<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Search Engine Land &#187; Nick Abramovic</title>
	<atom:link href="http://searchengineland.com/author/nick-abramovic/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://searchengineland.com</link>
	<description>Search Engine Land: News On Search Engines, Search Engine Optimization (SEO) &#38; Search Engine Marketing (SEM)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 17:14:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Automated Keyword Bidding? More Like Automated Money Sink</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/automated-keyword-bidding-more-like-automated-money-sink-21569</link>
		<comments>http://searchengineland.com/automated-keyword-bidding-more-like-automated-money-sink-21569#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 11:07:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nick Abramovic</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Channel: SEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paid Search]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/?p=21569</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Search Engine Marketing agencies scale not by creativity or innovation but by overhead. This is a fact that many agencies deny but is the cold hard truth. This is true even for agencies that have developed in-house technology or license technology from others.  Even the &#8220;advanced&#8221; agencies are not very sophisticated – they will use [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Search Engine Marketing agencies scale not by creativity or innovation but by overhead. This is a fact that many agencies deny but is the cold hard truth. This is true even for agencies that have developed in-house technology or license technology from others.  Even the &#8220;advanced&#8221; agencies are not very sophisticated – they will use rules-based bidding that works half the time because they still require humans to double-check if they actually care about their client’s bottom-line.</p>
<p>With these bidding systems being rules-based, they require account managers to make customizations (I believe the term is &#8220;settings update&#8221; after hearing a recent sales pitch) depending on the account/campaign.</p>
<p><strong>So what are the flaws with rules-based keyword bidding? Why is it not effective? </strong></p>
<p>Most rules-based bidding can only accept a limited amount of data (no matter what search marketing agencies may sell you on) – for example: 7 day, 30 day and lifetime &#8220;snapshots&#8221; of how your keywords are progressing. The agencies will check to see your cost-per-acquisition on a 30 day period, measure how much they need to change your position based off of the last 7 days, and see whether something’s happened and your keyword needs to be paused based off of the lifetime.</p>
<p>It is impossible for agencies to deliver on the &#8220;100,000 keywords X 5 match types X 3 ads X multiple networks&#8221; sales pitches because it requires an enormous amount of data. Take a look at the executive team of the agencies&#8230;last I checked, an MBA does not understand <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Support_vector_machine">machine learning</a>. This requires a PhD from a school such as Stanford and anyone who actually knows what they are doing is working at Google and not at a search marketing agency (sorry, a PhD from a state school does not necessarily qualify as &#8220;World Class&#8221;).</p>
<p>If an agency wants the system to look at more data, that will require more hard-coding of rules (&#8220;look at 45 days and weight X amount&#8221;, &#8220;look at one year and weight at Y amount&#8221;,…). This approach is very flawed, because accounts may vary and some might only have 6 months and would not quality for the one year rule – others may have dramatically different cost-per-clicks and cost-per-acquisition.</p>
<p>Many agencies will use keyword bidding to determine a change of the keyword bid by a percentage increase/decrease which may suffice if your keywords are hovering around $1 a click. But you will see serious, volatile changes if your cost-per-click averages around $10 (I have had some accounts like this). A percentage increase/decrease can dramatically increase the bid by several dollars (versus cents) and can result in killing accounts.</p>
<p>Another area to watch would be when you have different cost-per-acquisitions for different products, campaigns or keywords. If you are selling various products, you might have specific margins and be able to spend up to X amount, depending on the product purchased. Rules-based systems wouldn’t be able to handle this because they are based on CPA targets.</p>
<p>Agencies would have to go into their &#8220;settings&#8221; and enter a ballpark number for your overall average sales  and make measurements from there. This will mean that most of your keywords will not be accurately tracking to their appropriate CPA &#8212; they will either be too low, which means you are not getting all the volume you deserve, or they are too high and you are actually not turning a profit for that sale.</p>
<p>So whenever you hear a sales pitch from an agency with &#8220;proprietary technology&#8221; and are ROI-focused do what I do and say &#8220;K, thanks, bye!&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://searchengineland.com/automated-keyword-bidding-more-like-automated-money-sink-21569/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
