One Way PPC Search Marketing Could Be Ideal
What if Google were shoving us around? I mean really jerking us around by the . . . neck? (Let’s keep this clean.) Could they be getting away with a fast one pulled over all of us?
What if, amongst the billions and billions of searched keywords and variations, Google was working to paint us all into the same corner by getting us to buy the same keywords for their own improved monetization? Well, I think they are.
Right now it seems as though Google is performing multiple scams all at the same time, however due to the enormity and significance of each singular tactic, we’re all missing the whole strategic picture. The only logical explanation making an appeal to perception that Google may not be conspiring against us is that time seems to keep improving some of my 3 month to year old keywords.
Newer keywords are getting way more expensive than they used to be. They seem to get tolerably better between months 3-12, but beyond that, search marketers and advertisers are hurting. Beyond the fact that age is reigning supreme (but don’t dare start over without a good reason), all the rest is punishment being dealt.
I have a theory that we need to try, but it would require all of our joint participation. My theory would operate in boycott-like fashion, but not in the way you might think. It is clear that as time goes on that Google is attempting to coax advertisers into running campaign solely built upon generic keywords in broad match. Sound crazy? Yep! Potentially true though.
Just this last summer I was invited to a Yahoo Agency Day, where search marketers at agencies complained that Google was rewarding generic keywords on broad match, while discouraging the targeted keywords on phrase and exact match. It got me thinking . . . . or haven’t you noticed, too?
One way PPC search marketing could be ideal is if we all bought targeted keywords. I mean only those which were highly relevant to our ads and landing pages. What if this Utopian ideal could lower all of our bids and CPAs by 25%? Wouldn’t that be worth it?