The AdGooroo Blog
August 25, 2010Introducing AdGooroo Trademark Investigations!
Posted by Richard Stokes on August 25, 2010 to Features, Trademark Insight
AdGooroo Trademark Insight now offers subscribers the ability to automatically collect timestamped screenshots of infringements on search results pages in over 45 countries.
Read more about our new screenshot investigations feature.
Signal Strength - Linking Speed Bumps
Posted by Eric Ward on August 19, 2010 to
One of the many search algorithm signals you'll hear discussed is link speed. By link speed we are referring to the speed with which your site attracts or obtains links. One widely held belief is if you get too many links too quickly it looks unnatural, and this sends a bad signal to the bots. For the sake of this column let's agree that signals do exist, and link speed is one them.
The next logical questions would be how many is too many and how fast is too fast? Three years ago this month I wrote a column for SearchEngineLand titled Aggressively Seeking Links: How Much Is Too Much?
Here we are a thousand days later, and you still find confusion among the SEO/SEM community as to what constitutes too many or too fast.
Here's my reasoning as to why there cannot be a concrete answer to this link speed question, and an example.
First, there are plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons a web site could attract a surge of a few hundred or even a few thousand new links, literally overnight or within a few days (more on that in a moment). Second, Twitter and blogs make link propagation fast and easy, both real and spammy. Third, for both a brand new web site or an old, link spikes can be totally legitimate, or completely manipulated. (note: some link builders make a distinction between a brand new domain with zero inbound links, versus an old site with an existing historical "link growth profile" that if it suddenly spiked, would raise a flag). But this distinction isn't so cut and dried. Just because a site is old doesn't mean it can't have a natural link spike. If I'm right, the bots have to be able to draw a distinction between the speed at which links are being attracted and the quality and intent of the sites providing those links. All links given are not equal, especially those that come like a hailstorm.
Examples? Four months ago, you'd never heard of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, and why would you have? There are thousands of oil rigs around the world. They don't have web sites. But when the Deepwater Horizon rig blew up, you heard about it, and web sites were launched about it, both brand new like http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com, and also brand new sections at existing (and very old) sites, like http://www.bp.com/claims. In fact, the BP claims section has over 20,000 links, and that URL now forwards to another URL which is also attracting links.
Neither of these URLs existed three months ago, so nobody could link to them.
I wouldn't be surprised if BP's various "claims" URLs have more total inbound links than any other interior content URL on the BP.com site, all of which have come within the past few months. Unnatural? Nope, not at all. Very real, very sad, and very natural. And I'm sure as soon as BP can, it will kill off those pages, rendering those thousands of links dead. It's ironic that the kind of news that can cause a natural link spike engenders the kind of links you might wish you didn't have.
Back on point, a new site as well as an old site with new content can easily and suddenly generate mass links, perfectly naturally.
This doesn't mean you can go buy or build links with reckless abandon, though. The key is the word “naturally.” As I have written before, every web site has a certain linking potential, yet some linking related occurrences are out of our control, like a site devoted to an oil spill finding itself in the linking spotlight due to a horrible accident. Any engine looking to penalize a site just because it has a huge number of links, or a sudden surge in new links, would have to have the ability to algorithmically recognize when those surges were natural, or manipulated. My belief is that isn’t as hard as it sounds. It’s one thing to attract links from a few thousand news, oil industry and environmental sites. It’s quite another to have thousands of links from sites that have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
I can tell you that spotting manipulated linking patterns isn’t as hard as some people think it is. Link Insight helps me see them almost immediately, and can help you do the same. This also must mean if the engines want to look for a suspicious linking pattern, they can find it. Not every time, but you’d be amazed what you notice when you look across a list with 25,000 URLs/links in it. Without even having to look at the sites themselves, I can often spot manipulated links. From the URLs alone you can spot link spam.
So the real answer to the question is that it’s not about how many or how fast. It’s all about how natural.
If it can be algorithmically trusted as being natural, there is no such thing as too many or too fast.
The Perry Marshall Link Building Webinar
Posted by Richard Stokes on August 12, 2010 to Eric Ward, link building, Perry Marshall, Webinar
Does it ever seem like Google is a Greek goddess who demands libations from her followers? Google is supposed to be just a huge network of computers, right? It’s supposed to be completely logical and systematic, right? Still, sometimes you feel as though you’re constantly appeasing the search engine gods.
I’d be hard pressed to name any topic with more urban legends, flim flam men and mystical freaking voodoo than Search Engine Optimization.
You get sucked into all kinds of time-wasting activities, hoping they’ll someday pay off. If you’ve ever wondered what it was like to toss a damsel in the volcano hoping rain would come…. well, maybe you do know :^)
Eric Ward did link building for Jeff Bezos and Amazon.com Books back in the mid nineties, and I’ve arranged for him to do a free webinar on link building strategies that produce fast results, improved SEO rankings and free traffic.
In this webinar, he explains some dire pitfalls that most SEO guys sell as "really cool hot strategies." Some of these strategies will get you banned and almost none of them produce lasting results.
The webinar is below (it's in Quicktime format so it will also play on your iPod or iPad). I've also included a link to a 36-page "how to" manual for link building. This guide will show you how to add to and diversify your site traffic with two new sources of free traffic: (1) traffic from Google, and (2) traffic from the sites who link to you.
Enjoy!
Perry Marshall
Author, The Definitive Guide to Google AdWords
Download my 36-page link building guide (PDF)
Download links: iPhone | Desktop
Signal Strength - Perspectives on No-Follow
Posted by Eric Ward on August 10, 2010 to anchor text, link building, link signals, search rank
One of the unfortunate realities of link building and search rank is none of us really know the exact degree of impact the hundreds of off page signals have. We can read the writings of everyone from the darkest black hatter to tips from the search engine engineers themselves, but at the end of the day we cannot say with perfect clarity to what degree any given "signal" matters.
There have been countless studies and "expert interviews" where people assign a rating to certain signals. But among the top SEOs and link builders, there is plenty of disagreement. There are people I have utmost respect for as link builders who I disagree with on a signal by signal basis.
This post today will mark the beginning of a series of posts devoted to link signals. The term link signals is itself a bit confusing. When I refer to link signals, I am referring to both the pages (URLs) on which links exist, as well as the coding and attributes of individual links on those pages.
There are potentially hundreds of signals that are given off by pages and links. Some of them you are likely quite familiar with, like follow/no follow, anchor text, or link age. Others you might never have heard of, like reciprocity ratio or non-duplicated geographic inbound dispersion(yes I did make that up but it's also real). Even link color might play a role. I'm glad the search engines are sophisticated enough to better recognize when any given signal can be gamed. It's really not very hard to create a completely engineered anchor text inbound link profile that is heavily peppered with your keywords. And that engineered anchor text sends a signal to the engines that might even help improve your search rank.
For a while. Then? Boom. As the engines get smarter, your engineered signals will be discovered, and it's game over. It happened back in the day with on-page signals, and it has happened with off-page signals for years. Remember when directory signals were devalued? That was a painful moment for anyone who was foolish enough to base a linking strategy on something anyone could do.
Paid links are in the cross-hairs today. It can be very difficult for a bot to detect signals that indicate a link was paid for, and one of the bigger myths is that search engines have told marketers that buying links was was a violation of quality guidelines. A bought link may in fact have plenty of signals that indicate it can be trusted. No signal exists in a vacuum, either. You can't just look at a sites' anchor text without also looking at other signals to see if the site paying for that link can be trusted.
And this brings me to the great follow/nofollow debate. For those new to this, here's a backgrounder from Wikipedia. Put as simply as possible, if a link on a web page has the rel="nofollow" attribute, then search engines do not give that link credit that affects that page's organic search position. A real life explanation would be if I have a high ranking web page and I link to your site from it, this is supposed to cause your site to rank higher. But, if I insert rel="nofollow" into the html a href tag, this negates the potential of that link to help your site rank higher.
Here is where I think things can get confusing. If a link is nofollowed, then the engines do not give it credit and do not "hear" the signal the link sends. Nofollow is a muffler, right? Yes, but if I am running a search engine, and if my goal is to produce the best possible search results, do I really want to be at the mercy of millions of individual webmasters and page creators? Will they really all implement the nofollow attribute correctly on a link by link basis? What percentage of the billions of content creators around the world even know what nofollow means? What percentage of them are using a CMS that inserts (or doesn't) a nofollow tag automatically, and they don't even know it? And if we just look at the upper crust of web content, the absolute best of class content produced by the most brilliant minds, what is the likelihood those folks have ever heard of link attributes at all?
And this is where these truths lead me. A search engine can follow whatever the heck it wants to follow, if it feels the link will help it produce a more accurate and useful search result. No search engine dependent on an algorithm created by hundreds of genius PhD's can turn control of that algorithm over to the web masses via a hoped for perfect implementation of an arcane little known tag attribute. That's just plain silly.
Real world example. When I do a search for photosynthesis at Google, I get over 20 million results. Front and center is the Wikipedia entry. Out of 20 million possible pages, Google feels this is the best place to start, and I can't argue with them. Now, we know Wikipedia links are nofollowed (as they should be to hopefully keep that spam away). At the same time, let's think through this algorithmic logic.
- If Nofollow works perfectly and with 100% certainty, then...
- Google is displaying a page from Wikipedia as being the best page out of 20 million results, but...
- Any links on that page are of no algorithmic value to Google.
And that makes no sense whatsoever. It's like saying Albert Einstein was the smartest man in the world, inviting him to the head of the table, and then claiming every single thing he says can't be trusted.
A more likely scenario is what I believe to be the case. As I stated earlier, any search engine can choose whatever it wants to choose as the signals that produce the best result. Regardless of what we do or DON'T put in the source code, the bots have a job to do, and that job is often at odds with content publishers and web marketers.
As a link builder, I have never let the existence of any attribute impact my choice of link target. For me, it has and will ALWAYS be about relevancy and intent of the content where I am seeking the link. And scoff if you wish, but I have also seen rankings improvement even though some inbound links have been nofollowed. While I have absolutely no proof that any search engine does in fact ignore nofollow, it would seem to me that if other signals indicate they should, then they will. There job is to produce the best results, not police the links on the web. It just so happens they've ended up having to do one to accomplish the other.
Five Key Tactics For Maximizing Link Seeking Response Rates
Posted by Richard Stokes on August 6, 2010 to Link Building, Webinar
Once you commit to building links, there are many ways to go about it, depending on your content and the target sites you are pursuing. But the right tactic for one target site might not be the best tactic for another target site. Do you use email? If so, how can you improve response rates? When is the right time to pick up the telephone? What tactics make sense within social media worlds like Twitter?
In this presentation from our July 20, 2010 webinar, Eric Ward covers five key tactics to help increase your odds for success when seeking high trust links. Using case studies, Eric explains common and easy mistakes you can make that hurt your chances of getting links, as well as the tactics that give you the greatest chance for success.
Download this presentation (Subscriber content)
Excellent Article from TechWorld on Black Hat SEO Tactics
Posted by Richard Stokes on July 28, 2010 to Eric Ward, Link Building, SEO
TechWorld published an article today about the back-and-forth war between Google and black hat SEOs. Our very own Eric Ward is mentioned throughout:
Still, Google's policy of flagging sites and aggressively delisting any site using black-hat SEO remains in place, and by January of this year, Ward felt vindicated for his conservative approach to SEO. About the crackdown on black-hat SEO, a gloating Linkmoses (he has embraced the nickname) wrote a blog entry, "Don't Blame Google for Your Linking Failures":
"In 2007, many long-practiced link building tactics stopped being effective. Many link building companies and consultants sold the exact tactics/services that are now useless. Why didn't you see this coming, and if you did, why did you sell those services in the first place and what services will you sell now?... Are you really going to tell me you are shocked that Google no longer thinks a link from link-o-matic, link-to-my-loo, and LinksForNoGoodReason.com are of any value? Please. But if you knew that such links would someday lose value, why did you take money for that very service? And if you didn't honestly know such links were pointless, how can you call yourself a link builder? Google's focus on trusted sources is your worst nightmare."
Bing Portugal Now Available
Posted by Mike Schiro on July 22, 2010 to Features, Targets
Bing Portugal is now available as a target on AdGooroo.com!
To add monitoring capabilities to a new or an existing keyword group, navigate to the "Manage Accounts" page, select your group (or create a new one) and click on the "Search Engines and Regions" tab.
New Link Insight Features Coming Out This Week
Posted by Richard Stokes on July 15, 2010 to Features, Link Building
I'm excited to announce that the following changes will be rolled out to all Link Insight subscribers this week:
1. Streamlined setup wizard: we've combined the three separate search tabs (keyword, domain, and competitors) into a simpler, one page search form. This should be much more intuitive for new users.
2. Configurable spam sensitivity threshold: The first page of the setup wizard now allows you to adjust the sensitivity of the spam filtering more or less aggressive depending on your preferences. This will be particularly useful for those of you in spammy verticals, such as personal injury or auto insurance.
3. Cocitation 0 links will now be filtered to include only trust >= 1 links This was done to reduce the amount of off-target URLs displayed in the report.
4. Default sort order - all detail tabs will now have a default sort order of "cocitation descending". This brings up the most active URLs to the top of each report.
5. "To Contact" added to workflow states - You may now tag a URL as "to contact", which is intended to flag URLs which are candidates but have not been contacted yet.
6. Email Alerts - And finally, we have added two optional AdAlerts to let you know when you gain or lose a link. You can choose to receive these alerts either via email or RSS feed.
A special thanks goes out to our clients who provided the feedback which motivated these new updates!
Yahoo Philippines now available
Posted by Mike Schiro on July 14, 2010 to Features, Targets
Magandang araw!
Yahoo Philippines is now available as a target on AdGooroo.com!
To add monitoring capabilities to a new or an existing keyword group, navigate to the "Manage Accounts" page, select your group (or create a new one) and click on the "Search Engines and Regions" tab.
New Search Engines and Regions Now Available!
Posted by Mike Schiro on July 8, 2010 to Features
Over the past month here at AdGooroo we have been busy adding support for monitoring several new Search Engines and Regions, bringing our grand total to 7 Search Engines and 44 Regions worldwide! These are all available to subscribers of our SEM Insight and Trademark Insight products within the AdGooroo interface.
Here's a quick overview of what we have added over the past month:
Yandex Russia
Yandex is the largest search engine in Russia as well as its most popular website. Subscribers can now monitor Yandex Russia ads in our SEM Insight and TM Insight products.
Indonesia
We launched our first 2 targets in the region this past month as both Google and Yahoo are now supported.
Korea
Another new addition to our growing list of regions was South Korea (officially the Republic of Korea). You can now monitor Google Korea within the AdGooroo interface.
Along with those brand new Search Engines and Regions we also added to our existing target list with the following:
Yahoo Malaysia
Yahoo Vietnam
Bing Mexico
To add monitoring capabilities for any of these to a new or an existing keyword group, navigate to the "Manage Accounts" page, select your group (or create a new one) and click on the "Search Engines and Regions" tab.
Check back here often, as we are going to try and post these tech updates more frequently in the weeks to come.
- Mike, Sr. Web Crawler
How Do We Help Google Fight Webspam?
Posted by Eric Ward on July 1, 2010 to
On his blog this week, Matt Cutts put out the call for contributions for Webspam projects in 2010. Head over and add your ideas. I added the below suggestion.
A Google Chrome or Firefox or IE Web spam report tool extension could work if you did it by invitation only to a select group of invited participants, i.e., school teachers and librarians from everywhere from grade schools up though special and corporate libraries. There are 300,000 mastered degreed librarians in the US alone. If you let anyone install the extenstion, you’ll just get company A reporting competitor B for spam, where there is none. It’d be a free for all. At the same time, it takes more expertise than you might expect to spot a scraper or MFA page. We in the biz spot the spam instantly, but most folks can’t.
Beyond this idea's merit is the larger issue Matt's post refers to: Webspam in general, and Google's ability to identify it. I've been called out a time or two for drinking the Google Kool-Aid, and I'm proud to say yes, I drink it by the gallon. The reason I do so is because I was working online as a web publicist long before Google existed, and as a certified "First Gen" link builder, I do not believe in trying to make a search engine's job harder than it already is. The variety of spam I encounter on a daily basis is absurd. Not just scraped content or blog bot nets, and not just the email offers I get from people claiming to represent "thousands of high pagerank sites with links for sale" (which, btw, I forward to Google, so keep them coming, spammers). The spam problem goes way beyond the above tactics.
People are still hacking .edu servers to drop redirects to sites that would make you cringe. See for yourself. Click a few of the results for this search. It's pretty sad when someone will hack into or pay off someone to get links like this. Same with .govs. People laugh and ask why should we help Google, aren't they who we are trying to beat? Let Google solve the spam problem. Some will even blame Google for the spam problem itself. My favorite is when people say the Pagerank meter on the Google Toolbar is the root of all linking evils on the web.
No. It isn't. Not to me at least. Even though I'm a link builder, I side with Google on the spam issue. I want my search results to be useful, to help me find what will help me. If I'm looking for information about a medical condition my 83 year old mother is dealing with, I'd prefer to know the results aren't filled with pharmaceutical spam selling me pills.
I like the idea of a universal spam flag extension, but fear most people will just use it to call their competitor's site spam over and over. Based on the tactics people are willing to try, nothing would surprise me.
So how do we help Google fight webspam? Google does a pretty remarkable job now, and will continue to get better. I envision that percentage-wise, an ever smaller number of web pages will carry even greater influence with the search engines. The distance between main street and the back alleys will widen. Being able to identify where trust lives, and then recognizing how or why your site can or can't be a part of that trust link graph is going to be the key to long term organic success.
If the web is a bunch of liars, Google is the ultimate lie detector. That's why your link building approach should be to tell the truth from the start.
Eric Ward, Link Evangelist
New Blog Search Upgrade in Progress
Posted by Richard Stokes on June 11, 2010 to Features, General
At Eric's insistence, we are now making our blog more "bloggy". Tags are being added to our articles to make it easier to find what you may be looking for and we're currently upgrading our site search system (which is going to look awfully strange until it's completed - later today perhaps.)
Update: Not only did we add a new tagging system, we also enabled comments on our blog. Comments are moderated and will be delayed unless we know you or you're logged into TypePad.
Fixing Google's Buggy Traffic Data
Posted by Richard Stokes on June 2, 2010 to Forecasting, Google AdWords, Traffic
Over the past three weeks we've been taking a close look at solving the difficult problem of getting reliable traffic estimates. As many readers of this blog know, the Google AdWords traffic estimates are far from perfect. Broad match traffic estimates are subject to numerous sources of error. And while Exact Match traffic estimates are more reliable (a big thanks goes out to Alex Cohen of ClickEquations, makers of pay per click software), they are not available for many keywords of interest (especially outside of the US and UK).
Our current model
One of the most common choices we run into here is whether we should A) go with a simple model that trades accuracy for simplicity or B) pick a model that is more accurate but can be harder for our clients to understand.
In the past, we chose the simpler route for traffic estimates. Let's say you want to produce something like our Tornado report. This report shows what percentage of impressions an advertiser is currently capturing. To figure this out, you need to understand how many people search for a keyword of interest and how often the client appears for that keyword. Combine the two and you end up with a great report. It's simple, easy-to-understand, and actionable.
Today we generate it by simply taking the search engine’s broad match search volume estimate and multiply it by the advertiser's coverage to come up with captured impressions (note: we also multiply the raw data by a fixed coefficient to eliminate partner network impressions, but this doesn't change the analysis in any meaningful way). This ends up overstating impressions by quite a bit.
Let's see if we can figure out how far off we are if we rely on the raw AdWords search volume estimates.
In April, our clients generated 165 million impressions in the US (that's after ETL/data cleansing). The naive model predicted that there would be 351 million, so it’s overstating by 2.13 times.
However, this measurement overweights outliers, e.g. really high-volume keywords like "wireless" and "bluetooth", so it’s good to look at some alternative statistics.
A more fair way to measure is to use a best-fit linear regression indicates that the raw model overstates by 1.44 times (44% higher than actual impressions).
Finally, you can also look at correlation: 22%. Not so good.
Here's A Better Way
After many failed attempts (and lots of SPSS work by a PhD statistician), we've developed a new traffic model. This new model takes into account three sources of data, in order of importance:
1. Actual AdWords data (if available)
2. Exact match search volume (very accurate, but not always available)
3. Broad match search volume (not very accurate, but used as a fallback)
(These are not combined in an obvious manner. You simply cannot trust the broad search traffic. Even if it's your only data point, you have to treat it in a very specific manner depending on the keyword and the magnitude of the estimate.)
How does this compare to the naive model?
* The new model predicts 115 million impressions vs 165 million. So instead of overstating by 2.13 times, we are actually coming in about 30% too low. Yet it's much closer!
* Best fit: we understate by 61%. This is actually a little worse than before (we are currently overstating by 44%).
* Correlation: 60% vs 22%. A huge improvement.
So far, this is a positive development, but it’s not truly groundbreaking… or is it?
By tying in a feedback loop to actual AdWords data, the system can learn and grow more accurate over time. Through simulation, we discovered that the new traffic model should eventually achieve the following figures. I've applied them to April's data so that we can look at an apples-to-apples comparison:
* 155 million impressions vs. 165 million (within 6% of actual).
* Best fit: understated by 25% - compared to 44% currently (Another huge improvement!)
* Correlation: 80% (wow!)
These are unbelievable improvements and are by far the most promising results I've ever seen. If you manage search campaigns, this is something that should be of serious value when it comes time to generate your next search forecast or a gap analysis report.
We're really excited about this development and see this as a major leap forward in our technology. Of course, the question remains as to how we roll it out? Would you prefer for us to simply switch over to the new, more accurate model one day or opt-in? Would you like us to re-write your old data or just start calculating it moving forward?
Final note: If you're integrating your AdWords data with your AdGooroo account today (and calibrating), you're already getting most of the benefits of this new model. We know that the calibration process can be clunky for accounts with lots of keywords and we're already working on a new design to make it easier to use (ETA: August).
-Rich
About Ecommerce Sites and Link-Worthiness
Posted by Eric Ward on May 26, 2010 to Link Building
By Eric Ward, Link Evangelist
Some sites seem to attract links without even trying. But for every NationalGeographic.com or Discovery.com (for whom I built thousands of links in the 90's), there are a thousand other ecommerce sites that don't have the luxury of large editorial staffs and incredible content.
The challenge sales oriented web sites have are unique but not impossible to overcome. I hope you all will allow me to climb up on the pulpit again for a few minutes, because what I've seen through trial and error experience can teach all of us a lot about links.
Link Insight is, at it's core, a link building quality control tool based on rules. I'm not going to give away the secret sauce I worked on 15 years to help get Link Insight launched, but the site owner using Link Insight must understand is that Link Insight does not change your content, Link Insight does not make your content more "linkable", does not make it more appealing.
Any site created with the primary purpose of selling something is at a trusted link disadvantage because it is so hard to justify linking to such sites without a bona fide reason to do so. Site owners have to understand this going in. Here is a short story which I've used many times to explain this challenge to clients and at conference sessions.
There are two web sites. Both sell magic supplies. Magic tricks, hats, capes and wands, even the old saw-the-person-in-half gag. If your content is nothing more than an online magic store, why would anyone link to it?
You might get a few links from magic site web guides and link lists. But then what? If you are an online store with nothing but products as your content, then you MUST look to associate/affiliate programs, paid links or reciprocal links. Basically, negotiating for them, rather than attracting them.
But maybe there is something more you CAN do, if you are willing to roll up your sleeves. While I am not fond of the term linkbait, it has become part of the lexicon of link building. But, let us not confuse linkbait with link-worthy content.
What if, along with your products, you create a searchable database of information on magic. What if you had complete biographies of more than 700 magicians? What if you had a section devoted to magical world records, or a glossary of magical terms, or a directory of magicians on the Internet?
This would then be an excellent example of how a store site can add rich, relevant content, value, interest, and community to its web site, as well as sell merchandise. This site would be linked to by just about any writer who writes about magic and/or reviews web sites, and by any library with web content devoted to magic.
The above is not just a wide-eyed, hypothetical example. The site exists at http://www.MagicTricks.com
This site has been in the top five at Google for over ten years. Why? Trusted links. Look at the types of links this site attracts
http://bit.ly/aeN06w
That's nearly 300 highest trust libraries that have linked to magictricks.com. Those links never would have happened if not for their non-product content. Their non-product content is in fact the very reason they were able to earn those links. Links of merit. Links that Matt Cutts from Google might say "stand the test of time".
Here's an older article that touches more on this subject.
What Makes a Web Site Link-Worthy?
http://www.ericward.com/articles/linkworthy03-03.html
I'm not saying every ecommerce site must follow this blueprint/path. But sometimes an example is worth a thousand links, or in this case, a few hundred.
You have an opportunity with Link Insight to understand what a merit based link profile or link signature is and looks like. No other tool does this in the same way. Just as AdGooroo has created a one-of-a-kind keyword tool, they have done it again with Link Insight. But again, Link Insight will not make your site linkworthy. Anyone can launch an ecommerce site in a half hour. Millions of people have.
It's the passion of the content owner willing to do more than flip the switch that results in the depth of content that inspires links.
Four New SEM Insight Features
Posted by Richard Stokes on May 21, 2010 to Features, SEM Insight
We are excited to announce four new features available to all new SEM Insight subscribers!
New Ad Formats
We've recently re-architected our systems to detect new, experimental formats in use by the search engines. So over the next few weeks, you will begin to see new ad formats in your reports (some will start showing up as soon as tomorrow - May 22, 2010). Here are two examples (Click to enlarge images):
Phamaceutical Ads
Site Link Ads
PPC vs. Natural Messaging Report
This new report shows you how your PPC ad copy stacks up against your landing page URLs. This is particularly important as studies have shown aligning your paid and organic messaging can increase conversions by as much as 40%.
To access this new report, click on PPC vs. Natural Report -> Natural URL vs. PPC Ad Copy (tab):
Three Tier Client Sub-Accounts
Larger agencies now have the ability to create a hierarchy containing three tiers of accounts:
- Master Account
- Group Account
- Individual Client Account
A Master Account allows you create a single account which has access to all AdGooroo accounts across your agency. For instance, a Master Account administrator could create group accounts for regional departments scattered throughout the world.
These Group Accounts in turn manage individual client accounts. A Group Account administrator can easily switch between client accounts without requiring a separate login.
Finally, Client Accounts contain reports specific to a particular client. The login credentials can safely be shared with clients because they cannot access other client accounts.
To set up and allocate licenses between these different types of sub-accounts, navigate to Manage My Account -> Manage Account -> Client Accounts (tab).
Custom Aggregations
AdGooroo subscribers can now group related domains into a single data point on their reports. This is useful if you advertise on multiple domains (such as "www.example.com" and "shop.example.com"). Statistics are aggregated on the group and keyword reports, but you can still drill into the individual advertisers as necessary.
To use this feature, simply give two or more advertisers the same label using the Display Settings dropdown:
After you refresh the page, your reports will aggregate those advertisers on both the charts as well as the report tables:
If you need to drill into an individual advertiser, just click their icon and a popup will ask you which one you'd to see more detail on:
Categories
anchor text (1)
Beta (1)
Conversion Optimization (1)
Day Parting (1)
Display Advertising (1)
Email Marketing (1)
Eric Ward (2)
Features (21)
Forecasting (1)
General (2)
Geotargeting (1)
Google AdWords (1)
Landing Pages (1)
Link Building (14)
link building (2)
link signals (1)
MarketingSherpa (1)
Mentions (3)
PageRank (1)
Perry Marshall (1)
PPC (4)
Press Releases (1)
Research (4)
search rank (1)
SEM Insight (2)
SEO (1)
Targets (2)
Trademark Insight (1)
Trademark Protection (1)
Traffic (1)
Ultimate Guide (3)
Webinar (4)