• Stupidscript

    Great article! Filled with technical details and insider stuff, relevant, and a good read. It really brings home the points being made about big marketing campaigns, and what might be done to help capitalize on them. Well done!

  • Sarah

    Hi Vanessa, I would kindly like to point out that on all Dockers searches that I personally performed during and after the Super Bowl for their free pants giveaway that they appeared in top positioning for those keywords that are listed on Google Trends, which makes this article rather confusing.

    Being that the information in the article above, specifically “The Dockers site doesn’t appear for any of the four searches listed in Google Trends, although lots of other sites are taking advantage of the surge,” is inaccurate (perform the searches) it makes sense to revise the article to reflect the true accuracy.

  • http://ninebyblue.com/ Vanessa Fox

    Hi Sarah,

    The four searches that appear in Google Trends for Dockers are:

    dockers free pants
    dockers.com/freepants
    dockers super bowl ad
    http://www.dockers.com/freepants

    I did all four searches after the Super Bowl and the Dockers web site didn’t appear for any of them, although it did rank #1 for a search for [dockers]. It’s true that everyone sees different results at this point, so it’s possible some searchers did see dockers.com in the results for these, but I did not.

    I just performed the search again and the dockers site does appear on the first page (although not the first result) for three of the searchers (but not for [dockers super bowl ad]). Which makes sense as between the game and now, lots of links have likely accrued to the site with that anchor text. But my point in the article was that a brand wants that visibility immediately when the commercial airs. And when I searched that evening, Monday, and Tuesday morning, the brand didn’t show up on the first page for any of the four.

  • Sarah

    Vanessa,

    Ah – In reading your comment, it appears that I mistakenly interpreted your article as a Super Bowl vs. Search (as in PAID Search, not Organic Search) recap.

    My comments were solely based on the brand’s strong command/coverage specifically in the Paid Search/Adwords arena; not organic search. In knowing now that your article is geared directly re: organic, it makes sense.

    I assume that I am not the only one who interpreted the article in this manner as the title stated “Scoring Super Bowl 2010 Advertising: How’s the Search Visibility?” which to me in my profession automatically means SEM, not SEO. Any way to adjust the title to make it more clear to the masses? ;)

    Apologies for the confusion – my point being that Dockers did a great job at ensuring Paid Search coverage for their Super Bowl spot… and now I realize that your article is specifically regarding ORGANIC search visibility.

    Cheers!

  • http://ninebyblue.com/ Vanessa Fox

    Ah yes. I was scoring the Super Bowl advertisers on how well they did in organic search. I did mention a few instances where they had bought AdWords, but the article was solely focused on organic. I’ll see if I can brainstorm a modified title.

  • http://andybeard.eu AndyBeard

    Vanessa I am going to respectfully disagree

    Take SEL for example

    You have nice alt text with the logo on every page, but Google ignores it because you also have a text link “home” which it uses as a preference.

    I know maybe 15 different ways to get the text link first in the source code, but one of those ways is negative offset as the site highlighted has done, and another is using display invisible.
    Many of the methods would have the text totally outside the visible DOM, others would have it hidden in some manner, or appearing in a different section of the page.

    SEL for the main menu is using invisible text, using overflow hidden and a healthy amount of padding.
    That isn’t really any more legitimate than any other method as if you switch off images, the navigation is invisible in exactly the same way.

    John Mu and Matt Cutts seem to be in disagreement over this
    http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/020406.html
    Joost has some layout problems and still uses -9999
    http://yoast.com/google-speed-sprites/