AdWords Positioning

[AussieWebmaster]

There have been a lot of reports lately giving all types of numbers for positioning in AdWords... personally I work for getting number one as much as possible and optimizing for improving CTR and lowering cost that way... while also improving on page factors to get better CPA that way also.

Using both methods together gets you high traffic numbers at solid conversion costs.

[seobook]

you can further lower cost per click by going for a lower position. lower positions obviously have a lower cost (that is why it is in a lower position), and they also have another hidden bonus.

as you list further down the list the conversion rate shoots up because customers more adequately prequalify themselves by showing a greater demand to read down to the 5th or 6th or 8th ad.

[AussieWebmaster]

you can further lower cost per click by going for a lower position. lower positions obviously have a lower cost (that is why it is in a lower position), and they also have another hidden bonus.

as you list further down the list the conversion rate shoots up because customers more adequately prequalify themselves by showing a greater demand to read down to the 5th or 6th or 8th ad.
See I have not found this to be true...

[seobook]

when you think of the logic and mathematics behind it then it makes sense that the lower spots will be getting a better deal and better return. across small cases it might not work out that way, but if you scaled that across google's entire network you will find it to be generally true.

[Jeff Martin]

Gord Hotchkiss has an article on SEW entitled Inside the Searcher's Mind: It's a Jungle in Here! (http://searchenginewatch.com/searchday/article.php/3357841) that mentions this about sponsored links:
Like below the fold organic results, the number of participants looking at the sponsored links depended on the relevancy of the sites showing in the organic listings. If nothing relevant showed, 12 members of the group would then look at the sponsored links. But only 4 members would look even if they found a relevant site in the organic listings.

There is also a study put out by several interactive firms called The One-Two Punch: SEO and PPC at Clickz (http://www.clickz.com/experts/search/results/article.php/3347951)
which mentions that with Google and Yahoo! PPC ads fall way behind natural when it comes to perception of relevancy and what gets clicked.

Bearing these studies in mind I would have to say that, when relying on PPC, I need to be in a top three spot. Not just for syndication, but just for ANY opportunity to be noticed as the click rates seem to plumet after the top three.

[AussieWebmaster]

I have one term where I get more than double the clicks from PPC than I do free search and also the conversion rate is now better 17% for PPC 11 for organic and they all end up on the same page.

[seobook]

I have one term where I get more than double the clicks from PPC than I do free search and also the conversion rate is now better 17% for PPC 11 for organic and they all end up on the same page.

you probably have many terms where the opposite holds true too. the environment is too vast to say one or the other is constantly better, and that is why many people use both.

[AussieWebmaster]

you probably have many terms where the opposite holds true too. the environment is too vast to say one or the other is constantly better, and that is why many people use both.

I do have a bunch of terms that tend to convert better coming from the free side... but when I buy my way in to a term... and I scour my logs constantly... I find I get a bigger share of the clicks than from free searches... pretty much across the board... guess the top two listings are looked at as highlighted free searches!!!!!!!!!!

[OptimizeOnline]

On the whole I also tend to find that natural listings have a greater ROI than PPC. This is consistant across all market sectors.

[OptimizeOnline]

you can further lower cost per click by going for a lower position. lower positions obviously have a lower cost (that is why it is in a lower position), and they also have another hidden bonus.

as you list further down the list the conversion rate shoots up because customers more adequately prequalify themselves by showing a greater demand to read down to the 5th or 6th or 8th ad.

I can't say that I'd agree with conversion rates shooting up with ads that are positioned lower but such observations may be market sector specific as clicking behaviour can vary between market sectors.

For example, in some B2C market sectors particularly - such as travel, searchers often click through listings one by one - perhaps to find the most competitive price. Other searchers (such as business orientated searchers) are often more restricted with time and so their search behaviour may well be less extensive if they find what they are looking for after only a few clicks.

Also, you might be interested in figures that show an estimate of relative clickthrough rates for ads in positions 1 to 3 are:

Position 1 - 100 (Index)
Position 2 - 79.5
Position 3 - 76.3

This is actually based on Overture's figures they provide in their proposals. I expect these figures are based on OVERALL clickthrough figures they have obtained across their network. Although clickthrough rates for Google AdWords could be quite different it provides some level of comparison.

Interestingly, the relative clickthrough rates positions 2 and 3 have increased when compared to similar figures from a year or so ago. Perhaps that's indicative of the greater awareness of PPC ads?

[AussieWebmaster]

On the whole I also tend to find that natural listings have a greater ROI than PPC. This is consistant across all market sectors.
Yes I have definitely found that to be true... more clicks from PPC and decent ROI.. less clicks from ornganic but great ROI