Must Read Posts

Vinny Lingham’s Blog

AOL Only Adwords - Marketplace & Revenue Impact

So, if you haven’t heard by now, AOL is receiving their own version of Google Adwords (Private Label deal).

I’m not going to rehash the background and deal info, referenced at SearchEngineLand, but instead, I’ll try to explain what I see the market impact as being.

I’ve long argued the point that we should be able to price keyword by partner on all the major search engines, as they all have quite different conversion rates and “Not every click is created equally”, to paraphrase. The AOL deal has forced Google to make this move, and I think it will probably hurt their margin numbers and not just their revenues. Overall, it’s probably close to a zero sum gain as the money will flow to AOL, but their cut will just reduce. I haven’t done the math, but they might be just slightly worse off on revenues, but definitely down on margin.

Also, this impact will hurt many of Google’s partner sites that relied on high conversions from AOL to “slip” clicks through the door at higher than market value (respective earning or value per click), because of the fact that marketers cannot price each partner differently.

This is quite a complicated post, so please bear with me - I’ll try to explain this as simply as possible.

Currently, when buying Adwords ads, you pay a single price for a click & keyword that goes to Google’s distribution network.

For example (and I’m using hypothetical, BUT REALISTIC numbers here), let’s say that a keyword received 100 clicks and the breakdown by partner is as follows:

25 Clicks from AOL - 5 Conversions
50 Clicks from Google - 4 Conversions
25 Clicks from Google Partners - 1 Conversion

Total Clicks = 100 x CPC of 25c = $25 in costs
Total Conversions = 10 divided by $25 in costs, leaves us with a $2.50 CPA (Cost Per Acquisition)
Assume an average position of 3 and as you can see from above, AOL has the better conversion rate.

Let’s assume that your breakeven point is $2.50 CPA. Now, because Google runs a single blind marketplace, there is no price discrimination, which means that there is cross subsidization of keyword value (you pay an average price for everything, yet some clicks are worth more and others are worth less).

For the record, our logs indicate that AOL has the best conversion rate across all Google partners, and this simple means that if there is a separate marketplace for AOL, that prices across the Google Adwords network (especially direct) should fall, IN THEORY (see conclusions).

Now, let’s assume that we removed the AOL numbers:

50 Clicks from Google - 4 Conversions
25 Clicks from Google Partners - 1 Conversion
25c CPC x 75 Clicks / 5 conversions = $3.75 CPA

By AOL moving out of the marketplace, this would effectively mean that the remaining traffic would become too expensive, because AOL would not be cross subsidizing it (and obviously, they know this already, and that’s why they want their own marketplace). This would mean that prices would drop in order to offset the drop in traffic quality.

What would this mean for AOL?

$2.50 CPA x 5 Conversions = $12.50 / 25 Clicks = 50c CPC - almost DOUBLE what Google was raking in for them by cross subsidizing, is what the merchant would be willing to pay direct on AOL, because of the higher conversion rate.

Now, here are the possible conclusions vis a vis Google CPC’s:

1. Google CPC’s will drop as marketers move their spend directly onto AOL and adjust ROI’s according on Google. This will impact Google’s financials, as they will have to pay out a lot more money to AOL.

2. Google CPC’s will increase as dumb money floods the market because marketers are either too lazy or overworked to load AOL campaigns (highly unlikely in the long term) and instead they make it more profitable for Google to show Adwords direct ads for AOL, than AOL marketplace ads. I doubt this would occur though, but it’s a possibility.

3. Google CPC remain unchanged as AOL take-up rates are too low to impact the overall conversion number in the short to medium term.

So, logically speaking, by removing the “bane of mankind” *according to me* (Cross Subsidization) from the Adwords system, we as marketers will be able to align ourselves far more closely with the value per click.

Where do I get this insight from? Well, as an affiliate marketer, we have to watch the earnings per click very closely. EPC is a key metric and we are also able to distinguish (using our proprietary technology) the different conversion rates and therefore effective EPC’s per network partner for all the search engines. This data allows us to derive very accurate statistical models and also understand how the market is interpreted (well, as best as possible) by other players.

Every cent we spend is our own, so we have to ensure that we’re as closely aligned to value per click or EPC as possible, and therefore we’re very excited about the AOL prospects, but realise equally that it’s a lot of work.

I think this is a great move by Google and I applaud them. They’ve thrown the gauntlet down to the other search engines, and let’s see how they respond!

My Top 10 Most Read Posts of Q1 (Jan-Mar)

I was very happy (ecstatic!!!) to see that I FINALLY broke through 1,000 feedburner subscribers - only 300k+ more to go to catch Michael Arrington! The daily readership on this blog is nearly 4,000 unique visitors and currently is ranked as the #1 Media & Marketing Blog in South Africa. South Africa is still in the process of catching up with the rest of the world, and although technically I’m South African, this blog is Internet focused, and geographically agnostic! Arguably, I spend more time out of my home country than in it!

One of the things I have quickly realized is that the stuff I write about is very much more niche and driven around a very unique community of (very smart) people, many of which I know personally. I seriously doubt that this blog will ever become massively mainstream, which was never the intention, and I’m sure that comes with a whole number of pressures, none of which I could probably deal with right now (including the need to “dummy down” some of my more strategic industry posts). Thanks to my loyal readership I write posts only when I feel inspired to and I try to ensure that they are deep and meaty, something that mainstream blogs can’t often do due to the industry insider knowledge that is required to understand some of them.

A quick roundup of all the most popular posts this past quarter on this blog, based on pageviews (in order), justified my previous statement:

1. The Cookie Report
2. Profit Sharing Report
3. Best Business Books of Our Paradigm
4. HBD Capital invests in incuBeta
5. Clash of the Titans - A Fresh Perspective on how “the others” went wrong
6. Web Apps vs Desktop Apps
7. Affiliate Summit West 2007 - Opening Session
8. The Future of Search Engines
9. Meet the Super Bloggers of Search (Pubcon)
10. Pubcon Keynote Address - Malcolm Gladwell

Funnily enough, only three of these posts are actually from Q1, which makes me happy to know that my readers are still reading the old (and still good :-) ) posts that were written when the readership was not as high as it is now, relatively anyways :-)

Return on Effort with PPC Campaigns

I has barely finished the eComXpo session and no sooner had James from the InsureMe Blog expanded (stole :-) ) the themes of one of my upcoming blog posts that I was planning! Thanks a lot James! I’m going to write about it anyways!

Basically, James already details what I said during the show, but just to clarify what I mean by Return on Effort, here is my short and simple take on things:

The question was asked as to whether or not it is worth spending time on 2nd tier (non-Google/Yahoo/Ask/MSN) search engines and running campaigns with them.

There are a couple of key issues here, one is market growth (momentum) that Google in particular has, and the second is ROE (Return on Effort)
Let’s make the following assumptions for the US market search engine market (taken from VastPlanet):

Google Market Share = 53% (with AOL)
Yahoo Market Share = 28.1%

MSN Market Share = 10.5%

Ask Market Share = 5%

The Total for The Titans is a whopping 96.6%.

Now, until Snap, Become, Miva & all the other 2nd tier engines send traffic out of the massive :- combined 3.4% market share that they have & I can’t see the logic in advertising with them, and here is why:

If in one of our campaigns at Clicks2Customers, we have to allocate a campaign management resource to setup a campaign on a 2nd tier engine (which we don’t deal with). Now let’s assume for a decent sized researched campaign of 5,000 keywords with dedicated ad copy (as all engines are different and have differing editorial rules), it takes them 100 hours to do (and that’s quick, using our technology and existing processes).

Let’s assume that currently on Google, we are running with 50,000 keywords and generating $100k a month in sales and in our category, we’re getting 5.3m impressions (searches) per month. All things being equal, by the ratios above, the maximum searches we would get out of ALL the 2nd tier engines combined, would be 340,000 searches with 50,000 keywords. Let’s further assume that we went with the largest 2nd tier engine (not even sure who that is) and the engine had a 20% market share, then I’m going after a market of 68,000 searches related to my product/service - if you divide that further with the fact that you’re only loading 5,000 keywords - it would get scary, so I will neglect to include this in my calculations.

Again, ceteras paribus, if you just work out the back of the envelope stuff, then the absolute maximum that this traffic is worth to me if it converted even just as well as Google does is $1,283 in sales (which I highly doubt, as there are large amounts of Clicks Fraud on 2nd tiers). And that’s with a 20% market share which is not even possible in such a fragment tail-end market.

So, assuming I could spend my 100 hours on Google, and push my campaign performance up by just 10% with an extra 5,000 keywords, then I would be pushing the needle on my revenues by $10,000 (a nearly 400% increase in ROE), why would I bother with 2nd tier engines? I know the argument (from the 2nd tiers) is that it’s cheaper, etc - but at the end of the day, spending those hours improving clickthrough rates and other metrics like conversions etc, will translate into greater savings anyways on the majors like Google - so I don’t buy that argument.

Most Google PPC campaigns I have seen are not even 50% at peaking in terms of digging into traffic in the long tail, and most people are so worried being on other engines that don’t matter and waste their time there. Mine the Google keyword gold instead, and when you’re finished making triple digit gains, then go visit Yahoo and then MSN, and then finally, Ask.

Lather, rinse & repeat.
Someone today said to me that no one ever made a fortune by worrying about the numbers after the decimal. I think that this definitely holds true in this case.

My Summit TV Interview

For those of you that didn’t catch my Summit TV interview in November 2006 on DSTV, after incuBeta won South Africa’s Top 100 Technology Award, here it is…

Also, my brother recorded the following clip on his cellphone on the night of the awards - he’s understandably quite excited:

Top 20 Reasons why Web Apps are Superior to Desktop Apps

The Synthasite team recently had a strategy & planning session, and one of the things we did, was to look at the real benefits of why users (we hope) would use a platform like Synthasite, instead of Dreamweaver or Frontpage (i.e. Web App vs Desktop App).

There is a screencast demo of Synthasite that we produced from the sessions, but also, here is the list of reasons that we came up with as to why Web Apps are superior to (most) desktop apps – and herein lies the future of the web! The clip is available on YouTube here and in higher res format here.
And here are the 20 reasons why Web Apps are superior to Desktop Apps!


Never installed

Browser based software never requires installation processes or hard drive space. It lives in a virtual cloud in the Internet and this means that whenever you launch it, it always has the latest version. Ajax has made it possible to deliver Desktop-like look & feel, and functionality, with no loss of performance!

Updates are seamless

Instead of having to patch each and every individual user, the patches/upgrades are applied to the server and each user received the updated version the next time they log in.

No legacy

This is a big issue for traditional software vendors. Users who purchase previous versions of a software almost always will result in legacy versions lying around which need support (which is costly). The problems relating to legacy software are almost limitless, and often is not efficient for both the vendor or the customer.

No admin rights required

Finally, a world where the network administrator in the company does not have to approve the installation of your software!

Available anywhere, anytime

Ok, so the anytime comment is a stretch, but that’s only until Adobe’s Apollo gets here (here’s hoping!). The same way that people access their email from any browser, web apps are exactly the same.

Platform independent

This opens a wider market for software vendors – no longer do they have to build technology around a specific platform and limit their market (or incur additional costs to build for another platform). The browser is the platfom and therefore I believe you will see increased uptake in OS’s like Mac OS and Linus, due to the increased availability of Web Applications.

Less environmental conflicts

There are certainly going to be a lot less bugs in Web based software, due to the fact that it is not depending on any of the hardware or environment settings in the OS that may usually cause a problem.

Enables social possibilities

Many Web Apps are creating chat facilities and the ability to share your work in real time. This removes the previous “stand-alone” functionality that use to exist with most installed desktop applications. The world is becoming more and more social - people want to collaborate and work online together - Web Apps allows this, painlessly.

Lower cost of sale

No boxes, printed manual, expensive shipping costs, CD’s, distribution channels, middlemen, etc. Desktop apps are going to be more economical to produce and will result in a lower cost of sale!

Usable from inexpensive PCs

$100 Laptops, here we come! What do you need a dual core processor for, if you’re running a thin client application? This opens up a world of cost savings for both companies and consumers, especially in the field of productivity apps (obviously, not gaming!).

Piracy-proof

Here is a big one. Imagine a world without software piracy. That world is here, and Web Applications are the solution to that problem. Next problem, please!

No bad debts

Sofware companies are often owed money from distributors, that invariably go bust from time to time. With Web Apps, the cash is collected upfront and as long as the customer pays, the account is in good stead.

Low-cost support and maintenance

Given that the browser is now the platform, operational support costs and maintenance for Web Application providers will drop substantially. No need to have expensive operating system gurus on hand to help with installation problems. Also, using products like the Amazon EC2 cloud, will allow scalability, without a proportionate increase in costs.

User’s data is kept safe in hosting environment

Although this is probably not going to be true for all Web App companies, but using providers like Rackspace or Amazon’s EC2 cloud will go a long way in reassuring your customers that their data is safer than on their desktop!

No Viruses

No installation, means no viruses. Start shorting all those Anti-Virus stocks! Enough said!

Low cost global distribution

No more channel reliance. Most software companies make it or break it, depending on their channel. Forget that – focus on the biggest channel of all – the 1 billion users online!

Lower software price entry point for customers

Given the benefits above, you will see more products such as Basecamp and Synthasite that will offer far greater value than their desktop equivalents.

Access to the entire assets of the Web (APIs, widgets, messaging, collaboration)

By being wired into the web, Web Apps are able to integrate seamless into API’s etc and are a lot more customizable, than traditional software applications.

Mobile is here

Compiled desktop applications are going to have a hard time being adapted for mobile devices. Web apps are ready made (in most cases).

Widest potential audience

For all the points above, this basically unlocks markets for software vendors that previously were inaccessible due to technical reasons.

Vinny Lingham is an International Award winning Entrepreneur & Search Engine Marketer. He is currently CEO of Synthasite, a Web 2.0 Startup.

Learn more about Vinny »
RSS Feed

Visit the RSS page to add my feed using your favorite feed reader or subscribe using your email below:

Powered by FeedBlitz
Recent Categories Archives
View All » View All »
Conferences August 2008
General July 2008
Startups June 2008
Featured May 2008
Synthasite April 2008
Blogging March 2008
Search Engine Marketing February 2008
Media Coverage January 2008
Web 2.0 December 2007
Internet Strategy November 2007