PPC versus Organic Results

[respree]

Hypothetical question:

10 organic results are on page 1 of Google. So are 10 Sponsored Links.

Are there any statistics or studies which show which will gets more clicks?

I'm trying to get a feel for the ratio between organic and PPC clicks. Said another way, which is a surfer more likely to click on; the organic or PPC links? Said yet another way, if you have a top ten organic listing, does it make sense to pay for another sponsored one?

My initial thought tells me no, but I'd like to hear other viewpoints.

[Bernard]

You might find this previous topic of interest:

http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/forum/showthread.php?t=335

[bradbyrd]

the results will obviously vary, based on the quality of the listings in each of the sections. if the paid listings are great, and the organic search results are terrible, folks will lean towards the paid listings. in a real-world search, this will depend entirely on the specific keyword search itself, and the search type (ie. mindset/goal of the searcher).

for example, is it a commercial search (shopper) or an informational search (researcher)?

in the real world you can expect informational searches to lean towards the organic search results (unpaid). that's because most of today's advertisers using pay-per-click advertising are looking for direct response results -- ie. they want to sell something -- and the creative of their ads will reflect that fact. meanwhile, the researcher isnt looking to buy anything. the ads will therefore not "speak" to the researcher's goals, and the researcher will ignore them.

shoppers, meanwhile, are happy to choose paid listings because they directly "speak" to their immediate goals: to find and buy specific products.

invariably, a shopper who is performing a search will get both informational and commercial listings in the organic search results. because ppc advertisements wil on balance be shopper-centric, the paid listings will logically, on average, speak more directly to that shopper's goals.

put another way, ppc advertisements "work" for folks looking to buy things specifically because ppc listings are on-balance almost always going to be more shopper-oriented than organic search results.

thats my 2cents, based on experience.

[respree]

Thanks Bernard for the link.

Bradbyrd, that's an interesting point you make between people searching for information versus product, one that I had not previously considered.

Let's modify the assumption for the sake of discussion. What if the organic listings were all clearly products? Would you still there would be a heavier inclination to click on the PPC product listings (i.e. more than 50%)?

[bradbyrd]

depends on page layout, and creative.
which group is listed on top?
what color are the listings?
how does the title/description read?
how long is it?

again, the answer is always going to be "depends"...

on a related note, consider the broader question of comparing SEM and SEO traffic (paid versus organic) and weighing the value of strategies for each. its often argued that organic results get, on balance, more clicks than paid listings. why? probably because there are at least 10 organic listings on a page, and ALWAYS fewer paid listings. if you total up the average paid % versus organic % it may be skewed in favor of organic, but that leaves many stones unturned:
- compare NUMBER of listings
- compare TYPE of search (shopper vs. researcher)
etc.

but consider this: the top PAID listing can garner 5-15% of the clickthroughs, on its own. i guarantee you that that is, on balance, higher than any single organic listing on the same page. and more importantly, you have NO GUARANTEED CONTROL over if/when/where you appear in organic search results, or for which keywords you appear. you can TRY to appear for things, but there is CERTAINTY. PPC provides CERTAINTY. i KNOW i can appear on specific, relevant keyword searches if i pay to do so.

that, in a nutshell, is the difference between the two. its not an argument that one is more valuable than the other -- but its an illustration of the unique strengths of paid over organic.

in contrast, you can argue that organic has lower recurring costs than paid strategies. once you build a successful organic strategy and rank for a target keyword you dont have to pay per click for the traffic that ranking generates. true. so ask yourself what's more important: CERTAINTY, or SAVINGS. most companies answer both, which is why they pursue both at the same time... separate strategies, with separate core value propositions...

[dannysullivan]

We've run a session on gettting the balance right between paid and organic listings at the SES show -- a write up from the first one is here: Balancing Paid and Organic Search Listings (http://searchenginewatch.com/searchday/article.php/3095871) and has more thoughts on this topic.

It's also come up in other sessions that I've moderated. One key thing that comes up is people often feel it's useful to be in both places. They seem to find that a searcher might first see their paid listing, then their free one and be inspired to click on that "second reference." Or alternatively, the opposite may happen.

[respree]

Great comments, gentlemen. Much appreciated.

[Jeff Martin]

Here is an article on Clickz outlingn why its important to have overlap between your natural and PPC listings:
http://www.clickz.com/stats/big_picture/applications/article.php/3348071

Interesting to note is that as low as Adwords ads are used on Google (according to the study) if you weren't participiating in Adwords you could be missing 28% of users righ toff the bat.

-
Jeff Martin

[NFFC]

> if you weren't participiating in Adwords you could be missing 28% of users righ toff the bat.

Or, if you don't have a SEO stratagy you could be missing out on 72% of users?

[respree]

Excellent article. Thanks very much, Jeff.

That's the one I was looking for. :o