Building a second income stream

By using Google Adsense and affiliate programs, it is possible to build a second income stream.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

The Morality of Paid Links and Google's 'Intent Algorithm'

Copyright © 2006-2007 Bill Platt It is Google's fault actually. No one can be blamed for this matter more than Google itself. Google came up with a brilliant plan for determining the best web pages to show in their search engine results. And then without telling us the intimate details of their plan, they told us about part of their algorithm by explaining the importance of inbound links --- the Google PageRank (PR) system --- in their calculations. Google itself planted the seeds its own future headaches. Nobody did it to them; they did it themselves. I am sure the fault really lies in Google's marketing department. They wanted to tell the world what made their search engine algorithms more powerful than the competition. It probably was an innocent mistake on their part. But once the genie is out of the bottle, it is impossible to put the genie back in the bottle. So, now the whole world knows that if you want to get good search rankings in Google, you must have links pointing to your website from other websites on the internet. Everyone also knows that if you want better search rankings in Google, then you should strive to create even more links with the appropriate keywords in the anchor text of those links. Building Links There is always more than one way to skin a cat. There are many methods that people can employ to build links to their websites. 1. Register free websites so that you can create inbound links back to your own site. 2. Register new domains where you can place other links back to your website. 3. Leave comments on blogs. 4. Link Exchanges. 5. Getting your own listing in any of the directories that are available (dmoz.org, yahoo.com, etc.). 6. Signature File - getting involved in discussion forums and actually adding value to the discussions. 7. Submit product and service testimonials to those product distributors and service providers. 8. Social Networking - bookmark web pages through social bookmarking sites. 9. Link Baiting - creating a resource that people will want to link to for the benefit of their website visitors. 10. Article Marketing - writing an article and giving webmasters the opportunity to use your content on their website, IF they agree to post your link on the page with the article that they are using. 11. Press Releases - writing and distributing press releases online. 12. Buy advertising on a website. 13. Buy Link Placements on a website. Good Links Versus Bad Links I have always focused my attention on practicing White Hat Search Engine Optimization (SEO) techniques, instead of Black Hat SEO techniques. Most of you know what I am talking about, but I have been surprised a number of times when people did not understand what was meant by "white hat" and "black hat." So, for those of you who do not know what I am talking about, here is a brief description. "White hat" and "black hat" are references to the old serial cowboy westerns. The good guys always wore "white hats," and the bad guys always wore "black hats." By far, the link building techniques I employ most often are article marketing, press releases, and link baiting. I still frequently participate in forums and buy advertisements on other websites, but I do those for public exposure and not for search marketing. A Black-and-White Issue I have always been extremely concerned with White Hat techniques for building links to my websites and from my websites. "Providing good quality content as the foundation for my linking activities" has always been my golden rule. And, it still is that main driving force behind everything that I do. I like a black-and-white world where everything makes sense, and I had no reservations about my thoughts on this topic. The Morality of Paid Links A couple weeks ago, I was reading Matt Cutt's thoughts about paid links on his blog. Most folks in internet marketing know who Matt Cutt's is, but if you don't, he is a software engineer that works behind the scenes with Google in their quality department. Generally, if Matt Cutts says anything at all about improving your rankings in Google, you can take his words to the bank. Now, Matt has made it more than clear that we do not want to buy "paid links" to our websites as part of our link building campaigns. Paid links are a big no-no according to Matt. That is his advice, and I have always trusted it at face value. That is why I have focused my entire link building activities towards "content-driven linking." I was reading a discussion of paid links in Matt Cutts' blog at: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/ After I read Matt's thoughts, I continued reading the comments on the page. Many good points were made and responded to by Matt. It was an interesting read. And then, my black-and-white world was turned upside-down when I read the comments presented by Dan Thies of SEO Research Labs at: http://www.seoresearchlabs.com/ Here is what Dan said: Search engines are free to develop their algorithms as they see fit. They're free to decide which links they want to trust. Maybe I'm the heretic here, but I don't see anything wrong with Google identifying sites that are selling text links, and dealing with that however they like. I just hope Matt and his co-workers aren't expecting this to solve their problem. He's already seen that people are looking for better ways to game the system. I hope Matt and his co-workers don't seriously expect the entire web to start labeling paid links for them. The Google ideal may be that "the best links are earned and given by choice," but what does that mean? If I add text links to my favorite florist, favorite online casino, favorite unlicensed pharmacy, favorite travel site, etc. will Google decide that my site isn't worthy to participate in developing their "democratic" search results? If I "vote" for George Bush or Michael Moore as a miserable failure, am I no longer qualified to vote? What's the algorithm for determining intent, Matt? Intent Is Abstract and Important At The Same Time There is the rub. How can Google know the heart of the webmaster? They can't, unless the webmaster pointedly describes their intent. If the webmaster calls those links "paid links" or "sponsored links," then Google can know that webmaster accepted money to provide those links. If I buy advertising on a website, to attract potential buyers to my website, how does Google know my intent? Did I do it to get traffic from that website, or did I do it to game the Google results? They cannot know my heart. Even if the webmaster does not call the shown links "paid links" or "sponsored links," does the suspicion of the pay-for-placement model label the webmaster as a "bad egg?" How does Google really know if Dan is linking to a site because he wants to, or whether he has accepted payment for that link? They cannot know. And the final example on this topic comes from a poster named Shelley who participated in the discussion at: http://weblog.philringnalda.com/2005/08/19/ Shelley stated that she allowed two "paid links" on her well-respected blog, because she had a car payment to make. She traded on her brand name to get enough cash to make the car payment in tight times. Will she be penalized for selling "link space" to advertisers on her website? In Conclusion... Based on the comments that I have read from Matt, Shelley should not be worried about her acceptance of "paid links" on her website. If I have interpreted his comments correctly, her site will not be hurt by her outbound links. However, we are meant to believe that if you and I were to buy links on her page, then we should be concerned about our future in connection to the Google search results. So these questions remain for the search companies to figure out... Webmaster's Intent: 1 Which links are paid links, and which links are freely given links? 2 Who is selling links to pass on their PageRank value, and who is providing a useful or valuable link for their visitors? Link Buyer's Intent: 1. Who is trying to game the Google results, and who is trying to attract buyers to their website? 2. Who should be treated as a spammer, and who should be treated as an honest performer? This last question is the tricky one. We all know a spammer's website when we see a spammer's website. But, how can the search engines deal with the spammer's, without damaging the innocent in their quest for search results perfection? Yes, that is their problem, not mine. But, if Google's paid links policy hurts my own placement in the search engines, then the paid links equation becomes my problem too. More Questions Than Answers... Yes, it is true. I have posed more questions than what I have presented answers. But sometimes, the questions are more important than the answers. This is one such case. About The Author:
Bill Platt owns and operates the "Links And Traffic" Link Building program. Bill's team utilizes content-driven link building processes to develop links to his client's websites. People like this system and methodology, so much so that Bill has doubled his staff in the last eight weeks. If you would like to learn more about Bill's Links And Traffic program, feel free to visit his website at http://www.LinksAndTraffic.com or give him a call at his new office at 405-780-7745. Bill can be reached between 9am-6pm CST, Monday through Friday.
Article Source: thePhantomWriters Article Submission Service

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, February 05, 2007

Creating Inbound Links Is About More Than Just PageRank

Copyright © 2006-2007 Bill Platt


Is Google PageRank (PR) the be-all, end-all of the internet marketing equation?

I have wanted to discuss this topic for quite a long time. But, there is risk in discussing this topic. It is a lot like religion and politics. We are advised not to discuss religion or politics in mixed company, because people are willing to argue and sometimes kill, based solely on your disagreement with their religious or political beliefs.

In a lot of ways, Google PR is a matter of religion to some internet marketers. And for me to discuss this topic openly is tantamount to telling someone that his or her religion is false religion.

Many of my competitor's who read this article will run to their soapbox as soon as I am done, and they will pronounce to the heavens that I am an idiot.

I will let you be your own judge.


How I Draw My Conclusions

I own one website that has so far served more than 100,000 unique visitors in the first nine months of 2006. The same site has served well over one million page views, since the beginning of 2006. I often use the statistics from this website to measure trends in the marketplace, since the unique visitors and page views are of a substantial level.


The Importance of Google In The Internet Marketplace

Just because I am questioning the value of Google's PR in the grand scheme of things, it does not mean I am questioning the domination of Google in the marketplace.

The statistics on the previously mentioned website prove the dominance of Google against their competitors. Here is how my search engine referrals break down:

  • 37 Search Engines have sent me traffic.
  • 78.1% of visitors were sent from Google.
  • 18.4% came from Yahoo, Ask Jeeves/Ask, MSN
  • 1.5% arrived from AOL, Dogpile, Netscape, Earthlink, Altavista, Alexa.
  • 98.0% of all search engine referral traffic arrived from the Top Ten Referring Search Engines.

    So hands down, Google is the MOST important element for my search engine marketing.


    The Concept of Google PR

    Google has often said that their PR system is an integral part of their search algorithms.

    According to Google's own documentation, this is the definition of PR is as follows:

    "PageRank relies on the uniquely democratic nature of the web by using its vast link structure as an indicator of an individual page's value. In essence, Google interprets a link from page A to page B as a vote, by page A, for page B. But, Google looks at more than the sheer volume of votes, or links a page receives; it also analyzes the page that casts the vote. Votes cast by pages that are themselves 'important' weigh more heavily and help to make other pages 'important.' "

    Since PR utilizes a count of the number of links pointing to a website as a measure of PR value, professional internet marketers are very interested in acquiring large numbers of inbound links for their websites.

    PageRank values also allow you to decide whom you might want to do a link exchange (if you do such things).


    The Pros and Cons of Buying PR

    Professional internet marketers are also interested in getting links on pages with an already large PR.

    With Google's definition of PR, this makes sense.

    PROS:

  • When you buy links on pages that already have a significant PR, then you can gain that value with much less work involved.
  • You can bulk up your own PR in very short order.

    CONS:

  • Most sites that sell links on their high PR pages only do so on a monthly or quarterly basis, so this expense will be an ongoing for as long as you want to hold onto that value.
  • Depending on the PR of the page where the link is being sold, the cost can be very high. Many webmasters decide how much they will charge for advertising on their website, according to the PR assigned to their website.
  • The powers-that-be at Google warns us away from buying text links to increase our own PR. They warn us by example, pointing to the SearchKing devaluation in Google, as the result of SearchKing's paid linking scheme: http://news.com.com/Judge+dismisses+suit+against+Google/2100-1032_3-1011740.html
  • The Google power broker Matt Cutts stated matter-of-factly that we should not "participate in link schemes designed to increase (our) site's ranking or PR," as stated in the Google quality guidelines. He went on to say that Google "does consider buying text links for PR purposes to be outside our Google's quality guidelines." Read the full story in context here: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-PR/

    If you continue reading the comments on Matt's blog about the text links and PR, take a moment to search out the comment on the subject from Dan Thies (http://www.seoresearchlabs.com/). Dan asked Matt at the end of his post to define the "algorithm for determining intent" of the person placing the link. Bravo Dan.


    Google Toolbar Role In PR Monitoring

    Just like any discussion of paid links and PR, people tend to get fired up.

    Just the other day, I read a different thread on Google PR. In that thread at http://forums.Site-Reference.com, someone said that the importance of the Google Toolbar was the visible PR that shows up in the toolbar.

    ( PR value is only exported to the Toolbar at regular intervals. According to the "Page Rank Update and Export List History" page, the PR information was last exported to the Google Toolbar on September 28, 2006: http://www.seocompany.ca/PR/page-rank-update-list.html )

    The poster I mentioned above had stated that the importance of the Google Toolbar was the visible PR that buyers use to observe the trust factor attached to a website. He said that when people view the PR, then they would be assured that the company from whom they are about to purchase from is a reputable company.

    I had to disagree.

    The only people who have the Google Toolbar installed in their machine are online marketers. Perhaps that is a wide paintbrush, but it is not very far from the truth.

    Because most people who use the Toolbar are online marketers, then they will be the only people for whom the little green PR bar has any meaning.


    The Real Importance of Google's PR

    How many times have you heard that the value your website holds with the Google PR system will make or break your website's ability to gain traffic from Google?

    How many of you actually believe that?

    Here is where I am going to get people excited.

    I launched a site with zero PR in the first week of September. Within four days, I had page one placement in Google. Let me repeat that for you. Within four days of a website's launch, I had a website with PR 0, no official backlinks according to Google, and page one search results in Google!

    Okay, I admit... It was a memorial website: http://www.GoodbyeSteveIrwin.com

    I have several search keyword phrases in Google that produce page one, two and three results. Right now, the search phrase "irwin nature conservation" brings up my memorial site as the #3 result.

    You might tell yourself that I was able to do this because it arrived at a time when Steve Irwin was the only new story. But, I have created results like this with several websites. The Steve Irwin site was not a fluke. The Steve Irwin site was simply the fifth site that I was able to reach page one of Google search results within two weeks of site launch, with zero backlinks according to Google, and zero PR.

    So, let me ask you again how important the Google PR system is for guaranteeing the placement of your website on page one of Google's search results?

    You be the judge.


    Traffic Links Vs. PR Links

    Previously I mentioned my website that I use to measure trends in search engine marketing. Here is another interesting bit of data that I pulled from my website statistics for that domain:

  • 53% inbound traffic comes from search engines
  • 47% inbound traffic comes from links on third-party websites (not from search engines)
  • Both values exclude people who visited my site as a result of bookmarks for my site or clicks directly from an email

    If you break down the numbers even further, you will find the Google powerhouse is responsible for 41.4% of my gross inbound traffic from another website. And my website receives 47% of its traffic from websites that are not search engines.

    Wow! My website is getting considerably more traffic from links on websites that are not search engines, than what it is getting from Google! Interesting.

    Perhaps now you understand why I have always focused on getting permanent links on third-party websites that will send me traffic for years to come.


    How Many Links Are Traffic Links?

    This traffic arrived at my site from a total of 12,876 external webpages. If you ask the search engines how many links I have to my website on external pages, they will NOT show you a number of links anywhere near this number. In fact, MSN shows the largest number of inbound links to my website. And MSN only shows that I have 2,164 links pointing to my website. That is a number that is six times lower than the number of external webpages that actually send me human visitors!

    You would be surprised how many PR 0, 1 and 2 pages are actually sending me real traffic. Real traffic converts into real sales. And I am getting more traffic from these nowhere links, than what I am getting from the Holy Grail of Google.


    In Conclusion...

    Let me repeat the question that I opened this article with, "Is Google PageRank the be-all, end-all of internet marketing?"

    I offer a resounding, "No!"

    Is Google PageRank the Holy Grail of internet marketing?

    "No."

    Do you need to put your links on pages that have high PR?

    "No."

    I feel good that Google says that my PR is a Five. It makes me feel that I am gaining ground in the Google algorithms. And it boosts my human ego. But, for every keyword phrase that really matters to my business, I am already on page one of the search results, with a measly PR of 5, and no real backlinks to speak of according to the brilliance of the Google algorithms.

    About The Author:
    Bill Platt and his team provide inbound link building services. They don't rent links on high PageRank webpages. Instead, they develop content-driven pages, with keyworded links to their client's site, that speak to their client's target market. Bill has been utilizing the same methodology with all of his own websites since 1999. If these techniques work this well with Bill's sites, imagine how the techniques can improve Links and Traffic for your site. To learn more, call Bill at: 405-780-7327 M-F 9am-6pm CST or visit http://www.LinksAndTraffic.com. Reprint this article on your site, so long as all links are kept intact.


    Article Source: thePhantomWriters Article Submission Service

    Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Friday, January 19, 2007

    The State of Search Engine Advertising: Reality and Alternatives

    Copyright © 2007 Mel Strocen, All Rights Reserved


    The herd mentality never fails to amaze me. When the pay-per-click concept was first pioneered in 1997-98 by GoTo.com (now Yahoo! Search Marketing), it was years before the model was widely accepted. GoTo virtually created the market for pay-for-performance search single-handedly and redefined how businesses market online while other search engines sat on their collective hands. Then, when it was obvious that there was "Gold in Them Thar (PPC) Hills" hundreds of search engines entered the PPC arena and hordes of advertisers followed suit.

    As a search engine advertising model, pay-per-click was, and is, brilliant in its simplicity. In theory, it is a perfect way to bill advertisers based on consumer interest in their advertisements. Unfortunately, in real life money can bring out the worst in human, and business, nature. In today's search engine reality, pay-per-click should be on its last legs. But, as anyone with a knowledge of the search engine industry knows that simply isn't the case.

    Let's first examine the main reasons why advertisers should be abandoning PPC in droves:

    1. Cost

    According to the Fathom Online Keyword Price Index (http://www.fathomonline.com/120506.html), the average keyword price paid by online advertisers reversed a downward trend and increased 16.5% percent to $1.48 in the third quarter of 2006, up from a $1.43 per click at the end of 2005.

    That's one report. Another compiled by Click Forensics (http://www.eadp.org/index.php?q=node/14525) concluded that the average pay-per-click search-term cost was $4.51 across retail, financial services, health and fitness, technology and entertainment advertising. Whatever the average cost, it's too high for most small to medium-sized businesses.

    More stats and information on PPC trends (conflicting or otherwise) can be found at the links below:

    SEM Services: Trends and Predictions (http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/8-17-2006-105774.asp)

    DoubleClick Performics 50 Search Trend Report Q1 2006 (http://www.doubleclick.com/us/knowledge_central/documents/trend_reports/dc_search_q106.pdf)

    Advertisers Cutting Google AdWords Spending With Surge of Keyword Prices (http://searchengineland.com/070108-154101.php)

    2. Click Fraud

    You gotta love stats. In researching this article, click fraud was cited as running anywhere from a low of 2.0% to a high of 35% - a range guaranteed to put a smile on the faces of government flunkies that like to boggle the public with reams of out-of-context figures. Since stats can be massaged to support just about any argument, I won't bore you with a list of supporting links.

    If you're interested, just do a search on "Click Fraud percentages" or "35% Click Fraud" and review at your leisure.

    3. No Accountability

    PPC engines bill without providing any backup as to the origin of the clicks received. It's the "trust us" philosophy of business. Hey, if you're not savvy enough to look for, or find, fraud, then obviously there wasn't any. Why would you think otherwise?

    Not all advertisers, however, are content to accept the "trust us" approach to customer relations. Expect more suits like last year's class action suit against Google.

    Google Agrees To $90 Million Settlement In Class Action Lawsuit Over Click Fraud (http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060308-152034)

    Click Fraud Concerns Hound Google (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=1934655)

    Of the three reasons noted above, the first and third are known to any PPC advertiser and the second is widely ignored. Why? Because many advertisers would prefer to believe that the big PPC players are doing their best to monitor and control the click fraud problem. And, of course, they believe this because companies that make billions of dollars from PPC ads have no vested interest in padding their bottom line and making their investors happy. Also, there's the fact that the Internet is immune to scams and rip-offs. Plus, as we all know, history has shown that industries and companies that police themselves are above reproach.

    Is this the world we live in? Remember Enron and WorldCom? In the real world, the equation reads as follows:

    Money + No Accountability = YouRippedOff

    But to be fair, not all advertisers turn a blind eye to the threat of click-fraud. The sad fact is that most are either unaware there is a problem or are ignorant of the extent of the problem. These advertisers simply do not have the technical know how to investigate click fraud as it applies to them or to determine how it affects them - by which I mean how much money they are losing.

    Generally, this group is impressed with numbers. If they receive hundreds of clicks per day on a PPC ad, they are in click heaven. The same group is especially enamoured with all things Google. All other advertising models are measured against Google's AdWords and AdSense programs and found wanting. The problem is that only God and Google really know where their clicks and impressions come from, but why worry since both subscribe to "Do No Evil".

    So, how bad is click fraud? Worse than you think and worse than has been reported and, if you've missed what has been reported, the links below provide an overview:

    1/ The Sausage Manifesto By Jeffry K. Rohrs, December 18, 2006 http://www.sausagemanifesto.com/the-sausage-manifesto/

    2/ New Click Fraud Allegations, With a Twist By Kevin Newcomb | December 8, 2006, http://www.clickz.com/showPage.html?page=3624150

    3/ The Silent Epidemic of Botnets By Jim Hedger, December 6, 2006 http://www.sitepronews.com/archives/2006/dec/6.html

    4/ The Vanishing Click-Fraud Case By Ben Elgin, December 4, 2006/ http://businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2006/ tc20061204_923336.htm?chan=technology_technology+index+page_more+of+today%27s+top+stories

    5/ A True 2nd Tier PPC Click Fraud Story By Carsten Cumbrowski, November 15, 2006 http://www.searchenginejournal.com/?p=3996

    6/ Click Fraud The Dark Side of Online Advertising Business Week Magazine October 2, 2006 http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_40/b4003001.htm

    7/ Google, Yahoo Click Fraud Audits: When Will Advertisers Demand Them? By Donna Bogatin, August 25th, 2006 ZDNet http://blogs.zdnet.com/micro-markets/?p=381

    8/ Yahoo Used in SpyWare Click Fraud Scheme By Jim Hedger, Tuesday, April 04, 2006 http://news.stepforth.com/blog/2006/04/yahoo-used-in-spyware-click-fraud.php

    Still not convinced? then, listen to the following interview with the CEO of AIT Inc. Clarence Briggs who was one of the lead plaintiffs in last year's Google class action suit:

    http://www.webmasterradio.fm/breakingstory.php

    These stories should serve as a wake up call to any thinking person that a large number of clicks don't necessarily equate to sales or money well spent. And, if you think click fraud is just part of the cost of doing business, then there are thousands of scam artists out there who are ready to be your best friend.

    Can the PCC industry be saved? Not without accountability from the major players. In any other industry if you paid for something - say 100 widgets - you would expect to get 100 widgets. If you received 60 widgets, you would want to know what happened to the other 40. And, if the supplier said, "trust me, I sent a 100", you would demand proof.

    Even when there are external and independent monitoring agencies working on behalf of consumers and investors, fraud occurs, as in the case of WorldCom and Enron. When an industry polices itself - well, you figure it out.

    So, if pay-per-click is a poor choice for your advertising dollars because of rising costs, fraud and lack of industry accountability, what are the alternatives?

    1. Organic SEO (Search Engine Optimization): The blanket term used to describe the unpaid, algorithm-driven search results of a search engine, and the methodologies used to achieve such website rankings. (Source: http://www.mediumblue.com/newsletters/organic-seo.html)

    Entails a learning curve to become knowlegeable in accepted SEO techniques but worth the time and effort given that it's generally accepted that around 80%-90% of all traffic to websites originates from search engines. If time is money to you, hire a reputable SEO consultant. Use the savings from the money you would have spent on a PPC campaign.

    2. Paid Inclusion: Refers to the payment of a one-time fee for placement of a website listing within a search engine's paid or organic search results. Not as popular an advertising model as it once was (read not as much money in it for search engines) but could be poised to make a comeback.

    This model used to be the main revenue generator for a number of search engines with Inktomi being the best known proponent. Advertisers would pay an annual fee to appear in Inktomi's search results as well as the results of other engines powered by Inktomi. The hook was frequent crawling (every 48 hours) which allowed webmasters to see the results of their SEO efforts quickly.

    Paid inclusion hasn't died, but it has morphed with variations still being offered by Yahoo! and other engines. Probably, the most interesting variation was launched about 18 months ago by ExactSeek.com and the ISEDN (Independent Search Engine & Directory Network). In a nutshell, the ISEDN offers a hybrid advertising model which offers rotating top 10 site listing exposure across a growing network of smaller search engines as well as web, blog and article directories (currently, there are 260 ISEDN members) for flat fee rates. Pricing is based on time rather than keyword bidding. Buying a single ad listing for 3 months costs $12 and $36 for 12 months. The model is simple and affordable, offering all of the advantages of the PPC model without any of the drawbacks. More details at:

    http://www.exactseek.com/featured_listings.html

    3. Cost Per Action: From an advertiser's perspective, this could be the ideal advertising model since the advertiser would only pay for an ad when a specific action had occurred such as a sale or a registration. Back in June of 2006, there were several reports that Google was testing a version of its AdWords product using the CPA model. (http://www.clickz.com/showPage.html?page=3615476). Not much has been heard since. The CPA model is widely used in the affiliate and lead generation industries, but don't hold your breath waiting for wholesale adoption by the search engines.

    4. Pay-Per-Percentage: Put forward by Microsoft as a solution to both click and impression fraud. Below is a quote from a Microsoft research paper:

    "In this system, an advertiser picks a keyword, e.g. "cameras" and purchases, perhaps through bidding, a certain percentage of all impressions for that keyword. For instance, an advertiser might pay $1.00 to MSN Search. In return, the advertiser might receive 10% of all impressions for "camera" for 1 week. What does this mean? It means that for 1 week, one out of ten times that someone searches for the word "camera", they will see the ad."

    You can read the full abstract for an in-depth explanation. (http://research.microsoft.com/~joshuago/percentageworkshop-final.pdf)

    The Microsoft PPP advertising model was proposed, perhaps not coincidentally, around the same time Google was testing the CPA model. Again, not much has been heard since then.

    Will any of the above alternatives dethrone PPC? Time will tell. Which brings us back full circle to the herd mentality. If and when the advertiser herd twigs to the fact that PPC is a hype driven industry with very little substance and begins to move to a new advertising model, expect PPC engines to shift advertising gears faster than you can say "Who wants to stay a billionaire".

    About The Author:
    Mel Strocen is CEO of the Jayde Online Network of websites and founder of the Independent Search Engine & Directory Network. The Jayde network is comprised of more than 20 websites, including ExactSeek.com, SiteProNews.com, SEO-News.com, and GoArticles.com.


    Article Source: thePhantomWriters Article Submission Service

    Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,