• Duane Forrester

    Weren’t they clueless last month or the month before when a similar study was released?

  • http://www.periscopix.com allydent

    It sounds like there’s a pretty big selection bias on this though. I know there are arguments that you should appear in both the naturals and the paid listings on your main keywords, but most marketers would prefer not to use PPC on core keywords they rank well on in the organics.

    So by default, looking at lists of their top PPC keywords will exclude their top-ranked organics. Right?

    Assuming their SEO is targeting a smaller number of top keywords, looking at the list this way around will always bring up results like this. Starting with a large PPC keyword list, then wondering why a very small number of SEO keywords don’t appear in it, when the PPC would deliberately be avoiding them…

  • http://www.d4bmarketing.com djfink2001

    I should be surprised by this but I’m not.My experience has been the same. Many F500 are lacking even their basic blocking and tackling skills on SEO

    Pretty shameful for this day and age


  • http://incrediblehelp incrediblehelp

    I am sure the numbers are about right, but I would still love to understand how SpyFu picks their organic keywords. Whenever i use their tool, the keywords are WAAAAAY off from an organic perspective.

  • http://www.brickmarketing.com nickstamoulis

    Excellent post Matt and it is truly amazing to me that in 2010 you are reporting these kind of SEO numbers with regards to large companies. From one perspective it may be good for SEM folks like myself, since I don’t work with enterprise companies and it makes the competition much less for some of my clients. Large brands tend to have excellent rankings due to the trust that these brands have build over the years online. Simple on site optimization would often help propel these sites to the top of the SERPs.

    Anyway, I referenced your post and linked to it in my SEO blog on a post that I just added this morning: