There's a big detach in the way promotion money are assigned to online look for motor targeted strategies. Let me highlight:
Not amazingly, look for promotion should keep be the biggest classification, increasing from $9.1 billion money in 2007 to $20.9 billion money in 2013.
- Source: C|Net Information, July 30, 2008
OK. So organizations in the US invested $10 billion money last season on compensated look for ads, and even more this season. How about SEO?
SEO: $1.3 billion money (11%)
- Source: SEMPO information via Massimo Burgio, SMX The city 2008
According to SEMPO's information, it's 11% for SEO and 87% for PPC (with another 1.4% for SEM technology and <1% for compensated Inclusion). Here's where I get confused:
That looks to me like most of the visitors are on the natural results - the ones you can only impact with natural SEO... Huh? Maybe we should get more information on this topic. Let's convert to Enquiro:
Rank 1 � 100%
Rank 2 � 100%
Rank 3 � 100%
Rank 4 � 85%
Rank 5 � 60%
Rank 6 � 50%
Rank 7 � 50%
Rank 8 � 30%
Rank 9 � 30%
Rank 10 � 20%
1 � 50%
2 � 40%
3 � 30%
4 � 20%
5 � 10%
6 � 10%
7 � 10%
8 � 10%
Fascinating. So exposure is significantly greater for the natural outcomes. What about clicks?
Thanks to Comscore, we can see that mouse clicks compensated google look for has gone down eventually, and is now ~22%.
Conclusions: SEO pushes 75%+ of all look for visitors, yet garners less than 15% of promotion costs for SEM strategies. PPC gets less than 25% of all look for visitors, yet generates 80%+ of SEM strategy costs.
Questions:
Why does compensated look for generate so many more promotion dollars?
What can SEOs and the SEO market do to help carry equality to this equation?
Does a down economic system mean SEO will be given greater probability to perform?
I'll preserve my views for later, but would really like to listen to yours.
Not amazingly, look for promotion should keep be the biggest classification, increasing from $9.1 billion money in 2007 to $20.9 billion money in 2013.
- Source: C|Net Information, July 30, 2008
OK. So organizations in the US invested $10 billion money last season on compensated look for ads, and even more this season. How about SEO?
SEO: $1.3 billion money (11%)
- Source: SEMPO information via Massimo Burgio, SMX The city 2008
According to SEMPO's information, it's 11% for SEO and 87% for PPC (with another 1.4% for SEM technology and <1% for compensated Inclusion). Here's where I get confused:
That looks to me like most of the visitors are on the natural results - the ones you can only impact with natural SEO... Huh? Maybe we should get more information on this topic. Let's convert to Enquiro:
Organic Position Visibility
(shown in a amount of members looking at a record in this location)Rank 1 � 100%
Rank 2 � 100%
Rank 3 � 100%
Rank 4 � 85%
Rank 5 � 60%
Rank 6 � 50%
Rank 7 � 50%
Rank 8 � 30%
Rank 9 � 30%
Rank 10 � 20%
Side provided ad visibility
(shown in amount of members looking at an ad in this location)1 � 50%
2 � 40%
3 � 30%
4 � 20%
5 � 10%
6 � 10%
7 � 10%
8 � 10%
Fascinating. So exposure is significantly greater for the natural outcomes. What about clicks?
Thanks to Comscore, we can see that mouse clicks compensated google look for has gone down eventually, and is now ~22%.
Conclusions: SEO pushes 75%+ of all look for visitors, yet garners less than 15% of promotion costs for SEM strategies. PPC gets less than 25% of all look for visitors, yet generates 80%+ of SEM strategy costs.
Questions:
Why does compensated look for generate so many more promotion dollars?
What can SEOs and the SEO market do to help carry equality to this equation?
Does a down economic system mean SEO will be given greater probability to perform?
I'll preserve my views for later, but would really like to listen to yours.
