We'll email you every time we add a new post—just subscribe to our blog to receive updates.
Daily time spent watching online video across 40 key markets will grow by 23.3% this year and by another 19.8% next year, with mobile video consumption growing at roughly 5 times the rate of non-mobile devices, according to a ZenithOptimedia forecast. In fact, the forecast calls for mobile to account for a majority 52.7% of online video consumption next year, up from 40.1% last year.
Meanwhile, the growth in the number of regular online video viewers across those 40 markets is expected to be in the 5.1-5.8% range annually from 2015 through 2017. By contrast, the number of regular linear TV viewers is expected to peak this year and then shrink by 1.9% next year.
In line with its growth, ad dollars are flowing to online video: ZenithOptimedia expects that, globally, spending on online video will increase from 8.8% share of online ad spend in 2012 to 12.8% share in 2017. In the US, though, online video is already projected to account for 16.5% of total online advertising spending. READ ARTICLE
Some 21% of online US adults aged 18-34 accessed the internet using only mobile devices in December 2014, up from 18% doing so last year, according to a recently-released report [download page] from comScore. The study also demonstrates that multi-platform use is growing across age groups, with three-quarters of online Americans aged 55 and older accessing the internet either through mobiles only (6%) or through a combination of mobiles and desktops (68%).
Indeed, just 26% of online adults aged 55 and older accessed the internet solely via desktops in December of last year, down from 40% during the year-earlier period. As such, this age group counts as the fastest-growing cohort of mobile users.
Overall, 88% of online adults counted as mobile-only (12%) or multi-platform (76%) users in December. Given that a recent Pew Research Project study [pdf] found that 81% of US adults access the internet, the data – in combination – suggests that somewhere around 7 in 10 American adults are accessing the internet via mobile devices. (For context, recent comScore data showed that smartphone penetration reached three-quarters of the 13+ mobile subscriber market in Q4 2014.)
Not surprisingly, digital content consumption varies widely by category, per the report. Some categories that continue to lean strongly towards desktop consumption include business/finance (70% of time spent coming from desktops) and entertainment news (61% desktop). By contrast, social networking skews heavily towards mobile (74% share of time spent), as do the online gaming and weather (each at 87%) categories. Retail was fairly evenly split between mobile (49% of consumption) and desktop (51%) platforms in December, per the report.
It’s worth noting that those figures are likely subject to some seasonality. In January 2014, for example, desktop played a less prominent role in both retail (47% of time) and business/finance content consumption (62%), according to previously-released comScore data. That would suggest that desktop share of consumption in these categories grew over the course of the year, which would run counter to the prevailing winds of mobile’s growth.
Nevertheless, the latest report offers an interesting – and somewhat related – nugget: time spent with mobile devices hasn’t cannibalized desktop consumption over the past few years, at least in the aggregate. Between December 2010 and December 2014, time spent online via tablets grew by 1,721%, while time spent accessing the internet via smartphones increased by 394%. But, there was also modest growth in time spent accessing via desktops, of 37%. In essence, then, all that time spent accessing the internet through mobile devices has proved to be accretive. READ ARTICLE
More than 42% of US organic search visits to US sites in Q4 2014 came from mobile devices, up from 31% share during the year-earlier period, details RKG Digital [download page] in its latest quarterly digital marketing report, which covers a cross-section of industry clients, though leans towards retailers. The study notes that iOS devices’ share of mobile search traffic has declined, although they retain a commanding lead over Android devices. Indeed, iOS devices contributed twice as much organic search traffic share (27% share) as did Android devices (13%).
Among the top search engines, Yahoo was again the most influenced by mobile devices in Q4, as in each quarter of 2014. For the first time, half of Yahoo’s organic search traffic came from mobile devices, with mobile’s share of Google search traffic at 43%. Bing remained further behind, at 28% share.
For the quarter, organic search comprised 35% of site traffic, down a point from the same time during the year-earlier period.
The study notes that social media’s share of traffic to retailers’ sites has grown, although it remains fractional in comparison, at 2.4% in Q4. However, RKG notes that “the share of traffic being bucketed as social is depressed by ‘dark social’ visits, which are visits from social media in which the proper referrer string is not passed, leading to incorrect attribution.” Of the social visits tracked, 52% came from mobile devices, the first time mobile has broken the majority threshold in that area.
Meanwhile, mobile’s share of paid search clicks (with this data more heavily skewed towards retail clients) reached 39% in Q4 2014, with smartphones contributing a slightly higher percentage (21%) than tablets (18%). That overall figure was slightly higher on Google, which saw 40% of its paid search clicks coming from mobile devices. But mobile devices’ revenue-per-click remained significantly below desktops, particularly the case with smartphones (67% lower).
In other search-related news:
By RKG’s estimates, Yahoo’s deal in late November to be the default search engine on the latest version of the Mozilla Firefox browser will result in roughly 2% or less of total paid search traffic shifting from Google to Yahoo;
Yahoo/Bing captured 26.3% of US search spending in Q4, per IgnitionOne’s latest quarterly report, although RKG’s study puts Google’s share of US paid search spend at 83.2%;
Globally, search ad click-through rates grew by 11% year-over-year in Q4, says Kenshoo, which also tracked a 14% increase in paid search spend (RKG and IgnitionOne also noted increases in Q4 search spend); and
Google led all search engines with 65.4% share of US explicit core search queries from desktop computers in December 2014, according to comScore, with that figure down from 67% the previous month. Yahoo picked up those 1.6 points, increasing from 10.2 to 11.8% share of explicit core searches. READ ARTICLE
“Traffic began slowing down this fall and I had a brand new apartment community to lease up. I was delighted with our new Spherexx.com built website; so I asked them if they did direct mail and they took care of everything!
They located the addresses I requested, designed a lovely 6” X 9” postcard, printed and had them delivered at a very reasonable cost. There seems to be no end to what they can do. We got immediate response from the direct mailer and a new lease right away.
It is really gratifying to know I have such a powerful resource. Everything they do is stunning and gets dynamic results.”
Maria A. Lamari
Community Manager
Trio Real Estate Services
Apple spent only a minute or so of its two-hour WWDC keynote discussing the enterprise features in its upcoming iOS 8 mobile OS, which is set for release this fall. The response from the crowd after the business announcements was notably tame compared to the roars that followed many of the other announcements. The fact is, iOS 8 actually packs a set of valuable new features that demonstrate Apples strengthening relationship with the enterprise and with business users.
Though Apple dedicated a short amount of time to the enterprise, some of the most exciting "consumer features will also be valuable to business users. Here's a look at 12 of the most notable new iOS 8 features for enterprises and corporate users.
The analysis of 6 million email marketing campaigns sent by Campaign Monitor found that 41% occurred on a mobile device in 2013, compared with 28% on a desktop and 22% via webmail.
The problem is that it doesn't give your potential customer the WIFM in the few seconds that they're looking at your advertising materials. The, "What's In It For Me" factor.
We often don't really consider what our customers' needs are when we are working on headlines, copy, emails, etc. Our advertising materials go on about the features of our product, not the benefits. The features, though important to us, definitely aren't the focus of our customer. Think about your customer and what's important to them. They want to know the benefits to them, the WIFM.
"Our community is gated" "Our offices are spacious" "Our landscaping is remarkable."
These are the features of your property. Why not change the focus from features to the benefits to your customer?
"Our community is gated" becomes "Controlled access for your convenience"
"Our offices are spacious" becomes "Wow your clients with your huge office"
"Our landscaping is remarkable" becomes "Enjoy nature as you walk around your beautiful new community" READ ARTICLE
Bernard Marr, Best-selling business author and enterprise performance expert
I have collected some examples that should be an inspiration to anyone who aspires to be successful. They show that if you want to succeed you should expect failure along the way. I actually believe that failure can spur you on and make you try even harder. You could argue that every experience of failure increases the hunger for success. The truly successful won't be beaten, they take responsibility for failure, learn from it and start all over from a stronger position.
Let's look at some examples, including some of my fellow LinkedIn influencers...FULL ARTICLE
The findings, which come from a report by Knotice, show that smartphones now make up 29% of the total while tablets account for 12%.
This increased from 26% and 11% respectively in the first half of 2012.
And despite the increasing dominance of Google's Android operating system, iOS devices account for the vast majority of mobile email opens.
If you search for eBay, though, you'll find only a single listing — an unpaid one. Odds are, after marketers at Amazon, Walgreens and elsewhere catch wind of a preliminary study released on Friday, their search listings will start to look a lot more like eBay's. The study — by eBay Research Labs economists Thomas Blake, Chris Nosko, and Steve Tadelis — analyzed eBay sales after shutting down purchases of search ads on Google and elsewhere, while maintaining a control set of regions where search ads continued unchanged. Their findings suggest that many paid ads generate virtually no increase in sales, and even for ones that do, the sales benefits are far eclipsed by the cost of the ads themselves.
Companies spend enormous sums on marketing their products. Yet it's notoriously difficult to measure the impact of ad expenditures. Companies advertise heavily at times when they hope to sell a lot — like Christmas Eve and Boxing Day — and in areas where they expect to see their sales grow. So a naïve examination of the relationship between ad expenditures and revenues will of course find they move in sync, even if customers don't pay the ads any mind.
Advertising has also traditionally produced a lot of waste — I see ads for Brioni suits when I open up the morning paper, even though the last time I wore a suit was on my wedding day. The study's authors quote 19th century retailer John Wannamaker: "I know half the money I spend on advertising is wasted, but I can never find out which half."
The internet promised to change all that. Google, Yahoo, Bing, and others gave sellers the opportunity to target their pitches to customers who were plausibly interested in their products. That's why paid ads for Amazon come up in response to a search for books, but not life insurance. Further aligning the interests of companies and consumers, advertisers only get charged for paid search listings that actually get clicked on, ensuring that they pay for attracting genuinely interested customers.
But what do companies actually get for the billions they now spend on search marketing? The eBay team began by examining whether there's any benefit to buying search ads that contain the word "ebay." In these cases, it's possible that in the absence of paid listings, customers would simply click on the unpaid — or "natural" — listing, which would appear at the top of the search anyway. So in March 2012, eBay conducted a controlled trial to see what would happen if they shut off this "branded keyword advertising" by halting their purchases of search ads containing the word "ebay" on Microsoft and Yahoo search engines, while continuing to purchase search ads on Google as a control. There was no change in eBay sales via Yahoo and Bing, relative to those that came through Google — consumers simply substituted clicks on the unpaid search listing for the now-absent paid ones.
Encouraged by these findings, eBay management agreed to run a controlled experiment where they shut off all Google search ads in a third of the country, while continuing to buy ads everywhere else. In contrast to branded keywords — where it's inevitable that the company will end up as one of the top unpaid listings — there's a good chance that if you try searching for "used les paul guitar," a guitar reseller will appear ahead of eBay's search listing. So in order to drive a customer to eBay for his guitar purchase rather than, say, Guitar Center, it might be worth the cost of placing a carefully targeted ad.
But in aggregate, that's not what the eBay team found — overall, there was no appreciable decline in sales of eBay listings in the part of the country where Google ad purchases were shut off. People who thought to buy guitars via eBay were finding their way to the site anyway, either by clicking on natural listings, or by going directly to eBay's site without using a search engine at all. Search ads did generate a modest increase in the likelihood that internet surfers with little recent history of eBay transactions would end up making purchases on eBay. So paid search ads serve an informational function, letting a sliver of potential eBay customers know that they're in the guitar business. But by the time you get to customers who have had three prior eBay transactions in the last year, the effect of paid search on sales drops almost to zero. Overall, paid search turns out to be a very expensive way of attracting new business: The study's authors estimate that, at least in the short-run, paid ads generate only about 25 cents in extra revenues for each dollar of ad expenditures. (For branded keyword searches, the additional revenues are close to zero.)
People buying search ads aren't idiots — they've looked at the correlation between keyword purchases and subsequent sales and no doubt found it to be strong. But this study suggests that marketing departments should be more careful in confusing causation and correlation in assessing the returns to their ad expenditures, to avoid the equivalent of concluding that marketing works because you advertise and sell a lot in December.
The study's authors note that paid search may be more profitable for other companies than it's been for eBay. For example, as Stop and Shop tries to get a foothold in the crowded New York online grocery marketplace, they might sensibly buy some ads to compete with Fresh Direct. Paid search may also be worth it for smaller companies that lack the name recognition and high Google page rank that make paid searches less valuable for the eBays and Amazons of the world — some of Google's own research indicates that this is likely the case. Caveats aside, eBay's experiences suggest that all companies should look carefully at how much bang they're getting for their search marketing dollars.
by Pete Prestipino | Posted on 03.07.2013
The response in “responsive” Web design provides a clue about how to think about the practice. It’s essentially a set of actual techniques – and yes, sometimes tools too – that move elements of the page (e.g. images, navigation, text) based on the capabilities of the device it is being viewed upon. Responsive design enables websites to obtain information about the device and then display a version appropriate for the layout. There are actually quite a few digital moving pieces, so if you’re using responsive design right now – ask these six questions of yourself or your designer before making anything digital come alive.
You likely need no further explanation of why going responsive is the best design choice for your digital presence, but you’ll also need some practical guidance – just the kind of information that subscribers expect from Website Magazine. Here’s a quick guide for those interested in using responsive design, some things you should and need to know, and more importantly ask, about responsive techniques and tools, today and in the future.
A quick note, if you’re reading this on a desktop version you’ll quickly notice that WebsiteMagazine.com is not actually “responsive” per say. Aren’t we practicing what we preach? Well, sort of – we are mobile compliant. Responsive design is terrific for lots of things (like our Web 100 project) but not for every enterprise in every single scenario. Website Magazine, for example, opted for a mobile website over responsive layout as it provided us greater control over the complexity of information we publish and some unique opportunities related to our mobile applications. So yes, Website Magazine is mobile compliant, just not responsive (and it works!).
OK, enough defending our business decisions! You want to know as much as you can about responsive design… and you’re about to. The following outlines several guiding principles as you design (or redesign) your consumer-facing websites for modern desktop, mobile and tablet experiences.
Remove/Reduce Interfering HTML
Many might believe that responsive design will limit the amount of information (it does, at least in appearance) that can be made available, but responsive design demands nothing more than a thoughtful approach to the user experience. The way to achieve that is to ensure that the layout is kept as simple as possible.
Are you prioritizing the elements correctly for optimum consumption? Take a moment now to test – remove all styling CSS and styling information from your email or Web design and display it in a browser. If the content is easy to read and ordered appropriately, you’re on the right track. If not, you’re likely engaging in some poor HTML practices, such as the use of inline styles or unnecessary absolute or float positioning.
Another option is to use a one of the many testing tools to see how your responsive designs hold up. One of my personal favorites is Responsi, a very straightforward design-testing tool, which provides drag-to-resize viewport and several standard device presents. Designers will find tools such as Responsi and others very useful in their day-to-day design tasks.
The IFTT of Modern Digital Design
If you’ve read anything about responsive design you have come across the term media queries; the code that queries the users device to understand how the site is best viewed and then providing an appropriate response for the width conditions. Essentially, depending on the client-side response, designers will load the right style sheet and even have the ability to add specific styles in different scenarios. Think of media queries as “if this, then that” statements.
Know the Common Breakpoints
In order to create and use media queries however, it is important to know which are the most common resolutions used to view your digital assets. A business’ mobile efforts are best focused on the most popular devices, which fortunately makes quick work of the development process for designers. To work with these devices, designers must essentially just account for the minimum and maximum widths – 480, 768 and 1024 (in both portrait and landscape). Using a free tool like Responsi (listed above) or Screenfly helps to understand quickly if everything is appearing in an optimal way.
Adapt Quickly to the Viewport
When it comes to responsive design, layouts (obviously) need to be flexible, which means you’ll need to leave those pesky tables alone. The best option is to use a flexible, fluid grid (which uses columns to arrange content) and relative instead of fixed width to adapt to the right viewport size. If you’re using the right media queries in conjunction with a fluid layouts, you’ll have most if not all devices covered. To speed development on this front, consider the use of grid systems such as those listed here and here.
Adaptive Sizing of Images
The use of pictures and images on a responsively designed website or email can cause headaches for designers – and if you’re not....
As of December 2012:
A spreadsheet of the above data is available for download here.
The demographic breakdown:
Cell internet access:
As of April 2012, 55% of adult cell owners use the internet on their mobile phones; nearly double what we found three years ago.
31% of current cell internet users say that they mostly go online using their cell phone, and not using some other device such as a desktop or laptop computer. That works out to 17% of all adult cell owners who are “cell-mostly internet users”—that is, who use their phone for most of their online browsing.
For more specific information on cell internet access, visit our recent report.
Mobile phone problems:
In April 2012, we found:
Some 79% of cell phone owners say they use text messaging on their cells. We asked them if they got spam or unwanted texts:
Some 55% of cell phone owners say they use their phones to go online— to browse the internet, exchange emails, or download apps. We asked them if they experience slow download speeds that prevent things from loading as quickly as they would like:
How Americans use their cell phones:
See: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Best-Worst-Mobile/Part-V/Activities.aspx
Additional activities:
The % of cell phone owners who use their cell phone to…
See: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Cell-Activities.aspx
"Just in time" information:
An April 2012 survey finds that some 70% of all cell phone owners and 86% of smartphone owners have used their phones in the previous 30 days to perform at least one of the following activities:
Overall, these “just-in-time” cell users—defined as anyone who has done one or more of the above activities using their phone in the preceding 30 days—amount to 62% of the entire adult population. (See Just-in-time Information through Mobile Connections.)
CLICK HERE TO READ REST OF ARTICLE
At the time, this seemed about as good as an idea as trying to come up with another fast food restaurant that was going to dominate America. It certainly seemed like there were enough search engines already, and a powerful few maintained a stranglehold on the market.
But the search landscape was far from perfect. Searchers weren’t getting consistently relevant results, and those results typically took a long time to load.
Yet most people didn’t notice or mind these problems since online search seemed to be such a miraculous improvement over what had existed before: calling the theater and spending ten minutes listening to a recording of movies listings and show times; or lugging out the Yellow Pages and phoning 12 bicycle shops to see if they had a 24-inch unicycle tire in stock.
Online search, with useful information at your fingertips from the privacy and convenience of your computer, seemed like a miracle. Page and Brin assumed there were better ways to serve it up.
The big problem with search engines, prior to Google, were the rules those engines used to decide what page to show the searcher. The search engines would look at the pages, read the words on the page and say, “OK, so that’s what this is about.” The more times the keyword appeared on the page, the more relevant the search engine assumed that word was for the searcher.
Website owners quickly figured out that getting a top ranking on the search engines for important keywords was crucial to their success. Rather than thinking about the experience of the end user (their customer), they lured prospects to their pages by manipulating the search engines.
A search for “24 inch unicycle tire” would return the pages that contained that phrase the most. Search engine optimization (SEO) became an arms race to stuff as many keywords into the web page as possible.
As you can imagine (or perhaps remember), search engines rewarding “keyword stuffing” meant that searchers were landing on pretty dismal web pages.
In this face of this less-than-optimal search experience, Larry and Sergey asked a crucial question: in other settings, how do people decide if a source is relevant?
They applied their question to the world of academia: How do researchers know when a particular paper, book or study is really important?
Scholars vote for important works by citing them in their own work. The value of a study can be determined by how many times it’s referenced in subsequent work.
If a work is published and never gets referenced, it probably isn’t of great value. In contrast, a book or paper that appeared in the notes and bibliographies of other academic publications – that must be an influential work.
Google was built on this insight and analogy. Page and Brin devised what they called “off page factors” to determine whether a web site or a web page was relevant for a particular search term. A web page would be deemed important and relevant by Google and would rank highly for a keyword if a lot of other web pages linked to that page using the keyword as the visible part of the link.
For example, a post on a blog read by many unicycle enthusiasts that links to unicycles.com/tires as follows:
“… I got a great deal on a 24” Panaracer unicycle tire, so I was able to refurbish my unicycle…”
...would help that page rank highly in Google for the keyword [24” Panaracer unicycle tire].
The more “popular” those linking web pages are, the more popularity they confer upon a page they link to. Like how you can identify the popular kids in high school because they hang out with the other popular kids.
For the first time, the top positions on search results pages were assigned based on merit as determined by a broader community.
In a matter of few months with no advertising, Google eclipsed the other search engines and become name brand of search. We don’t Lycos, we don’t Webcrawl, we don’t AltaVista; we Google. The improved search experience made Google the overwhelming winner.
What does that fun history lesson mean?
Google understands that its prime directive is to quickly give searchers relevant results. When they launched AdWords in 2002, they applied the same principles to advertising that they did to their “real” content. Ads that aren’t relevant, or annoy searchers, threaten Google’s dominance by diminishing the search experience.
Google discovered that search is different from newspapers or television. People don’t pick up newspapers or flip through channels on their television hoping to find an ad for unicycle tires.
When people search online, on the other hand, they are almost as likely to be looking for a sponsored listing as a free one. Whatever scratches their itch, whether it be organic or paid.
Unlike typical advertising media, Google allows and rewards ads that provide a high quality experience for searchers. Google measures this in two ways:
Only when the answer to those two questions is yes will they pay attention to the auction that determines placement.
Google cares about the experience of the searcher much more than they care about you giving them a dollar in exchange for a click. A click today means a dollar today, while a satisfied searcher means many more dollars tomorrow and beyond.
Even though you pay Google when you use AdWords, you aren't their customer. The satisfaction of the searchers who never give Google a dime is the cornerstone of their vast empire.
The second relevant aspect of Google psychology is this: Google understands it rose to prominence out of nowhere really quickly, based on a slight edge. They had made, initially, a slight improvement to the search experience.
Therefore, everyone at Google has profound paranoia drilled into their DNA: they think of Google as being one tweak away from being out of business completely.
Just as their rose to dominance based on a slight edge, lots of people are out there trying to create better search engines, aiming to eat Google’s lunch.
Page and Brin ran the company from a friend’s garage for six months, so they know that a good idea is more powerful than lots of funding and huge a staff.
Google has never stopped experimenting to improve the search experience. That’s why thousands of Google advertisers woke up one morning in summer 2006 to discover that all their five cent keywords now cost them $10. Google had determined that their ads represented a poor quality experience for searchers, so it penalized the advertisers until they improved that quality.
And pretty much every month over the past 7 years, Google advertisers have been surprised and shaken by “Google Slaps”: changes in policy and algorithm that kick them off the first page of search results.
Why Should The Apartment Industry Use Pay Per Click Advertisement?
Written By: Spherexx.com
Pay Per Click (PPC) ads can produce quality leads, and therefore leases in a short period of time. Plus, you can track this advertising effectiveness to know your exact ROI.
One PPC analyst says, "PPC is most effective in industries where a customer is worth a lot of money over the long-term." Why is this? Simply because PPC can be expensive. You most likely want to use PPC in a lease-up situation or during a low occupancy period to quickly shrink vacancy. It is generally not used for everyday advertising, but many apartment operators will use PPC regularly in a weak market.
Typically, apartment keywords range from $.50 to $5.00 every time a prospect clicks your advertisement. A click on your PPC ad doesn't even get you a name and phone number of a prospect - so the "click" is just the beginning of driving that prospect to give you their information. Note: the Insurance Industry can pay more than $54 a click. A cost per lead (CPL) averages around $50.00. Here are some articles on how PPC works: check out Wikipedia and Google Adwords for more detailed information.
What if my site already ranks well on Search Engine pages?
If it does that's great. But let's think for a second about how search engines make money with advertising money from PPC ads. For example, Google makes $3 billion a month (yes, billion) on these ads. So Google wants their ads to be clicked on first. Even if you rank #1 on page 1 for your keyword, there can still be three PPC ads right above your listing. It also allows you to target keywords you probably could not win with just organic SEO efforts. You can always benefit from PPC when you need it.
Should I do PPC myself or hire out?
Of course you can do it yourself, but remember how Google make it's $3 billion a month-with PPC. If you aren't an expert on search engine optimization it is easy to lose a lot of money and quickly. What about landing pages, setting up tracking, call leads? And don't forget the time it will take you to educate yourself on best practices, and of course monitoring the account itself.
What if you contract your PPC campaign?
Who should you hire? This is where it can get tricky. Let's look at two philosophies for PPC methods.
Traffic Producing Philosophy
The first and most prevalent system is this: we will get you lots and lots of traffic.
There are lots of large national companies that claim to have the best "algorithms" in the market. They send all that traffic to your website and hope it will produce leads. These companies will get you lots of impressions and will do a really good job at getting you a low cost per click (CPC). This works well for some industries, but not so great for the apartment industry.
Lead Producing Philosophy
The second system of thought is to optimize the campaign to target quality prospects and thus produce highly qualified leads. These providers will produce quality, lead-generating landing pages and track the customer from the landing page to your website. The CPC is much higher when applying this philosophy, but the amount of leads produced and the cost per lead (CPL) is significantly lower, thus giving you a much better ROI than the traffic-producing philosophy.
In a three month comparative case study (same budget, same keywords) between two companies using these two philosophies, the lead-producing philosophy prevailed.
Note: Company A is traffic producing, Company B is lead-producing.
Company A produced 21 leads a month with a $52.16 CPL (Cost Per Lead)
Company B produced 33 leads a month with a $30.31 CPL (Cost Per Lead)
Company B (lead-producing) had:
63% more leads
58% less cost per lead
Look for a company with a lead-producing philosophy.
Ask these questions:
Do they produce a lead generating landing page?
What is their tracking method: can they track all the leads, even the ones that come back later?
What about phone call tracking, make sure it is included in the package
How much are their fees? Most companies can't or won't tell you. So pick someone that is honest about their fees, even if it may seem a little high to you; you may not know how much an undisclosed bidder is actually taking.
In Conclusion:
PPC campaigns will impact your traffic, so use them when you need a traffic surge.
Don't try it yourself, leave PPC strategy to the professionals.
Pick the right company that will send you leads that you can convert to leases.
Home | Adkast | Phonekast | Chatkast | Emailkast | Mobilekast | Searchkast | PPCkast | Videokast | Pricing | Order Now | Blog | Contact Us | ||
9142 S. Sheridan,
Tulsa,
OK
74133
|
Phone: (866) 491-7500
www.messagekast.com | Developed by Spherexx.com ® | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Site Map | Copyright © 2009-2021 |