘kids’ and ‘children’ is not universal among different searches, but instead depends on other words they are next to. When someone searches for ‘with kids’ or ‘with children’, conversion rate is extremely poor, but when someone searches for ‘without kids’ or ‘without children’, conversion rate is very high.

Similarly, with 1-word analysis, you may have jumped to the conclusion that the word ‘cheap’ is a poor-performer, and should therefore be added as a negative keyword. But by observing 2-word phrases which contain ‘cheap’, you can immediately see that not all ‘cheap’ search queries are poor-performers. Searches which contain the phrases ‘cheap vacation’ or ‘cheap holiday’ have in fact performed extremely well; it is only the search queries which contain the phrase ‘cheap flights’ which have converted poorly.

That’s all very interesting…

But while 2-word theme analysis might help you make more reliable observations about your search query themes, especially for negative keywords, it still is rather impractical for identifying tangible new keyword opportunities which can be added to your campaigns. Knowing that searches which contained the phrase ‘cheap vacation’ performed well, does not mean that adding the keyword ‘cheap vacation’ would deliver equally promising results. If you specialised in Paris holidays, you would get all sort of non-Paris visitors. You are once again ignoring the other crucial words in the search query which are essential for identifying the searcher’s intent.

Even carrying out a 3-word or 4-word search query theme analysis, you would no doubt uncover useless phrases such as ‘cheap holiday deals to’, ‘cost package for october’, and ‘in paris april 2012′, which would not be sensible to add as new keywords:

We need a way of highlighting new keyword opportunities which can quickly and efficiently be added to the account.

Something more is needed.

Filters

We need filters. Once we have identified our promising 2-word, 3-word, and 4-word phrases from our search query report, we need to filter them to ensure they contain essential qualifying words.

Exactly what words you will use as qualifiers will obviously depend on the specifics of your individual campaigns, but here I have filtered to only show phrases which contains the words ‘paris’ and ‘holiday’:

I now have a list of sensible 4-word themes which I can add to my campaign as new phrase match keywords. And since each of these new keyword suggestions contain the words ‘paris’ and ‘holiday’, I can be confident that these keywords would deliver highly-targeted traffic.

Conclusion

There is a huge amount of data available to PPC advertisers via the search query report. Although we are seeing tools which help advertisers mine their search query reports for negative keywords, the real gold is in identifying new opportunities for keyword expansion. Being able to do so efficiently and reliably is surely the Holy Grail of search query analysis, and can be the difference between a mediocre and successful PPC campaign.

What techniques do you use to mine search query reports for new keyword opportunities? How do you ensure new keywords are qualified and relevant? Share your comments and experiences below.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords manager helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. To find out how search query keyword expansion can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

We all know first impressions count. First impressions are crucial for forming beliefs and expectations about a business and its product and service offering. And since your pay per click (PPC) ads are one of your first touch points with online potential customers, and one you have massive control over, your PPC ads are your first opportunity to mould a positive image of your business to potential customers.

Just like it makes sense to invest in a shiny new lobby or reception area to create a positive first impression to new prospective clients, so it also makes sense to ensure your PPC ads portray professionalism, trust and credibility. Below are 9 suggestions of how to appear more credible on Google to better engage with potential customers and increase your conversion rate.

1. Spelling

Make sure spelling in your ads is correct – even when matching to mis-spelt keywords. Avoid dynamic keyword insertion (DKI) for mis-spelt and highly-generic keywords. Export your PPC campaigns to Excel and run a spell-check – you’ll be surprised how easily typos can crop up in ads.

2. Grammar

Make sure your messages are grammatically correct and read clearly as a sentence. Stay away from over-abbreviated ‘txt msg’ style wording which looks amateur and unprofessional. Avoid ‘keyword stuffing’, especially when it is at the expense of message flow. Instead, try including words such as ‘the’, ‘and’, ‘of’ and ‘to’, which can help your messages read more elegantly and portray a better image of your brand.

3. Capitalisation

Be consistent with capitalisation. Whether you’re using start case or only capitalising open-class words, make sure it’s consistent. Experiment with capitalisation to find the style which works best for your business.

4. Punctuation

Avoid over-use of hyphens, commas and other unnecessary punctuation. Special characters can draw the eye, and achieve a higher click through rate, but it can make you look rather amateur and can affect conversion rates. Google only allows one exclamation mark in PPC ads, but that doesn’t mean you have to use an exclamation mark in every ad. Sometimes subtle is better.

5. Closure

Unless your ad is written as a single sentence across both lines of ad text, make sure description line 1 and description line 2 end in a full stop (or exclamation mark). If your ad does not contain full-stops because you’ve reached your 35 character limit, choose a shorter message to close off the sentence with a full stop. Think about how your ads will read now that Google are implementing longer headlines, where both your headline and description line 1 are displayed as a single headline. Does it read well? Does your message make sense in this format?

6. Equality

Try to make both description lines of your ads equal in length. Neatly-formatted ads look clear, concise and well-considered, so avoid having one line of text significantly longer than the other. Try to use 30-35 characters where possible, but also experiment with shorter messages of 25-30 characters. Words such as ‘Now’, ‘Today’, and ‘Online’ are often useful buffer words for creating ad descriptions of equal lengths.

7. Clear Message

Don’t waffle. Have a clear message and give the impression you understand your product. Be specific, state your unique selling points (USPs), and use prices and numbers to quantify your claims. Ads with a clear and confident focus will look and perform considerably better than those with a highly generic message.

8. Display URLs

Avoid ‘keyword stuffing’ your display URLs. Including search terms in display URLs might make your ad more visible and may improve CTR and Quality Score, but since longer URLs are often considered less credible, conversion rates may suffer. Sometimes a shorter display URL looks better than one which tries too hard.

9. Relevancy

No-one likes irrelevant amateur-looking ads, and ads which look like they understand customer needs portray a sense of credibility and authority. Ensure your ads are personalised to users’ search queries and include keywords in headlines and descriptions where possible. Take time to invest in a granular ad group structure.

Conclusion

First impressions count. No more so than on Google, with a huge number of people using Google to carry out initial research about a product or service. Your Google AdWords campaigns are often your first contact with new potential customers, so it’s essential to portray your business in a positive light to maximise your chance of conversion.

Don’s be like eBay and find your PPC campaigns being talked about for all the wrong reasons. Ensure your PPC campaigns give off a message to be proud of.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how specialist PPC marketing can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

But while the long tail has boasted widespread adoption throughout the search marketing community, there does not appear to be a universal agreement among PPC specialists about exactly how many words constitute a long tail keyword. Nor does there appear to be agreement about which other metrics – price, search volume, competitiveness or purchase intention – should be used in defining a long-tail keyword.

Definitions of long tail keyword length vary greatly, from the vague mention of several words and nothing more than a series of words strung together, to the less vague description of 2 or more words, 3 or more words, and usually more than 2 words in length, to the very specific combination of 3-6 words and at least three, and some times as many as five words.

One definition rejects the long tail’s use in describing keywords of 3-4 words, instead referring to them as keyword gems, while others define long tail keywords not by definition but by using examples such as ‘myspace’ vs. ‘is myspace free to use in china’.

I’m hardly any better at providing a clear definition. In a previous post I wrote on the benefits of long tail keywords, my confusion over what exactly constitutes a long tail keyword made me shirk away from providing a clear definition, and I opting for a cop-out by providing an example of a long-tail keyword (e.g. ‘cheap remortgage for bad credit history’) along with a more generic keyword (e.g. ‘remortgages’).

So in search for a more definitive definition of long tail keywords, let’s break the long tail keyword down into its alleged factors to uncover its fundamental, defining properties and determine a clear definition of the long tail. Based on the above definitions of the long-tail, the following 5 characteristics all seem to play an important role:

• Number of words in keyword

• Search volume of keyword

• Competitiveness of keyword

• Price of keyword

• Purchase intention of keyword

Let’s look at each of these 5 areas to see how useful they are in describing long tail keywords:

1. Number of words in keyword

It makes sense that a long-tail keyword contains a greater number of words than a short-tail or head keywords. But exactly how many words should a long tail keyword contain?

Although some definitions of long tail keywords specify a lower and upper limit for the number of words it must contain (e.g. 3-6 words), it makes little sense placing an upper limit on the maximum number of words a long-tail keyword can contain.

The more important question here is exactly how many words should a keyword contain until it is classed as long tail? In the definitions we looked at earlier, we’ve had mentions of anything over 2 words, anything over 3 words, and anything over 5 words.

Then there is the question of whether the number of words in a keyword really matters at all. For example, a short keyword such as ‘antique bingo clothing’ (3 words and very niche) might be considered long-tail, whereas a longer keyword such as ‘car insurance for women’ (4 words and very popular) might be seen as highly competitive and therefore not a long tail keyword.

So perhaps the number of words isn’t useful in defining long tail keywords. Perhaps search volume or competitiveness might be better.

2. Search volume of keyword

Again, it makes sense that keywords with low search volume should be classified as long tail keywords.

But exactly how low a search volume must a keyword have before it is labelled as a long tail keyword? 10 searches a day, 10 searches a month, or 10 searches a lifetime?

While long-tail keywords surely must have less search volume than highly generic keywords, clearly the definition of a long tail keyword should again not depend on a finite number. In searching for a definition, all we can say is that long tail keywords are generally searched for in less volume than more generic keywords.

3. Competitiveness of keyword

What about the competitiveness of a keyword? Are keywords with little competition long-tails?

If so, exactly how much advertiser competition is needed before a long-tail keyword becomes long tail no more? While Google’s keyword tool provides a scale of advertiser competition ranging from 0 to 1 to represent the competitiveness of a keyword, it does not have much practical use in reliably distinguishing between generic keywords and long tail keywords.

So once again, while competitiveness is definitely a defining factor in long-tail keywords, we can only say that long tail keywords tend to have less competition than those which are not long tail. We can’t say specify the exact amount of competition needed to distinguish between generic keywords and long tail keywords.

4. Price of keyword

What about the price of a keyword? Surely long tail keywords are those super cheap phrases you can bid on for $0.10?

Well, since the price of a keyword is linked to its competitiveness, it makes sense that long tail keywords would be cheaper than shorter keywords. And it also makes sense that the cost per click prices should be included in a definition of long tail keywords. But once again, it’s impossible to define exactly where the long tail cost per click cut-off lies. And since keyword prices are also closely linked to the purchase intention and the amount of potential profit which might arise from a sale, keyword prices naturally vary between industries and markets. Again, all that we that long tail keywords are generally cheaper than shorter keywords.

5. Purchase intention of keyword

Purchase intention is interesting. The theory behind purchase intention is that people who make longer, more specific search queries (e.g. ‘casio exilim ex-fh100 digital camera’) are more likely to have already carried out the majority of their pre-purchase research compared to people making shorter, generic searches (e.g. ‘digital cameras’). They are likely to be more informed about their buying needs, and therefore more likely to convert.

Longer keywords have long been known for their higher conversion rates, and many a PPC advertiser’s campaigns are built around a huge number of long tail keywords due to their strong conversion rates.

But does buying intention really form part of the definition of a long tail keyword? While it is true that some longer keywords (e.g. ‘casio exilim ex-fh100 digital camera’) exhibit high buying intention, other longer keywords (e.g. ‘how do clouds form in rainforests’) display little or no buying intention. Similarly, some shorter phrases (e.g. ‘buy apple ipad’) show significant purchase intent, while other shorter variations (e.g. ‘capital of peru’) display little or no intention to buy.

Purchase intention is therefore rather tenuous in its use in describing a long tail keyword.

RELATIVE

While it seems that word count, search volume, competitiveness, and price all play some kind of role in defining a long tail keyword, there are too many exceptions for word count, search volume, competitiveness, and price to becoming defining features of the long-tail:

A keyword which receives 10 clicks a day might be labelled as long-tail to a large advertiser, and labelled as generic to a small, niche advertiser. The keyword hasn’t changed, but the description of it has depending on the circumstance.

Similarly, the keyword ‘casio exilim digital cameras’ might be seen as an uncompetitive long tail keyword to an advertiser spending $500,000/month on clicks, while instead being seen as a highly-competitive generic keyword to a smaller advertiser spending only $50/month on clicks.

Perhaps long tail keywords should not be defined in terms of absolute measures, such as number of words or number of clicks, but instead only used as a relative measure when comparing keywords? Rather than saying:

“This keyword here, ladies and gentlemen, is a long-tail keyword”

Perhaps it is better to say:

“This keyword here, ladies and gentlemen, is more long-tail than this other one”

 
How would you describe a ‘long tail keyword’? In terms of searches, clicks, CPCs, and competition? Or more in terms of a relative measure to compare one keyword (or set of keywords) to another? Your comments welcome below.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how a long-tail approach to PPC can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

PPC advertisers have abided by this relevant approach since the dawn of PPC, knowing that to maximize PPC profitability, ads should be shown for highly-relevant keywords, and not for irrelevant keywords. If you are a synthetic grass manufacturer, for example, you should only show ads for highly-relevant searches such as ‘artificial grass’ and ‘synthetic grass suppliers’, but not for less relevant searches such as ‘real grass’ or ‘buy grass seed online’. Showing ads for these less relevant keywords would achieve a low conversion rate and yield a poor profit.

Or so the theory goes.

But maybe there is a way to still achieve great results from these less relevant keywords? Maybe there is a way to reach a greater number of potential customers, while still achieving a strong profitability?

There is. But it involves a different way of thinking. It involves a different approach to simply bidding on a range of keywords, showing your best performing ads, and waiting for the sales to come flooding in.

Capturing less relevant search traffic and achieving a good return on investment involves 3 crucial steps – separation, qualification, and persuasion.

1) Separation

“Keywords of differing levels of qualification should be separated into their own campaigns”

Start with your most relevant and highly-qualified keywords. These are your cream of the crop keywords in terms of relevancy. If you are selling luxury apartments in New York, for example, keywords in this highly relevant campaign may include a descriptive qualifier (e.g. ‘luxury’ or ‘exclusive’), a property qualifier (e.g. ‘apartments’ or ‘real estate’), a purchase qualifier (e.g. ‘for sale’ or ‘buy’), and a location qualifier (e.g. ‘New York’). People searching for ‘luxury apartment for sale in New York’ would be an extremely high quality of visitor, so these keywords must be kept separate in their own campaign.

In your next campaign, create keywords which are slightly less relevant. Keywords in this campaign might contain a descriptive qualifier (e.g. ‘luxury’ or ‘exclusive’), a property qualifier (e.g. ‘apartments’ or ‘real estate’), and a location qualifier (e.g. ‘New York’), but not a purchase qualifier (e.g. ‘for sale’ or ‘buy’). Keywords such as ‘world class property NYC’ is still relevant, but since it does not contain the words ‘for sale’ or ‘buy’, they need to be kept separate so they can optimized separately.

Next, create a campaign for keywords which do not contain a descriptive qualifier (e.g. ‘luxury’ or ‘exclusive’) not a purchase qualifier (e.g. ‘for sale’ or ‘buy’). Keywords such as ‘New York property for sale’ or ‘buy an apartment NY’ are still somewhat relevant, but since they don’t contain any descriptive or purchase qualifier, they need to be kept separate.

Then create yet another campaign for keywords with a descriptive qualifier (e.g. ‘luxury’ or ‘exclusive’) and a purchase qualifier (e.g. ‘for sale’ or buy’), but without a location qualifier (e.g. ‘New York’). This campaign will include keywords such as ‘exclusive apartments to buy’ or ‘prestigious real estate for sale’), which although are somewhat relevant, do not contain any mention of location so need to be kept separate. To increase the relevancy of keywords in this campaign, you might want to geo-target the campaign to a particular geographic area (e.g. searchers located in New York).

Keep creating campaigns, each with keywords of slightly less relevancy, until you start getting very generic and ambiguous keywords such as ‘New York apartments’. By now you should have a few different campaigns, each identifiable by the amount of qualification their keywords contain. Your campaigns may look something like the following:

• DESCRIPTIVE | PROPERTY | PURCHASE | LOCATION
• DESCRIPTIVE | PROPERTY | PURCHASE
• DESCRIPTIVE | PROPERTY | LOCATION
• PROPERTY | PURCHASE | LOCATION
• DESCRIPTIVE | PROPERTY
• PROPERTY | PURCHASE
• PROPERTY | LOCATION

As you move from one campaign to the next, keywords in your campaigns become less qualified and more ambiguous.

Now comes the exciting part – qualifying your ads.

2) Qualification

“Ad messages should be qualified to cater for different types of searchers”

While showing your best performing ads might work for your highly relevant keywords, using the same ads for less relevant keywords will have very different results. Using the same ‘tried and tested’ ads for less relevant keywords is a major reason why many PPC advertisers complain about the poor profitability of less relevant keywords. It’s not the keywords which are to blame; it’s the poorly qualified ads.

To achieve a strong return on investment from less relevant and more ambiguous keywords, such as ‘apartments in New York’, you need to qualify your ads. The less relevant your keyword, the more qualification is needed in your ads. When a user searches for something generic and ambiguous like ‘apartments in New York’, you are not able to tell whether she is looking to buy or rent an apartment in New York, nor are you able to determine the type of apartment they are seeking (whether it’s luxury, spacious, cheap etc). You therefore need to qualify your ad messages, providing clarity on the crucial missing information your searcher failed to include.

For your keywords which do not include a purchase qualifier (e.g. ‘buy’ or ‘for sale’), make it clear you are selling apartments (rather than renting apartments) by including words such as ‘buy’, ‘for sale’, ‘now selling’, or ‘from $3.5m’. When a searcher sees a price or a purchase qualifier in your ad, they will immediately know you are selling apartments (rather than renting apartments), which will reduce the number of rental seekers clicking on your ads.

Similarly, for your keywords which do not include a location qualifier, make your location extremely clear in your ad messages to minimize wasted clicks from people searching for properties in irrelevant locations. And for your keywords which do not contain a descriptive qualifier (e.g. ‘luxury’ or ‘world class’), ensure the searcher understands you are selling high-end property by using words such as ‘luxury’, ‘world class’, and ‘from $3.5m’ in your ads. This will help to filter out first time buyers or property seekers looking for low cost properties.

Qualifying your ads need not be a difficult task. One of the main reasons why you separated your keywords into different campaigns in step 1 is to make ad qualification all the more easier. By keeping keywords of differing levels of qualification spate, you should be able to quickly and easily create ad messages with the appropriate amount of message qualification.

Next comes the interesting part that is crucial to achieve profitability from less relevant keywords – persuasion.

3) Persuasion

“Ad messages should make it clear you are not offering the product or service the user has searched for, but provide clear messages as to why they should consider you as a substitute”

If you are an artificial grass manufacturer, for example, and you wanted to show ads for ‘real grass’ or ‘buy grass seed online’, you need to persuade searchers why they should change their mind and consider purchasing artificial grass instead. Messages such as ‘Grass that never needs watering’ or ‘Find out why you should go artificial’ might do the trick.

Similarly, if you’re a 4* hotel in Manhattan, New York, and want to reach people searching for hotels in the close by Midtown, New York, don’t just bid on the keyword ’4 star hotels midtown’ and show a generic Manhattan ad. Don’t just include the word ‘Midtown’ in your ads either, as that would mislead potential customers, and result in wasted clicks and few conversions. Mention the word ‘Midtown’ in your ad, but instead point out how far your hotel is away from Midtown. An ad such as the following would do nicely.

You’ve made it clear your hotel is not in Midtown, but clearly suggested why they should consider you anyway. You will filter out those people who must stay in Midtown, but encourage people who are flexible to consider your hotel. And since you’ve pre-qualified your ad messages, you’ve set their expectations at the right level which will help to deliver a strong conversion rate.

Relevancy Is Still King

While separation, qualification and persuasion can help to deliver strong profitability from slightly less relevant keywords, relevancy is still essential for paid search success. There is little point bidding on the keywords ‘apartment decorating’ or ‘the apartment film review’ to sell New York apartments, so keywords must still be somewhat relevant to your offering.

That said, if it’s approached intelligently, the three-pronged attack of separation, qualification, and persuasion should enable you to target less relevant keywords and still achieve a good return on investment. Separation allows you to keep your different keywords separate, qualification helps you reduce wasteful clicks, and persuasion helps you increase your conversion rate. Use all three strategies together, and they can be extremely powerful at increasing conversion volume within your cost budgets.

Are you a fan of the mid-tail? Have you found it possible to achieve a good return from slightly less relevant keywords? Share your thoughts and comments below.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how a strategic approach to PPC can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

While this extra degree of control was largely welcomed by PPC advertisers, modified broad match no doubt adds an extra degree of complication to Google AdWords management. However, as we will see from four seperate modified broad match experiments, if modified broad match is used correctly, it can be extremely effective in significantly increasing click through rates (CTR) and lowering cost per click (CPC) prices of Google AdWords campaigns.

Infinite Matching Possibilities

Modified broad match isn’t just the fourth match type. Modified broad match is the infinite match type. Whereas previously it was only possible to match a keyword in three possible ways, with modified broad match it is now possible to potentially match a keyword an infinite number of ways. The only limit to the number of matching possibilities using modified broad match is the length of the keyword itself.

Say you wanted to bid on the keyword ‘cheap hotels melbourne’. Previously there were only three possible ways you could match this keyword – exact, phrase, and broad:

1. [cheap hotels melbourne] – exact match
2. “cheap hotels melbourne” – phrase match
3. cheap hotels melbourne – broad match

Now, with modified broad match, adding plus signs in front of certain words in your keyword forces those words to be included in the search query. As any word with a preceding plus sign must be included somewhere within the user’s search query, it is now possible to better control the relevancy of PPC traffic. However, this extra control means more possible customisation – there are now a 10 possible matching combinations for the keyword ‘cheap hotels melbourne’:

1. [cheap hotels melbourne] – exact match
2. “cheap hotels melbourne” – phrase match
3. cheap hotels melbourne – broad match
4. +cheap +hotels +melbourne – modified broad match
5. +cheap +hotels melbourne – modified broad match
6. +cheap hotels +melbourne – modified broad match
7. cheap +hotels +melbourne – modified broad match
8. +cheap hotels melbourne – modified broad match
9. cheap +hotels melbourne – modified broad match
10. cheap hotels +melbourne – modified broad match

That’s 10 possible matching combinations if the keyword has 3 words, 18 possible matching combinations if the keyword has 4 words, and 34 possible matching combinations if the keyword has 5 words. It doesn’t take long to realise that modified broad match creates a huge number of possible matching combinations – each which triggers its own unique range of search queries.

While these numerous matching possibilities no doubt add extra complication to Google AdWords management, if modified broad match is approached strategically it can be hugely effective in improving Google AdWords campaign performance. Over the course of 4 AdWords campaign experiments on modified broad match, we will see how modified broad match can lead to significant increases in click through rate, while at the same time significantly reducing cost per click prices.

Experiment 1 – Four Keywords

Firstly, let’s look at a small-scale test which was carried out on an AdWords account over the last 2 months. Below are results for a hotel name keyword (broad match), along with 3 modified broad match variations. Each of the 4 keyword combinations were given their own ad group, the same ads, and the same keyword bids. Over the 2 month test period, each keyword combination received over 200 clicks.

While quality score, average position and average cost per click prices were very similar for each of the combinations, click through rate and conversion rate were significantly higher for longer keywords and those with a greater degree of broad match modification. Click through rate rose from 1.36% to 2.99% to 3.81% to 4.65% as the keyword increased in broad match modification, while conversion rate similarly rose from 3.03% to 3.17% to 4.13% to 4.23%.

Although the experiment was on a small scale using only a handful of keywords, and there could potentially be multiple causes of uncontrolled bias which could have influenced the results, the findings strongly suggest that longer keywords with a higher degree of broad match modification achieve better results than shorter keywords with little or no broad match modification. Considering that longer, modified keywords are more specific in their nature, this is hardly surprising.

Experiment 2 – Multiple Keywords

To provide a more comprehensive analysis of the performance of modified broad match, modified broad match was rolled out across two separate test accounts. Again, the testing time period was just over 2 months, and each test account received over 2,000 clicks. While different keywords had different bids, largely due to their differing levels of competition, care was taken to ensure each match type variation of the same keyword had the same bid.

In test account 1, exact match performed significantly better than the other match types in terms of click through rate (CTR). Phrase, broad and modified broad match had similar click through rates, although average cost per click prices were much lower for phrase match keywords. Although there was little difference in CTR between broad and modified broad match, modified broad match had a 10% lower average cost per click, and a Quality Score comparable to exact match.

In test account 2, however, the story was much more conclusive. Exact match was this time the worst performing match type in terms of click through rate, while Quality Score of exact match was considerably lower than the other match types. Modified broad match had a higher click through rate than standard broad math, although average cost per click prices were slightly higher. However, once again, modified broad match boasted the highest Quality Score, suggesting that modified broad match keywords were perceived as highly relevant for the searches they triggered.

While both test accounts provided results which were largely promising for advocates of modified broad match, the differences in match type performance between the two accounts suggest a more investigative analysis is needed.

Experiment 3 – Amount of Modification in Keyword

In experiment 1 we found that although the sample size was small, keywords with more broad match modification tended to perform better than keywords with less broad match modification. To test the accuracy of this finding, keywords across the two test accounts were grouped according to the number of plus signs they contained. A keyword which contained 4 plus signs for example, meant that those 4 words must be included somewhere within the user’s search query.

Once again, account 1 provided little evidence that more broad match modification resulted in higher click through rates. Although click through rates increased for keywords with 4 or 5 modified words, click volume was significantly lower for these longer words, making it hard to provide a conclusive result. Cost per click (CPC) prices, however, were more conclusive, with CPC prices falling steadily as the amount of broad match modification increases.

In test account 2, not only did cost per click prices fall for keywords with more broad match modification, but click through rate showed a more convincing trend. Quality Scores remained relatively similar across all keyword groups.

Although the results reflect favourably on the use of modified broad match, with keywords having more plus signs generally performing better than those with less plus signs, the results do not take into account the number of words in the keywords which were not broad math modified.

Experiment 4 – Amount of Modification vs. Non-Modification in Keyword

To assess the performance of keywords with differing number of modified and non-modified words, keywords were grouped according to the number of words they contained vs. the number of which were modified. A keyword such as +cheap +hotels melbourne +4 +star, for example, contains 5 words, of which 4 words were broad match modified.

The results show that keywords with a high percentage of their words broad match modified had click through rates considerably higher than keywords where only a few (or none) of their words were broad match modified. While longer keywords also performed better than shorter keywords in terms of click through rate, as expected from long-tail theory, keywords with a higher number of broad match modified words tended to have a higher click through rate.

Similarly, keywords with a greater amount of broad match modification tended to have lower cost per click prices. Keywords with 0 or 1 plus sign were generally expensive while keywords with 3 or 4 plus signs were considerably cheaper.

Although Quality Score was higher for keywords containing a greater number of words, Quality Score remained relatively constant for keywords of varying broad match modification. Quality Score, however, was relatively high across all keywords, suggesting a strong degree of relevancy across the campaigns.

Conclusion

Although exact match was found to perform very well, modified broad match outperformed phrase match and standard broad match in both test accounts. Looking at keywords with different amounts of broad match modification, the results suggest that broad match modification can be incredibly useful in increasingly click through rates and reducing average cost per click prices for Google AdWords campaigns. While keywords containing a greater number of words will naturally tend to achieve higher click through rates and lower cost per click prices, as expected from long-tail theory, the findings suggest that incorporating modified broad match into your long-tail strategy can provide superior results on keywords of all word lengths.

While modified broad match presents a great opportunity for PPC advertisers to improve the performance of their campaigns, it also allows advertisers to increase their control over the types of search queries which match each of their keywords. If modified broad match is rolled out strategically and methodically, with highly-tailored ads closely matching the keywords in each ad group, there is no reason why modified broad match can’t be a stepping stone towards even greater results.

How have you found modified broad match? Did you see similar results in CTR and CPCs? Did modified broad match affect your conversion rates? Share your thoughts and experiences on modified broad match below.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how a strategic approach to modified broad match can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

All very clever. And a massive time-saver too – reducing search time around the world by a massive 11 hours every second (not per person, in total).

But while this is arguably a change for the better, giving users a greater level of interactivity as they search, the announcement has had some negative reactions from search marketers.

End of the Long Tail?

The main concern, as pointed out by John Ellis in his Search Engine Land article, Will Google Instant Kill the Long Tail?, is that by giving users the ability to preview search results as they type, people will be more likely to accept search results for shorter words, and will be less likely to continue searching for highly-specific, long-tail phrases. This will ultimately lead to higher cost per click prices on shorter, generic keywords (as they grow in popularity), and large reductions in the value of long-tail keywords (as they fall in popularity).

Bad news for search marketers.

Why?

Because long-tails are incredibly profitable.

Long-tail keywords are those highly-specific phrases such as ‘luxury apartments in Paris for sale’, as opposed to short-tail keywords which are phrases such as ‘apartments for sale’ or ‘Paris apartments’. Due to the highly-specific nature of long-tails, people searching for long-tail phrases are generally more informed about their requirements, have done the majority of their research, are further along in the buying cycle, and are more likely to buy. Search marketers can therefore use long-tail keywords to very accurately provide highly-targeted ads, and expect to deliver a good return as a result.

The stats back up the theory – research I did last year on long-tail keywords found long-tails can be up to 50% cheaper and convert up to 200% better than short-tail keywords. Long-tails are a search marketer’s friend.

So it is no surprise then to see search marketers up in arms when Google announce a change which threatens to reduce the number of people searching for long-tail keywords.

But will it really have such an impact? Although Google’s Autocomplete feature in March 2009 did somewhat change search behaviour away from the long-tail, it largely had an insignificant effect on long-tail paid search strategy, with the long-tail still very much as powerful as before.

Now, as users are presented with instant search results, will people really change the way they search?

I think it depends on two crucial psychological elements: laziness and laziness

1. Will people get lazy with their keyboard?

Suppose you were interested in buying a luxury apartment in Paris. You start typing your query into Google…

Search results start to appear for Paris weather, Paris transport and Paris tourism. Not very relevant, so you keep typing…

That’s better. As you get more specific with your query, organic and paid search results start to appear with mentions of ‘Paris Apartments’.

Do you stop now and click though a link? Or do you keep searching and hope to get something even better?

Let’s keep typing…

Even better! As you add the words ‘for sale’ into you search query, organic and paid search results now only show listings for Paris apartments for sale. None of those irrelevant rental or holiday apartment listings. Just ones which are for sale.

So do you stop now and click through a link. They all look pretty good! Or do you keep on typing…

As you add the word ‘luxury’ into your search query, the results get even better! Organic and paid search listings for cheap, low cost, budget, discount apartments are no-where to be seen – all that’s visible are listings for luxury apartments. The best yet!

So when did you stop searching? When did something look relevant, catch your eye and bring your typing to an end? Was it after typing ‘paris apartments’? Or after ‘paris apartments for sale’? Or was it after ‘paris apartments for sale luxury’?

Where you (and others) decide to stop typing will be critical for paid search advertising. If it was early (e.g. ‘paris apartments’), it could mean a reduction in the traffic to long tail-searches, which would increase the price of short-tails, making it difficult for small, niche advertisers to compete with the big brands.

If it was late (e.g. ‘paris apartments for sale luxury’), then there could still be hope for the long-tail, with click through rates and conversion rates possibly rising with the improved quality of searches.

Exactly how people change their behaviour when searching will be crucial in determining the effect on paid search advertising.

2. Will be people get lazy with their mouse?

Another critical behavioural factor is how people change the way they use their mouse. Prior to Google Instant, once I typed a query into Google and hit ‘search’, I tended to grab my mouse and browse through the results until I found something of relevance. If nothing satisfied my requirements, I would refine my search until I found what I was looking for.

Now, with Google Instant, there is no need to scroll through results with my mouse. I would simply keep typing, or change what I have typed, until I see relevant results on the search page. As soon as I see something which grabs my attention, I would let go of your keyboard, grab my mouse, and click through that listing. I don’t let go of my keyboard until I have already decided where I am going to click. With Google Instant, my mouse is no longer used for browsing through the results – it’s only used for clicking on what I have already decided to click on.

If my behaviour – of only using the mouse to click, rather than to browse – becomes the norm with Google Instant, this could have massive implications for paid search advertising.

If scrolling with the mouse through search results becomes a redundant activity, only above-the-fold ads in the top positions will have any chance of being clicked. Advertisers with ads in the lower positions (such as 7, 8, 9 and 10), will see their click through rate (CTR) fall considerably, and to retain a decent click volume, will likely increase their cost per click (CPC) keyword bids in an effort to appear above the fold.

Over time, this will raise the cost per click (CPC) prices of ads in the top positions. It is therefore likely to be smaller advertisers – who cannot afford to compete with the big brands – who are likely to suffer. Big brands will simply welcome the extra traffic.

Worst Case Scenario

Although it is difficult to predict exactly how people will adapt to Google Instant, the worst case scenario for pay per click advertising is scary. People accept shorter phrases, and only click on ads in the top few positions. Long-tail keywords fall in volume, and the price of short-tail, generic keywords rise considerably. Smaller advertisers struggle to compete.

Best Case Scenario

The best case scenario is somewhat more comforting. The comprehensive search suggestions of Autocomplete and the ability to preview search results mean people enter more specific, detailed search queries. Long-tail search volume remains unchanged, or even rises as a result. And since users now see search results as they search, impressions are of a higher quality, so click through rates (CTR) and conversion rates rise.

Likely Scenario

While it’s too early to determine exactly what affect Google Instant is likely to have on pay per click advertising, it will no doubt change the way we search. But as long as Google’s Autocomplete continues to provide a wide selection of long-tail search suggestions (e.g. ‘paris apartments for sale luxury’), I don’t think the long-tail is in any immediate danger.

I think what is more likely, however, is a reduction in searches for phrases which are not in the Autocomplete list of search suggestions. I think people will learn to accept the search suggestions presented to them, and reduce the number of creative ad hoc ‘outside the box’ searches. As soon as you’ve reached the end of the road in the list of search suggestions, you would accept the suggestion as your search. I think only a small minority of people will go on to refine their search further, typing something even more specific as ‘paris apartments for sale luxury 2 bedrooms’.

Whether the long-tail is dead, and whether competition is focused on the top few ad positions, in my opinion is down to the extent to which Google continue to expand their range of long-tail Autocomplete suggestions. As as long as people continue to demand ever more specialised search results, and do so with ever more specific search queries, I think the long-tail is still very much alive.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how a strategic approach to PPC can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

While exact and phrase match keywords are generally more controllable than broad match keywords, broad match can open up your business to a significant number of additional customers – those who might otherwise have been missed if only exact and phrase match keywords were used.

As we consider the pros and cons of each match type, we find that a balance is therefore required between the extra visitors broad match can deliver, and the quality of those extra visitors. In trying to find that balance, we consider a technique called the Broad Match Generator, which uses broad match search queries to generate new exact, phrase and negative keywords. We see how the methodical process of regularly analysing  search query data, to continually expand keyword lists and ad text relevancy (Broad Match Generation), can help take advantage of the opportunities of broad match while still delivering a strong return on investment.

Exact & Phrase Match

Exact and phrase match keywords are typically the most favourable for search marketers, as they allow a high degree of control over the words a searcher has to make in order for their ads to be shown. If your campaign contained the exact match keyword ‘flights to Melbourne’, for example, you can be 100% sure your ad would only appear when someone searches for ‘flights to Melbourne’ exactly.

Phrase match also gives you a high degree of control, and ensures that the words ‘flights to Melbourne’ must be included somewhere in the user’s search phrase. You can therefore be 100% sure you will only receive traffic from searches which include the phrase ‘flights to Melbourne’, such as ‘cheap flights to Melbourne’, ‘flights to Melbourne from Hong Kong’ or ‘low cost flights to Melbourne from China’.

So with exact and phrase match, you have a high degree of control over the search words which will trigger your ads. You can ensure your ads will only be shown on Google for highly-relevant potential customers.

Broad Match

Broad match, however, is not so controllable. Bid for the broad match keyword ‘flights to Melbourne’, for example, and you ads could be shown when someone searches for ‘flights from London to Melbourne’, ‘Melbourne flying club’ or ‘Australian travel deals’. Basically any search term Google believes is somewhat relevant to the keyword ‘flights to Melbourne’.

Not very controllable, you might think, and you’d be right. Why would you risk receiving visitors from people looking for ‘Melbourne flying lessons’, when you can be 100% sure what you’re getting by using exact and phrase matching?

Traffic, stupid!

Broad match isn’t all bad. In fact, it can be incredibly useful. According to Udi Manber, Google’s VP of engineering, 20-25% of search queries each day have never been made before, making it almost impossible to target every potential customer using just exact and phrase match keywords.

No amount of keyword research can predict that someone might search for phrases such as ‘flight prices March 2011 Tokyo to Melbourne’, ‘airlines Melbourne business class from NZ’ or ‘flights around the world via Melbourne’. Broad match can help deliver thousands of additional highly-targeted potential customers, who would otherwise have been missed if only exact and phrase match keywords were used.

So broad match allows you to receive high-quality visitors from search terms you may have missed during your initial keyword research.

But the problem of broad match still remains. Broad match can still send you visitors from hundreds of irrelevant terms such as ‘Melbourne flying lessons’. What a waste of money.

A balance is therefore needed between the benefit of extra visitors from broad match keywords, and the relevancy of those extra visitors. Introducing the Broad Match Generator…

The Broad Match Generator

Since exact and phrase match keywords provide the highest level of control, and allow advertisers to display highly-targeted ads, exact and phrase match searches should account for the bulk of clicks in a paid search campaign. Broad match should only be used as a catch all, to pick up those specific, seasonal and somewhat abstract long-tail searches which were not added as exact or phrase match keywords during your initial keyword research, and as a tool to generate new exact, phrase and negative match keywords.

To see how this Broad Match Generator would work, let’s first look at an example of an excellent user journey.

Example 1 – Exact Match Keyword in Account

Suppose someone searched for ‘flights to Italy from Melbourne’. Also suppose ‘flights to Italy from Melbourne’ exists as an exact match keyword in your Google AdWords account. So when a search is made, your exact match keyword ‘flights to Italy from Melbourne’ is triggered. Not only that, but since the keyword has its own ad group with its own tailored ads, your ad which appears will be highly-relevant and mention the words ‘flights’, ‘Melbourne’ and ‘Italy’, as well as current pricings for the trip. The visitor is then taken through to a landing page which shows details of flights to Italy from Melbourne.

Highly relevant, highly engaging, and likely to result in high click through rate (CTR), high Quality Score, low cost per click prices (CPCs), low bounce rate, high conversion rate and higher return on investment. Fantastic!

Example 2 – Exact Match Keyword not in Account (and search is relevant)

Now let’s see what would happen if a search is matched to one of your broad keywords.

Suppose the search is ‘flights Christmas 2010 to Melbourne’, and ‘flights Christmas 2010 to Melbourne’ is not is your Google AdWords account as an exact match keyword (ignore phrase match for the moment). The search is then matched to your broad keyword ‘Melbourne flights’, and the generic ad for ‘Melbourne flights’ is triggered. The visitor is then taken through to a generic landing page.

Somewhat relevant, you might think, but far from perfect. The searcher explicitly stated they were looking for flights at Christmas 2010, so why not show ads which better answers their question?

This is where the Generator comes in.

For any broad-matched search query, first decide if it is relevant. If it is relevant, then add the search as a new exact and phrase match keyword and give the keywords its own highly-targeted ads in its own ad group.

So the next time someone searches for ‘flights Christmas 2010 to Melbourne’, your ad which will appear will mention the words ‘flights’, ‘Christmas’, ’2010′ and ‘Melbourne’, and take visitors directly through to a Christmas 2010 Melbourne flight page.

Higher click through rate (CTR), higher Quality Score, lower cost per click prices (CPCs), lower bounce rate, higher conversion rate and higher return on investment.

Example 3 – Exact Match Keyword not in Account (and search is not relevant)

But what if the search query is not relevant, such as ‘Melbourne flying lessons’?

Again, this is easy. When you find a search query which is not relevant to your business, add it (and similar irrelevant searches such as ‘instructor’, ‘jobs’ and ‘careers’) as a negative keyword, to prevent it (and similar irrelevant searches) from triggering your ads again in the future.

The result will be reduced wastage, lower bounce rate, higher conversion rate and higher return on investment.

Two Simple Steps to Ultimate Broad Match Generation

The Broad Match Generation process is very simple. On a regular basis, simply look at each of the search queries that have matched to your broad-match keywords, and make one of two improvements:

1. If the broad-match search query is relevant, add the search query as exact and phrase match keywords in their own ad group, with their own tailored ads.
2. If the broad-match search query is not relevant, add the search query as a negative keyword.

Remember, even as you add new exact, phrase and negative keywords, your broad match keywords will continue to match to more and more search terms, so Broad Match Generation is an ongoing process. However, as you increase your number of exact and phrase match keywords, you should see broad match accounting for fewer and fewer of your visitors. A higher proportion of visitors coming through exact and phrase match keywords means you’re more in control of the types of visitors coming to your site and the ads they are shown, and is a sign that your Broad Match Generation is working.

If the Broad Match Generator is carried out regularly, broad match can be extremely effective in helping to target your ads to an increasing number of highly-qualified searchers, while at the same time reducing wastage from irrelevant and wasteful searches.

Broad match should never be used as a long-term ‘set and forget’ keyword targeting strategy; instead, it should only be used to generate new exact, phrase and negative match keywords, and improve the relevancy of your ads. It should only be used as a means to an end – that end being more exact, phrase and negative keywords and better relevancy.

Broad match keywords, left alone, should never be a long-term solution.

Opportunities

As we have seen, ongoing Broad Match Generation is a great way to make use of the extra traffic available through broad match, while at the same time providing a simple and practical means to continually improve the quality of your Google AdWords campaigns. It can help you uncover new seasonal trends and long-tail opportunities (such as ‘Christmas flights to Melbourne’ and ‘flight and hotel packages Melbourne Cup 2011′), and provide you with a great opportunity to provide highly-relevant ads, tailored to these new search terms.

What’s more, since there will also be some difference between your phrase match keywords and the search queries being matched to them, phrase match also presents another great opportunity for similar ongoing refinement. Looking at the searches being matched to your phrase match keywords, and adding new exact, phrase and negative keywords, as well as new tailored ads, can help take your Google AdWords campaigns even further.

And although Google’s recently-announced broad match modifier will help to give you more control over the types of searches being matched to your broad match keywords, ongoing Broad Match Generation will still be an incredibly powerful strategy – not only to help expand your list of long-tail keywords, but also to identify seasonal keywords trends and improve the relevancy of your ads.

Broad Match Generation provides a practical means to continually provide ever more specific and relevant ads to help better cater for the growing demands of searchers and better connect with your target audience. Use it to your advantage and watch how your return on investment from Google AdWords improves.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how the strategic use of exact, phrase and broad match can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

Although we infer that profit sharing is sound from an economic sense, we find it does have problems of its own in terms of implementation and conversion attribution, and conclude that profit sharing should only be considered once a strong and tested relationship has already been established between client and agency.

So let’s get started.

With a profit share deal, instead of paying the client paying the agency a percentage of PPC spend fee, or a set fee for each sale, the PPC agency receives a share of all profits they help to deliver for the client through PPC activity.

If the PPC agency helps make the client $50,000 in profit from PPC, and the agreed profit share percentage is 10%, the client will pay the PPC agency $5,000 for their troubles.

Since the more profit the agency makes for the client, the higher their fees, it is therefore in the agency’s best interests to make the client as much profit as possible. Unlike the percentage of spend (markup) model, there is no monetary incentive for the agency to spend money haphazardly on clicks to increase their commission. With a profit share model, it’s the other way around. There is an incentive for the PPC agency to reduce wastage and increase spend in areas which generate a return.

The profit share model is the only PPC pricing model which is perfectly efficient from an economics point of view. Unlike the management fee model, the percentage of spend model and the cost-per-sale model, with a profit share model both client and agency have the same common goal: to maximise client profit. As pointed out by Andreas Reiffen in his analysis on paid search profit sharing, it allows a win-win situation in which both the client and PPC agency are better off.

So the profit share model is economically sound. The point of maximum agency profit is also the point of maximum client profit. There is no other click volume which will deliver a higher profit. It provides the necessary incentives to help both client and agency maximise their bottom line.

What’s more, since a common goal is being chased by both parties, the profit share model provides a solid foundation for a long-lasting, open relationship between client and agency. It creates a platform for innovation, makes testing worthwhile and encourages the sharing of ideas to reduce clicks costs and increase click revenue. It’s in the agency’s interest to make recommendations to improve website conversion rates; and it’s in the client’s interest to share knowledge of their business with the agency to improve keyword targeting and ad copy. It’s a mutually beneficial agreement that can’t go wrong.

Or can it?

Perhaps. A client’s profit figures are sensitive information. If leaked into the hands of competitors, it could be disastrous for the client. A significant level of trust between both parties is therefore required for a profit sharing model to work.

Conversion Attribution

There’s also the issue of conversion attribution. Since the PPC agency’s fees are bases on profit generated from PPC activity only, how much the agency receives is entirely based on tracking capabilities.

Tracking generally uses cookies to measure customers who buy online within a certain time period (say 30 days), and generally ignores revenue through offline methods such as phone calls and store walk-ins. If someone clicks on a PPC ad while at work, then makes an order when at home on a different computer, or perhaps picks up the phone, that revenue is not attributed to PPC. Nor is revenue from users who have high browser privacy settings or reject cookies.

As pointed out by Econsultancy, PPC marketers are currently missing out on credit for half of the revenue their campaigns are driving, which is a huge amount. With a profit share model, agency fees are based entirely on trackable revenue, so the agency will be under-rewarded for the value they deliver. This can significantly compromise the level of investment in the client’s PPC campaigns, and the level of testing and innovation.

This bias in conversion attribution can also lead to the PPC agency reducing bids on generic ‘research’ keywords from customers earlier in the buying cycle. These keywords might not convert profitably online (according to the under-reported tracking), but may be essential for the client’s walk-in orders, branding or long-term growth. Again – not very efficient.

So although the profit share model performs exceptionally well at aligning the motivations of client and agency, it is far from a perfect PPC pricing model. A high level of trust is essential for it to work – as is accurate (and fair) revenue tracking. Until conversion attribution improves considerably, any business with strong brand or numerous different marketing touch points should use the profit share model with caution.

Are you a fan of the profit share model? Have you made it work for both client and agency? Or is it one for the future when conversion attribution improves? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how a strategic approach to PPC can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

From a client’s point of view, this is great. There is little risk – agency fees are only payable once sales come in. Guaranteed profit!

From an agency’s point of view, it’s also great. Each extra sale is extra revenue, so an agency which is confident of its abilities to deliver value from paid search is rewarded heavily (and fairly) for their efforts. Performance-related pay creates an incentive for agencies to invest their best resources and expertise into making PPC campaigns a success for their client.

Researching cheaper and high-converting long-tail keywords, restructuring ad groups to improve relevancy and regularly carrying out landing page testing to increase conversion rate become all the more worthwhile when there’s a monetary incentive. If an agency only gets paid when they deliver sales, it is worth their time and effort to deliver sales.

Sounds too good to be true. Client risk is minimal. Agencies which perform are rewarded. Agencies which don’t perform…well they are forced to perform if they are to stay in business.

So you’ve decided you want to give performance pricing a go. But how exactly would a performance deal work? And how should you go about creating one for your PPC agency?

Economics

To see how such performance deals would affect your bottom line, and the bottom line of the PPC agency you’ve hired, we’ll use a similar method to that used in Economics of PPC Pricing: Why the Markup Model is Flawed, and look at the cost and revenue structures for both client and agency.

Let’s suppose Shiny Shoes Corp launched a new range of shiny red golf shoes, which they sold online for $15 (OK, they’re very cheap golf shoes). Sales were stagnant, so in an effort to increase sales of shiny red golf shoes, Shiny Shoes Corp decided to pay a PPC agency $10 for every pair of shiny red golf shoes they sold through PPC. If the PPC agency only sold 10 pairs a month, the client would pay the agency $100 (10 x $10), regardless of whether the agency spent $50 or $5000 on clicks. If the PPC agency were to generate 1,000 sales, the client would pay the agency $10,000 (1,000 x $10) – again, regardless of whether the agency spent $50 or $5000 on clicks.

How many sales will the PPC agency deliver? How much profit will Shiny Shoes Corp make? How much profit will the agency make? Will the agency be incentivised to deliver extra sales? Is $10 per sale a fair amount, or should it be $12, or perhaps $8? All burning questions we can consider with some simple economics.

Look at the green line ‘MC (client)’ in the figure below. MC stands for manginal cost, and shows what happens to the costs of Shiny Shoe Company as sales volume increases by extra units. It’s a flat line, which makes sense – the client is paying the agency $10 per sale regardless of sales volume.

Since Shiny Shoes Corp pays the agency $10 per sale, we can also add in the agency’s marginal revenue (red line), which again is flat. At every sales volume, whether it’s 20 pairs or 2,000 pairs, the client’s cost per sale is $10 and the agency’s revenue per sale is also $10.

We also know that Shiny Shoes Corp sells the shiny red shoes online for $15, so we can add in the client’s marginal revenue. Again, it’s a flat line, since Shiny Shoes Corp receives $15 for each sale, regardless of how many pairs they sell.

Now that we have the cost and revenue structures for Shiny Shoes Corp, we can see what profit they’re making. Shiny Shoes Corp’s profit is the difference between their cost and revenue, which is represented by the green shaded area. The higher the sales volume, the higher their profit. Since Shiny Shoes Corp makes $5 profit for every sale ($15 they recieve from the customer online minus $10 they pay the PPC agency), they would want as many sales as possible!

How many sales will the agency will deliver depends on the agency’s profit, so let’s add in the agency’s marginal costs (red line). The agency’s MC is an upward sloping line, since click costs increase progressively as volume is increased.

Why is it upward-sloping?

Diminishing Marginal Returns

Well, the first few sales will come from cheap clicks from brand terms, such as ‘Shiny Shoes Corp’, as well as highly-relevant long-tail keywords, such as ‘red shiny golf shoes for sale’. Not only are long-tail keywords generally cheaper, but conversion rates for these highly-relevant keywords will also be high, meaning fewer clicks (and therefore fewer click costs) will be needed for each sale. The agency can probably bring in the first few sales for only $1-$2 each.

Once the PPC agency has saturated brand terms and highly-converting long-tail keywords, they are forced to show ads for more competitive, more generic and more expensive keywords, which might not convert as well. The higher cost per click prices and lower conversion rates for less-relevant keywords such as ‘golf shoes’, mean sales might cost the agency $8.

Each extra sale costs the agency progressively more, hence the upward-sloping marginal cost line. Diminishing marginal returns set in.

Now we have all our cost and revenue lines for the agency, we can see how many pairs of shoes will be delivered by the PPC agency, and how much profit the client and agency will make.

After a while, when all profitable keyword opportunities are exhausted, when all that is left are expensive and poorly-converting keywords such as ‘shoes’ and ‘birthday gift ideas’, the the agency will start to make a loss from any extra sales they deliver, where the agency’s Marginal Cost goes above the agency’s Marginal Revenue . At this point, the agency will reduce bids, pause keywords and cut back on sales volume until they stop making a marginal loss.

The agency’s maximum profit is where their Marginal Cost equals their Marginal Revenue, at 5,000 pairs of shiny red golf shoes. Any less than 5,000 pairs (say 4,000 pairs), and the revenue for the agency delivering extra pairs of shoes would be more than their cost of delivering those extra pairs (their Marginal Revenue would be greater than their Marginal Cost), so it would be profitable for the agency to increase volume. Any more than 5,00 pairs (say 6,000 pairs), and the agency would make a loss from these extra pairs (their Marginal Revenue would be less than their Marginal Cost), so they would be better off by reducing volume.

Maximum agency profit is therefore where the agency’s MC = MR, at 5,000 pairs of shoes.

At this point of maximum agency profit (5,000 pairs of shoes), we can see the profit for both client and agency. Looks healthy, right?

Wrong.

At 5,000 pair of shoes, there is a wastage, an inefficiency – what economists call a loss of utility. There is extra profit to be made (dark grey area), but since the agency doesn’t want to make a loss from helping the client achieve this extra profit, the extra profit goes unrealised. This makes model inefficient. There is extra profit to be made, but the model does not sufficiently extract this extra profit the market is offering.

The cost-per-sale model starts to breaks down.

What’s more, with a $10 cost-per-sale model, the fee the agency receives is a poor reflection of their efforts.

The Brand Problem

A good PPC pricing model should be an accurate reflection of the agency’s work and expertise, which is not the case with this $10 cost-per-sale model. The first few sales will be from showing ads for brand searches such as ‘Shiny Shoes Corp’, which require little agency effort and will cost the agency next to nothing. Agency profit will be high.

But as sales volume increases, and the agency is forced to invest considerable time and effort to research new keyword opportunities, agency profit will be relatively low. This and low effort/high reward and high effort/low reward problem might cause the agency to cut back on volume even further, thinking these these extra sales and tiny profit (which are highly valuable for the client) are just not worth the extra effort.

So, to recap, Shiny Shoes Corp’s decision to pay a PPC agency $10 for every sale is inefficient for two reasons:

1. The agency will stop delivering sales when the cost of an extra sale is more than $10, even though Shiny Shoes Corp would not mind paying $11, $12 or over $14.50 for these extra sales.
2. The agency’s fee is a poor reflection of the work and expertise required

Okay, so a set cost-per-sale model doesn’t work.

Separating Brand & Non-Brand

But what about a structured cost-per-sale model, such as below? Shiny Shoes Corp pays the agency only $7 for the ‘easy’ sales (brand terms), and $13 for the more difficult sales. With two different pricings, the fee the agency receives is a better reflection of the value they are adding (great!), the loss of utility is reduced (great!) and the agency now has a monetary incentive to increase sales volume to 6,000 (great!).

Awesome! It’s solved both of the problems above! Right?

Wrong.

There is still a loss of utility (the client can still make extra profit if it received these extra sales for $14 or $14.50). And although the agency is more fairly rewarded for their efforts, the agency’s red Marginal Revenue line still does not follow their Marginal Cost line closely. They are not being paid proportionately for their efforts.

How about a multi-step (or progressive) cost-per-sale model, such as below? Shiny Shoes Corp would pay $6 for the first 1,000 sales, $8 for the next 1,000, and so on.

With multiple pricings, loss of utility is tiny, and the agency is fairly rewarded at all spend levels (notice how the agency’s red MR lien closely follows the agency’s red MC line.) What’s more, sales have increased to 7,000! Great!

Such a well-structured model would be great, and as close to the Holy Grail of PPC pricing as one might hope to get. It’s fair, creates incentives, maximises sales volume and maximises total profit (client and agency).

But just as the Holy Grail is hard to find, so is such as pricing model.

Performance Models Are Difficult

A multi-step (or progressive) cost-per-sale model is great in theory, but in practice such a model might be prohibitively difficult to construct. For a progressive cost-per-sale model to work efficiently, it requires an in-depth understanding of revenues at multiple sales volumes, knowledge of brand strength, seasonality, offline marketing influences, not to mention tracking inefficiencies and bias which might exaggerate or under-report sales volume.

One scenario might be where brand strength and click costs are under-estimated by the client, such as below. Fees set too high, and the agency is over-compensated for their services. The client would make little profit, and would be better off with a percentage of spend or management fee pricing deal.

Another scenario might be where click costs and brand strength are over-estimated by the client, such as below. Fees are set too low, so the agency makes a loss from delivering any sales, and the client will struggle to find an agency wanting to manage their PPC for more than a few months. As they regularly jump from one optimistic agency to another, long-term stability goes out the window and are replaced by extra costs, effort and confusion.

A more realistic scenario might be the one below, where in an effort by Shiny Shoes Corp to closely match click costs to fees, offers a slightly under-priced cost-per-sale structure. At some volume levels, delivering extra sales would make the extra agency profit, but and at other volume levels any extra sales would be at a loss. If the agency was at point B, for example, they would be better off either increasing volume to point C, or reducing volume to point A.

Very inefficient. Sales are vastly under-delivered and nobody wins.

This difficulty in creating a cost-per-sale model and setting it at the correct level leaves the client (and agency) with a difficult decision.

A correctly set cost-per-sale deal would be great for the client, as it minimises their risk (they only pay when sales come in), as well as encouraging the agency to perform. It would also be great for the agency, who are fairly rewarded for investing their time, effort and resources into doing what they do best.

But an incorrectly set cost-per-sale model (such as the three above) could be disastrous. If the agency is making a loss, they will refuse to deliver any sales, which is a waste of time for both client and agency and a massive loss of potential sales. If the cost-per-sale fee is set too high, the client will make only a small profit a would be considerably better off with a set management fee or percentage of spend (markup) deal.

So, if you are a business looking to minimise your risk from PPC, as well as incentivise your PPC agency to perform, should you consider a cost-per-sale performance deal?

Cost-Per-Sale Tips

Firstly, be wary of offering a set fee for every sale. You will pay heavily for the agency to simply harvest the value of your brand, and will find that sales are restricted way below your most efficient point.

Secondly, be careful of offering a multi-step progressive model, unless you have accurate sales and revenue data allowing for seasonal fluctuations, offline marketing efforts and special offers, and are confident (and preferably experienced) regarding likely PPC click costs at a range of different spend levels. If guesswork makes up a large part of your research, a progressive cost-per-sale model might be more trouble than its worth.

A happy medium, especially if you a business new to PPC or cost-per-sale models, might be a two-step cost-per-sale model, which separates brand and non-brand sales. It’s not ideal, but limits the brand / non-brand problem and is relatively risk-free (you only pay for sales so are guaranteed to not make a loss from PPC). It does, however, require a decent knowledge of brand searches and likely PPC click costs, so perhaps only consider this two-step cost-per-sale model once you have collected at least a few month’s worth of brand and non-brand cost and sales data.

And remember, a performance deal does not have to be based on sales. Leads, enquiries, email sign-ups downloads or anything which is a desired outcome for your business can potentially be incorporated into a cost-per-action performance deal. Just make sure you have the performance data to back it up.

Are you a fan of the cost-per-action model? Have you made it work for client and agency? Or does it cause more problems than it’s worth? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Next: profit sharing. Does it work? What are its limitations? Coming soon.

 

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how a strategic approach to PPC can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.

One common model that many agencies use is the ‘markup’ model (also commonly known as the ‘percentage of spend’ model). If the agreed markup is 10%, and the client spends $30,000 on clicks, the client pays $33,000, of which the agency receives $3,000.

Nice and simple.

But does it create incentives for the agency to maximise profit for the client? Does it fairly reflect the work and expertise involved at all spend levels?

No.

Conflict of Interest

In short, the percentage of spend model is a highly inefficient pricing model for paid search management, and should be avoided. As pointed out by George Michie in his recent post on SEM Pricing Models, since the agency receives a commission on every dollar spent, there is an incentive for the agency to spend as much as possible, which can be far in excess of the point of diminishing marginal returns.

To find out exactly what George means by diminishing marginal returns, and how it creates a conflict of interest for client and agency and renders the markup model pretty much useless, let’s consider the cost and revenue structure of the client.

Look at the line CPC (marginal) in the diagram below (Cost Per Click). It shows what happens to the Cost of each subsequent Click as the volume of clicks increase. It is upward-sloping, so each extra click costs progressively more than each previous click. Makes sense – since the first few clicks are usually very cheap, and raising bids and showing for more expensive keywords is generally needed to increase click volume.

Now have a look at the line RPC (marginal). It stands for Revenue Per Click, and shows how much Revenue is generated from each subsequent Click. It is downward-sloping, which again makes sense, since each additional click is likely to be less relevant and have a lower conversion rate than each previous click (this is known as diminishing marginal returns). A rational advertiser would always go for the low hanging fruit first (the most relevant keywords), which will naturally convert better than the high hanging fruit (less relevant generic keywords).

(If this all sounds very confusing, you may like to check out Wikipedia’s articles on marginal cost and diminishing marginal returns first).

So we have an upward-sloping marginal CPC line and a download-sloping marginal RPC line.

Now, assume the client has no other costs other than paid search click costs. If the client spends $1,000 on clicks and generates $1,500 in revenue, the client makes $500 in profit (this is of course very unrealistic – but just bear with me for the sake of argument).

Look at where the two lines cross. This is the level (2,000 clicks) where the client will make the most profit.

Why?

Well suppose click volume increased to 2,100 clicks. The 2,100th click is now costing $0.85, but is only bringing in $0.55 of revenue! The client is losing money on these extra 100 clicks, so reducing click volume would increase the client’s total profit.

What about reducing click volume?

Well, at 1,900 clicks, the 1,900th click is costing only $0.65 but generating $0.85 of revenue. The client is making $0.20 profit from their 1,900th click, so why not increase click volume further, and make $0.19, $0.18 and $0.17 profit from additional clicks? It makes sense to increase click volume until no additional profit is being made – until the cost of an extra click equals the revenue of that click.

It is where the marginal CPC and marginal RPC lines meet that no additional profit would be made, and it is at this point which makes the client the most profit. It is this level of click volume that the client should aim to target with their PPC activity.

Now let’s complicate things a little. The graphs above were only concerned with marginal costs and marginal revenues – costs and revenue at the margin. They show what happens to the next click or the previous click, but they don’t show what happens on average – to the average cost per click or the average revenue per click. Average CPC and average RPC lines are therefore needed for this purpose.

Have a look at the red CPC (average) line and see if it makes sense. Like the green CPC (marginal) line, it’s upward-sloping, but flatter. Why?

Think about it for a second.

If you just spent $1,000 on 2,000 clicks, each click costed you $0.50 each on average, right? If you then decided to go crazy and purchase a few extra clicks on some expensive keywords for a hefty $4.00 each, what will happen to your average CPC price? It will increase, but not by very much, maybe to $0.41? Adding some expensive clicks will pull up the average, but only by a relatively small amount. Hence the flatness of the average Cost Per Click line.

The same is true with the average Revenue Per Click line. If a few extra keywords bring in only a small amount of revenue, it will pull down your average revenue, but only slightly, hence it’s flatness.

Still following?

Great. So we now have 4 lines which represent the cost and revenue structure of a client:

1. Marginal CPC – shows how much each extra click costs
2. Marginal RPC – shows how much each extra clicks generates in revenue
3. Average CPC – shows how much clicks cost on average
4. Average RPC – shows how much clicks generate in revenue on average

These 4 lines are all that’s needed to assess the client’s profitability.

Now remember how we decided that 2,000 clicks was the most profitable click volume for the client? Let’s see exactly how much profit the client is making from 2,000 clicks.

Well, at 2,000 clicks, the average cost per click (CPC average) is $0.30. The client is spending $600 on clicks ($0.30 x 2,000).

At 2,000 clicks, the average revenue per click (RPC average) is $1.50. The client is generating $3,000 in revenue ($1.50 x 2,000).

Minus one from the other ($3,000 – $600) and we have a healthy client profit of $2,400.

Fantastic.

Now this is where the inefficiency with the percentage of spend (markup) model comes in. Since the agency is paid a commission on every click, the agency will always want to increase click volume and spend as much as possible. As we’ll see from the following examples, this is often in excess of the point of maximum client profit.

Suppose the agency increased click volume to 3,000. The average Cost Per Click (CPC) increases from £0.30 to $0.45, and the average Revenue Per Click (RPC) falls from $1.50 to $1.20. The client is still making a healthy profit of $2,250 (revenue of $3,600 ($1.20 x 3,000) minus cost of $1,350 ($0.45 x 3,000)), although their profit of $2,250 is less the previous level of $2,400.

The agency, however, has increased their profit, since they now receive a cut of a bigger spend ($1,350 instead of $600). Assuming the markup is 10%, the agency’s profit has increased from $60 to $135, at the expense of the client’s profit.

But here’s the thing. The client is unlikely to complain – the agency is making them $2,250 of profit, after all! How is the client to know that they could be making $2,400 of profit, should the agency decide to reduce click volume? The client is none the wiser and would most likely praise the agency for their ‘efficient’ work in making them such as tidy profit of $2,250!

But why stop there?

The agency makes a cut of every click spent, so why not increase click volume further? Why not increase it to – wait for it – 4,000 clicks!

Here, at 4,000 clicks, click spend will be $3,000 ($0.75 x 4,000) so the agency’s profit will be $300 (10% of $3,000) – much better than the measly $60 or $135 from the previous click volumes of 2,000 and 3,000.

But look at what’s happened to the client’s profit at this new click volume of 4,000. Their costs are now $3,000 ($0.75 x 4,000) and so is their revenue! The client is making no profit at all! Any more spend, and the client’s average revenue will fall below their average cost, and they will make a loss. If the client is losing money, they will most likely leave the agency, or at least apply massive pressure on the agency to increase performance (reduce click volume), so any click volume in excess of 4,000 is not sustainable in the long-run.

So it’s in the agency’s interest to maximise their commission by getting the click volume as close to the point of 4,000 click where the red lines cross (where average costs equals average revenue) – but without going over, so as to keep the client happy (the client will still be making some profit).

What happens is a negotiation of pushing and pulling between the client and agency until a compromise is found – say 3,000 clicks. Exactly how close to the point of maximum client profit or the point of maximum agency profit is settled upon depends on the relative bargaining strengths of client and agency, access to cost and revenue information and countless external influences to name just a few factors at play.

What is clear though, is that whatever click volume is reached as a compromise, it will not be efficient. It is impossible to maximise the profit of both client and agency using a percentage of spend model. At every click volume, there will always be a way to increase agency or client profit by adjusting click volume.

With a percentage of spend model, there is no working together of client and agency, no common goal, no shared vision. It’s a constant pushing and pulling and conflict of interest. Time and effort is wastefully diverted into politics in an attempt to move click volume closer to one party’s optimum, not to mention the reluctance of each party to be open and transparent and share useful information with each other. Doesn’t sound like the foundations of a successful and lasting business relationship to me. Perhaps it’s why some agency churn rates are so high?

Of course, no PPC pricing model is perfect – every method will have its weaknesses. The key is to find one that works best for your goals and objectives as a business, and one which appropriately compensates the agency for their efforts in helping you develop your paid search marketing strategy. But in terms of aligning the agency’s monetary motivations with that of your business, and creating incentives encouraging them to maximise your profit from paid search, the percentage of spend model fails miserably.

My advice: use the percentage of spend model with caution.

Are you a fan of the percentage of spend model? Have you made it work for client and agency? Or does it create more problems than it’s worth? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Next: cost-per-sale performance models – rewarding agencies based on how they perform. Do they work? Are they efficient? Economics of PPC Pricing: Why Performance Deals Often Fail

 

Alan Mitchell is an experienced Google AdWords consultant helping businesses in Australia increase their return on investment from PPC marketing. For more information on how a strategic approach to PPC can benefit your business, get in touch today for a free consultation.