Search Engine Watch
SEO News

Go Back   Search Engine Watch Forums > General Search Issues > SEM Related Organizations & Events
FAQ Members List Calendar Forum Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-03-2004   #1
rustybrick
 
rustybrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 2,810
rustybrick has much to be proud ofrustybrick has much to be proud ofrustybrick has much to be proud ofrustybrick has much to be proud ofrustybrick has much to be proud ofrustybrick has much to be proud ofrustybrick has much to be proud ofrustybrick has much to be proud of
Opening Keynote by Danny Sullivan - Live from SES San Jose

Danny Sullivan begins to say that his past keynotes were all about telling the audience who owns who and which engine powers which search. But ironically he quickly goes over the "who powers who" diagram.

SEM Threats:
- Contextual Pollution;
Results only come up for a keyword search I desire. This works differently then viewing ads on a Web page based on browse mode versus "quest mode." Danny said "contextual ads" are not "search". Just because an ad is CPC-based doesn't make it search. Lumping the two together pollutes the data. Are you a performance marketer or a search marketer? Its important to separate these two types of marketing tactics out. One is search and one is contextual. Just because the search engines are providing this technology, doesn't mean they should be looked as - as one.
- Agency Money / Branding Buck;
There is branding value here based on the GoTo's 2001 study and IAB's study in 2004. He says the pie of a company's marketing budget isn't bigger, but you need to get a larger piece of that pie. The search companies are providing support for this primarily on the PPC (ad side). But SEM is not only ads its also SEO, which is Public Relations. The support on the SEO side is an issue, other then PFI, there is no support.

SEO Lives:
- SEO should have died
- Google has kept SEO alive and revived it (he notes a thread at WMW that discusses how 3 bots revived SEO.
- You can sell ads but people want the PR (SEO) too

He then goes into a case study, a funny example of his 3 and 5 year old boys. His children call flash lights "flash torches" because Danny is American (flash light) and his wife is English (torches). So his kids are not hitting either market with the name "flash torch". So they can buy ads but they get nothing on the SEO side.

What is Needed for SEO Support:
Danny basically pulled the info from an SEW thread (t=197);
- Algorithm shift warning
- More authoritative info
- Express Spam Report
- Public spam reporting and checking
- Paid support program
- Search query stats
- Complete crawls
- Partnership in attitude on both ad and free side
- Commissions? Protection from direct sales? Certification?

What's the incentive for search engines to do this?
- Helping to win the ad spend but can't be ad-only shop
- It's not exactly like newspapers. You do need PR support and can do it without violating the church/state divide.

SEM Reputation Problem?
To get more support, we need to deal with the reputation problem in our industry (reference the SEW thread in the forums). He also quotes the marketing guru, Seth's blog entry. He pleads that SEO is not a black art. He discusses the SEO contest and how link bombing worked. The customers when shopping for an SEM firm are afraid. Fast Company releases an article about the Google Dance 2003 with the title "Shmoozing with the Enemy."

He goes through some spam examples on the Web, with tons of links at the footers of pages. The search example was "san jose radio flyer" in Google. Then he did the same search in Ask Jeeves. The text is not hidden, but pages are filled with text that mean nothing to the searcher.

He says there are good SEM firms and good stories.

What do customers want?
- Traffic that converts (not just top rankings), check references
- Not to be scammed (maybe someone should start a public forum telling people about these companies)
- Not to be banned

Solution:
- Code of Conduct? "I will do nothing to harm search engine relevancy" but this is all very subjective.
- Enforcement/Review
> seopros.org
> seoconsultants.com
> any standards are open to debate

One thing Danny thinks will help is if the search engines themsevles get involved.
- We need something, not sure what.
- Search engine involvement in proactive way would greatly help (goes both ways)
- Will it lock some out? Some people will be locked out but they will have to deal with it. Its not just a white hat versus black hat. He said there is a lot of gray in the industry, because its a very complicated area. I wonder if the audience understood "White versus Black"

He now gives the audience a peep talk about all we have done. SES will be giving out marketing awards in the future to reward us.
rustybrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2004   #2
NFFC
"One wants to have, you know, a little class." DianeV
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 468
NFFC is a splendid one to beholdNFFC is a splendid one to beholdNFFC is a splendid one to beholdNFFC is a splendid one to beholdNFFC is a splendid one to beholdNFFC is a splendid one to behold
>- Express Spam Report
>- Public spam reporting and checking

I assume he also defined spam?

>What do customers want?

Wrong focus IMHO, we already know what customers want and its not world peace and the end of hunger, its traffic. What users want is the only game in town.

>- Code of Conduct? "I will do nothing to harm search engine relevancy"

Tell ya what, if he could get the search engines to sign up for that we may have a winner.
NFFC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2004   #3
St0n3y
The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know.
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Here. Right HERE.
Posts: 621
St0n3y is a name known to allSt0n3y is a name known to allSt0n3y is a name known to allSt0n3y is a name known to allSt0n3y is a name known to allSt0n3y is a name known to all
Its important to know what the customer wants while also being able to present to them what they NEED. Sometimes a meldign of the two will have to be accompolished.

i.e. I WANT world peace, I NEED to be safe, I'll be very happy with a safe neighborhood my kids can play in.
St0n3y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2004   #4
dannysullivan
Editor, SearchEngineLand.com (Info, Great Columns & Daily Recap Of Search News!)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Search Engine Land
Posts: 2,085
dannysullivan has much to be proud ofdannysullivan has much to be proud ofdannysullivan has much to be proud ofdannysullivan has much to be proud ofdannysullivan has much to be proud ofdannysullivan has much to be proud ofdannysullivan has much to be proud ofdannysullivan has much to be proud of
Quote:
I assume he also defined spam?
Nope. The spam reporting things I noted came from what people here had posted that they wanted. In terms of spam, I said how difficult it was to define -- did an example of how you could have a pledge not to hurt search engine relevancy, then have what some would consider a spammy doorway page, but if it took you to a product that fulfilled the search, some would argue what's the harm? The main thing I stressed was that spam is so difficult to define and sometimes requires flexibility that involving the search engines would be helpful, in my view. Will try to expand on this more once I get past the show.
dannysullivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off