ArticleSnatch Blog

You are browsing the search results for "sponsored."

Yahoo President Sue Decker took to the Yahoo Anecdotal blog to defend the search advertising deal her company struck with Google a few months ago.

Google has been doing the heavy lifting when it comes to defending the deal to the critics. So, it was about time we heard from Yahoo again on the deal.

But Decker started off with a sarcastic tone. Her first paragraph ended with:

Since the critics clearly don’t understand the deal and what it means for Yahoo!, Google, advertisers, and users, it’s time for some myth-busting.

Sue, if you want to win friends to your side, you shouldn’t alienate these critics. Many of them are AdWords customers!

But Decker devolves even further by saying making her two points about what the deal does for Yahoo instead of making it about the customer:

• Yahoo! will use this agreement to help us become a stronger competitor in all aspects of online advertising; and
• Yahoo! is not exiting the sponsored search business. We plan to remain a strong player in sponsored search.

I know that Decker has probably been consumed with trying to save a flailing Yahoo. But the fact that she’s going after this argument by defending the business aspirations of Yahoo might show why this company is struggling in the first place.

Companies succeed when they focus on the customer. But Yahoo is focused on stock prices and board preservation. This is not the way to win the hearts of search advertisers or investors.

Otherwise, Decker made points that Google has made. She says there will not be price setting between Yahoo and Google because advertisers set the prices through the bidding process. The price is related to the value which is based on demand.

Decker even played on Google’s unofficial motto “Do no evil” by saying the partnership would be implemented through respect for the Hippocratic Oath “first, do no harm.”

To be fair, Yahoo probably needs this deal in order to bring in some extra income. What they need to do what that income is invest in innovation that brings a better search experience to users. That’s what the search industry needs right now. And it’s the only way to truly compete with Google.

Related Reading:
To Fear or Not to Fear: That is the Question (About the Google-Yahoo Ad Deal)

According to an exclusive story in the National Journal Online, John McCain has outspent Barack Obama for two consecutive months in search engine advertising.

Written by Lucas Grindley, the story, entitled, “McCain buys his way to top of Google,” cites Nielsen Online data that shows McCain bought 7 million “sponsored search link impressions” in June and 5.4 million in May, compared with 1.15 million for Obama in June and 1.8 million during the previous month.

Since search engine advertising is sold on a cost-per-click (CPC) basis instead of cost-per-thousand impressions (CPM), it’s unclear if McCain’s dramatic lead in impressions generated equally dramatic number of clicks.

It’s worth noting that one of the top five sites where McCain bought image-based banner impressions was … the National Review. However, the other five included Topix and The Washington Post, so it’s not clear that you can read anything between the lines here.

By comparison, the top five sites where Obama bought image-based banner impressions included Yahoo, CNN and MSN. Plus, Obama bought 80 million banner impressions in June, compared with McCain’s 16 million.

So, what’s all this mean to search engine marketers?

For his story, Grindley interviewed Peter Greenberger, who manages the “small but growing” elections and issue advocacy team at Google. Greenberger speculated that the Presidential campaigns were in a “persuasion phase,” where candidates might be more interested in banner advertising.

“You are not looking for that active voter who maybe knows who he or she is voting for,” said Greenberger. “You are looking for that more passive voter who is reading information but not quite ready to commit.”

Hmmm. I wonder if Greenberger has seen the new study conducted by Enquiro Research with Google in Europe that found the ability of unclicked search ads to build brand. If he hasn’t, he can click on “Digging Still Deeper Into The Search Branding Question” and read the blog post by Gord Hotchkiss, the CEO of Enquiro.

Of course, Gord would be the first one to tell you that the debate over the search branding question is far from over.

But, if I were working in the McCain or Obama campaigns, I would run, not walk, to get my hands on the latest research. Gord is a Canadian, so he doesn’t have a horse in this race. And, if this upcoming election is as close as the latest polls indicates that it is, then neither presidential campaign can afford to leave even a small amount of search branding value on the table.

As for the search engine marketers who read this blog, I would also encourage you to run, not walk, to get your hands on this latest research. As Gord says, “search can be the most important brand tool in a marketer’s arsenal, if it’s used in the right place. It’s a matter of understanding what search can do and what it can’t. And, even more importantly, understanding how to measure that value.”

Yahoo has released updates to the ad performance reports for sponsored search accounts. First up, three columns have been added to the report. They are:

• Ad ID column – This column displays your Ad’s ID number.
• Ad: – This column provides a visual representation of your ad, including its title, short description and display URL.
• Destination URL

The columns are available in report downloads as well. Additionally, Yahoo has consolidated ad statuses into a single column.

The updates have been made across global markets and Mobile Sponsored Search.

What do you think of the updates? Let us know in the comments.

Related Reading:
Yahoo’s Conversion Tips: Optimize, Navigate and Track
Where My Ads At? Yahoo Knows
Yahoo Makes Minor Updates to Sponsored Search

Microsoft Senior Vice President Satya Nadella announced at the company’s financial analyst meeting that their partnership with Facebook has been extended to include search.

The existing partnership has Microsoft serving up banner and sponsored ads on the popular social network. Last year, Microsoft paid $240 million to own a 1.6% stake in Facebook, a private company.

Microsoft expects Facebook members to see the integrated Live Search, including search ads, by the end of the 2008.

Earlier today, Facebook announced a new initiative, opening up its platform to aggregate feeds from other sites, including local search site Citysearch and other social networks such as Digg and Twitter.

In March, Microsoft announced its alternative to Google’s OpenSocial, a data portability partnership across 5 social networks: Facebook, Bebo, Hi5, Tagged and LinkedIn.

Meanwhile, Microsoft has announced a reorganization which will split the Platforms and Services Division into two new divisions: Windows/Windows Live and Online Services.

There was a new service launched at the beginning of the month that follows all uses of your brand, domain, special keywords and more - Search Monitor. And before you jump at me for the plug I am not associated with it at all.

I was sent the press release and information about the product and from what I have seen so far this could be a great tool for reputation management, keeping an eye on competitors using your name etc. or even to track affiliates.

The press release states:

The Search Monitor (“TSM”), an online monitoring service that tracks competitive advertiser activity on paid search, blogs, news, and web sites, announces the product release of three new automated monitoring utilities: Competitor Monitor, Trademark Monitor, and Affiliate Monitor.

With this launch, interactive agencies, marketers, affiliate managers, and compliance teams gain critical insight into search marketing strategies, affiliate activities, trademark abuse, and brand buzz. The Search Monitor offers important information that can only be gained by careful 24×7 automated monitoring, and surfaces the information in 3 easy to use reporting sections:

1. Competitor Monitor gives insights into competitive bidding strategies, competitor market share and visibility, ranking on sponsored search, ad copy strategies, and promotions like free shipping, trials, or sales.

2. Trademark Monitor eases the tasks associated with reputation management by auto-detecting advertisers sponsoring branded keywords, use of trademarks and slogans in ad copy and display urls, and brand buzz on blogs, news, and web sites.

3. Affiliate Monitor simplifies oversight of affiliate programs by auto-identification of affiliates using sponsored search to detect violations of rank requirements, keyword restrictions, ad copy
requirements or restrictions, and landing page copy requirements or restrictions.

Search engine marketing has become a critical component for advertisers. According to the Search Engine Marketing Professional Organization (SEMPO), North American advertisers spent $12.2 billion on SEM in 2007 and that figure is estimated to more than double to reach $25.2 billion by 2011. The Search Monitor was developed to provide the tools necessary to optimize the sizable investments being made in this medium and to protect brands from competitive threats.

“There is a big problem in the industry known as ‘Piggybacking’ which is when smaller advertisers use the trademarks or slogans of bigger advertisers in ad copy or display urls to lure consumers into clicking on their ads”, says Shaun Martinec, a TSM founder. “For our larger brand clients, we have discovered as many as 1 in 10 competitors engaging in this practice. We were quite alarmed to learn that some violators are parked domains, phishing, and spyware sites. With The Search Monitor, our clients are able to catch these activities and react quickly.”

Another advantage of having a monitoring tool such as The Search Monitor is that marketers and agencies can glean insights into competitive online advertising campaigns including ad copy, promotional offers and ad placement strategies.

There are some products out there that cover some of the elements, but the interface is easy to navigate and provides some valuable monitors that many of us can use.

Guess the wagon circling has begun over at Yahoo in preparation of the stockholders’ meeting August 1. They sent out a letter to stockholders outlining the various events of the past few months and promoted voted for the existing board of directors.

The letter attacks Carl Icahn.

“It is time for Yahoo! to turn its undivided attention to implementing its key strategies, and we therefore urge you to reject Mr. Icahn’s slate and his ill-defined agenda,” the letter from Yahoo CEO Roy Bostock states.

The letter - posted below - is very slanted towards the actions of the existing executives. Right now the Microsoft offer of $31 to $34 looks good given the stocks major slump to the low $20s.

The letter read:

Dear Fellow Stockholders:

We are writing to update you on the latest developments here at
Yahoo!, including our recently announced commercial agreement with
Google and the outcome of our discussions with Microsoft regarding a
potential transaction.

On June 12, we announced a non-exclusive agreement with Google that we
expect will generate approximately $250 to $450 million in
incremental operating cash flow for Yahoo! in the first twelve months
following implementation. This cash flow will enhance our
profitability as well as help support achievement of our key
strategic objectives. Combined with continuing advances in our own
search capability, the agreement is an important step in our efforts
to capitalize on the high-growth online advertising opportunities
where we are best positioned to compete successfully and create more
value.

Let us explain why we find this new agreement so exciting.

The Yahoo!-Google Agreement is Financially Attractive and Strikes the
Right Strategic Balance.

Under the agreement with Google, Yahoo! will continue to provide
algorithmic and sponsored search results, but now will also have the
ability to run sponsored search ads supplied by Google alongside
Yahoo!’s search results. Advertisers will pay Google directly for
each click on Google paid search results appearing on Yahoo!. Google
will then pay us a fee (in industry jargon, traffic acquisition cost)
based on revenue realized from click-throughs on ads supplied to
Yahoo! by Google.

This carefully structured agreement strikes the right strategic
balance, enhancing our financial results while advancing our
strategic objectives of being the “starting point” for the most users
on the Internet and offering such compelling value that advertisers
will see us as the “must buy” in online advertising.

One of our key strategies for achieving these objectives is to
capitalize on the increasing convergence of search and display
advertising, where we are especially well positioned to compete and
succeed. We have already accelerated our efforts to strengthen our
presence in display through a variety of initiatives and acquisitions
in recent months. Our new commercial agreement with Google enhances
our ability to pursue this strategy.

Another key strategy is to open our platform to other developers to
optimize monetization for our advertisers and publishers and provide
the best experience for our users. We see this agreement as a natural
extension of the efforts we have already made toward an open
marketplace.

The Google agreement is non-exclusive and provides strategic and
operational flexibility for Yahoo!. It allows Yahoo! to use Google’s
services in those areas where Google monetizes our inventory more
effectively but also permits us to continue to use our own search
technology in areas where we believe we are most competitive. The net
result is that the agreement helps us accelerate one of our strategic
aims–closing the monetization gap. At the same time, it allows
Yahoo! to continue to compete aggressively in search and display
advertising.

Importantly, the agreement does not prevent Yahoo! from pursuing other
alternatives that could increase stockholder value. Because the
agreement can be terminated by either party upon a change in control,
it would not preclude a transaction with Microsoft or any other
potential acquiror in the future.

The Yahoo!-Google Agreement Does More for Stockholder Value than
Microsoft’s Search-Only Hybrid Proposal.

We also want to update you on the conclusion to our discussions with
Microsoft regarding a potential transaction. As we explained in our
last letter, our board and management held numerous meetings and
conversations with Microsoft about its proposal to acquire Yahoo!,
both before and after Microsoft withdrew that proposal on May 3. On
June 8, our Chairman, Roy Bostock, other independent board members,
and members of Yahoo!’s management team again met in person with
Microsoft representatives. At that meeting, Microsoft stated
unequivocally that it has no interest in acquiring all of Yahoo!,
even at the price range Microsoft had previously suggested.

Microsoft did propose an alternative transaction. Rather than acquire
our whole company as it had been proposing for months, Microsoft now
proposed to acquire only our search business for $1 billion and a
share of future search advertising revenue. This proposal also
included an $8 billion investment in Yahoo! but required Yahoo! to
commit to a 10-year exclusive arrangement that would have made us
dependent on Microsoft for all of our search business. It would also
have given Microsoft veto rights on certain future Yahoo! actions,
including a sale of Yahoo!. Our board of directors and management
made a great effort–and conducted in depth negotiations–to elicit a
feasible proposal from Microsoft that made strategic and financial
sense for Yahoo!, but without success.

While Microsoft’s search-only hybrid proposal may have been helpful to
Microsoft, our board and management concluded it would have had a
significant adverse impact on Yahoo! strategically, leaving the
Company without the operational control of search assets and
technology we view as critical to our objective of becoming a leader
in the converging search and display advertising business. The board
and its advisers also carefully studied the financial impact of
Microsoft’s proposal and concluded that it would have provided no
meaningful improvement to our operating cash flow. In short, this
proposal would have generated substantially less value for Yahoo!
stockholders than Microsoft has suggested.

Based on all the key factors–strengthening our competitiveness,
protecting our strategic position, generating attractive financial
returns–the Google agreement is far better than Microsoft’s search-
only hybrid proposal. That’s why we moved forward with it.

Your Current Board of Directors Has the Knowledge, Experience and
Commitment to Best Represent Your Interests and Maximize Stockholder
Value.

The events of recent weeks underscore the fact that your board of
directors is far better qualified to represent your interests in the
effort to maximize stockholder value than the slate put forward by
Carl Icahn.

Based on Mr. Icahn’s narrow agenda, it seems highly unlikely that
either he or his slate would bring added value to Yahoo!. Consider
the following:

– Mr. Icahn put forward his slate so as to sell Yahoo! to Microsoft,
even though he had no knowledge of the sustained efforts made by your
current board and management to determine whether Microsoft was
willing to engage in a transaction that would provide appropriate
value and certainty of achieving that value. On June 8, Microsoft
once again made it perfectly clear that it is not currently
interested in acquiring Yahoo!.
— Mr. Icahn publicly opposed any alternative form of transaction
with Microsoft. Your board and management, after thorough and
deliberate negotiations and evaluation, separately concluded on its
own that the alternative hybrid deal proposed by Microsoft was,
indeed, not in the best interests of the Company or its
stockholders.
— Mr. Icahn urged, as an alternative to a Microsoft transaction,
that Yahoo! find a way to partner with Google that would not
preclude a transaction with Microsoft in the future. We have done
exactly that through the commercial agreement with Google we
announced on June 12.

Simply put, you can choose to vote for a slate of nominees with no
articulated plan for the future of Yahoo!–and who now have
essentially no alternative agenda to offer you–or you can choose to
vote for your existing board of directors which has the independence,
experience, knowledge and commitment to navigate the Company through
the rapidly-changing Internet environment, execute on our strategic
objectives and deliver value for Yahoo! and its stockholders.

It is time for Yahoo! to turn its undivided attention to implementing
its key strategies, and we therefore urge you to reject Mr. Icahn’s
slate and his ill-defined agenda.

We strongly urge you to vote your WHITE Proxy Card today for your
current board of directors.

We look forward to sharing our progress with you as we move forward
and we thank you for your support.

Sincerely,

Roy Bostock Jerry Yang
Chairman of the Board Chief Executive Officer

There are many freebie blogs out there and I don’t spend a lot of time reading them, as most are just promoting affiliate offers hoping to capture $1 here and $1 there as you otpin to a form that will cause you to get more junk email than you can imagine.
Then there are the contest [...]

Figured the title would get Matt’s attention. Okay Matt I need some help. I have been hired by an adult entertainment site to build their presence online - get better rankings etc.

I need to build their inbound links and want to make sure I am not wasting my time and their money. So before I started I did a search for your comments on directory submissions, paid links (well everyone knows that opinion), reciprocal links, bad neighborhoods (of the IP kind - not the seedy parts of towns where my client’s businesses are located) and your example site review post.

So I began to think that I may not be able to do much for them. In general adult content has a bad rap in our industry - the job no one wants to take on for fear of the association - but it is also the industry that has been ‘gaming’ the system for the longest and thus most neighborhoods have been marked bad.

What’s a guy to do Matt?

Directory listings seem to be one way. But how do we really know which ones are still considered any good and are the adult areas of some of the bigger directories taken with a TON of salt?

Could Google set up a Monitored By Google program? Why not give a Good Search Keeping Seal of Approval? Since directories should be an important part of deeper search results, if there was a system or established list maybe the work on one end could help in other areas of the fight against spam.

I know I am going to hear: “Google does not want to classify good and bad” or some variation of that, but we are being told to use no follow - so maybe other rules and system checks could help this.

Given the basis of the Google algorithm is link based and your job is to fight back the constant spamming, some sort of system could help people.

Interestingly, as I did my searches I did find a lot of people using your name to promote themselves, the one by submit edge is particularly good. They are 2 and 3 for Matt Cutts Directory Submissions and offer to get you in to hundreds of directories for a fee. Despite their SEO efforts I am thinking they may not be a good investment.

There are millions of directories, hell I started dozens back in the day. But if you are going to push your way up the rankings you need links.

I want to do it the right way, so am reaching out to you Matt for some advice. I could do a hoax press release about some gossipy fake story - hey include a porn star and a search industry leader (Danny smart move introducing me to your wife now I can’t use you) and I will get a lot of links.

I have read your advice to use common sense when looking at directories but unless I am building the ultimate “good directory list” it is an endless job and one that is still subjective.

Hell, I am sure the people below still do not share the views they once stated:

Rand may not still think:

What does suck, imo, is that Google doesn’t want to recognize more legitimate sources of paid links - I’m not talking about link brokers, but about sponsored links on particular sites or in directories, etc.

The belief that a link should not be counted as a vote if someone paid for it is a very dangerous idea. Imagine the link structure of the web without the influence of paid or monetarily influenced links. It would be a very, very different environment and I wonder if Google really believes it would be a better one. It’s particularly egregious since their business model is serving links to paid sponsors, but they don’t want folks doing it on their blogs or sites unless they add “nofollow” and remove some of the value of that link… Seems highly hypocritical to me.

Jill Whallen:

Come to think of it, it’s just not fair that Google doesn’t want to count my link farm links as links. Google sucks and so does Matt Cutts.

Okay that one was a joke - don’t shoot me Jill.

Time has changed what w do. Would love some insight into where directories stand now as a link building tool.

Wedding Website is Fun and Helpful Posted By : Dillan Sawyer: This article tells about the advantag.. http://tinyurl.com/64f5qx #
Mortgage choice NSW Posted By : Kirsty Williamson: There are different kinds of Mortgage brokers in.. http://tinyurl.com/5lhvvf #
New Article - Why Picking Good Popup Displays Will Affect Your Business Profile Posted.. http://tinyurl.com/5o6gjz #
ADD: There may be more [...]

Wedding Website is Fun and Helpful Posted By : Dillan Sawyer: This article tells about the advantag.. http://tinyurl.com/64f5qx #
Mortgage choice NSW Posted By : Kirsty Williamson: There are different kinds of Mortgage brokers in.. http://tinyurl.com/5lhvvf #
New Article - Why Picking Good Popup Displays Will Affect Your Business Profile Posted.. http://tinyurl.com/5o6gjz #
ADD: There may be more [...]