Bing Brings More Conversions at Lower Costs(thesearchagents.com)
thesearchagents.com
Bing Brings More Conversions at Lower Costs
http://www.thesearchagents.com/2009/06/bing-performance/
2 comments
I don't have a convenient way of segregating my paid and non-paid Bing traffic, but I thought it might be interesting to try comparing to paid and non-paid Google traffic for giggles. The conversion of interest for me is a trial download. I'm analyzing the data only from the date Bing was publicly released.
Google (free): 10.4k visits, 12.76% conversion
Google (paid): 5.2k visits, 21.61% conversion
Yahoo (free): 1.2k visits, 18.64% conversion
Bing (both): 945 visits, 17.69% conversion
I'm not exactly seeing the sort of results that it would take to make me mentally retool my SEO thought processes away from "give Google what it wants". For instance, that volume problem you're talking about is an absolute killer for me -- there is no way I can justify rewriting my ad text to match the habits of Bing searchers when at best I'm going to be getting a couple hundred clicks a month on ads.
(The lower conversion on Google searches is because, in the course of giving Google what it wants, I have ended up ranking for a high-volume term or three whose searchers are not looking for what I have to offer. The biggest offender is [bingo cards].)
Google (free): 10.4k visits, 12.76% conversion
Google (paid): 5.2k visits, 21.61% conversion
Yahoo (free): 1.2k visits, 18.64% conversion
Bing (both): 945 visits, 17.69% conversion
I'm not exactly seeing the sort of results that it would take to make me mentally retool my SEO thought processes away from "give Google what it wants". For instance, that volume problem you're talking about is an absolute killer for me -- there is no way I can justify rewriting my ad text to match the habits of Bing searchers when at best I'm going to be getting a couple hundred clicks a month on ads.
(The lower conversion on Google searches is because, in the course of giving Google what it wants, I have ended up ranking for a high-volume term or three whose searchers are not looking for what I have to offer. The biggest offender is [bingo cards].)
So instead of providing negligible traffic compared to google, it now provides 22% less traffic
The 22% drop is not for traffic but for impressions.
Cost per Acquisition (CPA) down 3%
It seems however that it is positive for publishers since CPA is going down.
I don't know much about SEM but to me it seems that their advertising network is qualitatively better than before. At least on this matter and if figures are correct.
The 22% drop is not for traffic but for impressions.
Cost per Acquisition (CPA) down 3%
It seems however that it is positive for publishers since CPA is going down.
I don't know much about SEM but to me it seems that their advertising network is qualitatively better than before. At least on this matter and if figures are correct.
The article didn't saw how traffic was affected, but if impressions are down, it follows traffic would be.
My point is that a lower CPA is largely useless if the volume is also lower.
If you have the volume, you can tweak ad copy, keywords, etc to bring the CPA down to what you're willing to pay. If you don't have the volume to start with, there's nothing you can do.
My point is that a lower CPA is largely useless if the volume is also lower.
If you have the volume, you can tweak ad copy, keywords, etc to bring the CPA down to what you're willing to pay. If you don't have the volume to start with, there's nothing you can do.
if impressions are down, it follows traffic would be
From what I understand it depends on the CTR.
My point is that a lower CPA is largely useless if the volume is also lower.
Now I don't get this. If you want more volume, you buy more impressions, don't you? CPA going up means you get more value for money invested.
Please correcct me if I am wrong.
From what I understand it depends on the CTR.
My point is that a lower CPA is largely useless if the volume is also lower.
Now I don't get this. If you want more volume, you buy more impressions, don't you? CPA going up means you get more value for money invested.
Please correcct me if I am wrong.
>> "If you want more volume, you buy more impressions, don't you?"
Most of the time bing/live don't have the volume to sell. I've tried raising bid prices to crazy town. Still just small trickle compared with google.
Most of the time bing/live don't have the volume to sell. I've tried raising bid prices to crazy town. Still just small trickle compared with google.
I believe that was always the case with Microsoft Live. You'd make more conversions but it would always be hard to get the higher volume of Google.
If you could get a good ROI it was worth it but Google always seemed to bring the most in.
If you could get a good ROI it was worth it but Google always seemed to bring the most in.
He's comparing Bing with pre-Bing and you're comparing Bing with Google.
So instead of providing negligible traffic compared to google, it now provides 22% less traffic - but it's better traffic than it was!
Way to spin it into a positive story. Come back when you have useful volume.