• Pat Grady

    Bing CPCs for branded, high-CTR traffic, are too high (relative to G). Their editorial process can be a time vacuum (and therefore an ROI vacuum). Their interface has made a ton of really great progress over the last year. Bing dist partners are horrid (so is the transparency into them).

  • Pat Grady

    The Rev, ROAS columns that popped up recently, are a nice thing to finally see. It is very clear that a team of interface folks at B have changed the culture there in the last year. I hope they do the same for the editorial review process soon. Sometimes we get wide swaths of PPC disapproved because we’re using tracking URLs that B decides they don’t like – talking to their outsourced reps, to get them to understand the issue, has been a recurring nightmare, one time taking several months to resolve. If your platform has others using it (which good ones don’t?), and one of those users runs afoul of B’s rules, they can’t seem to understand that everyone’s not guilty by association.

  • lauralouise90

    I use both Bing & Google – I much prefer the Adwords interface so there is the additional time in using Bing, but the CPAs are a lot lower on Bing – transactions might be few and far between compared to Adwords but you get a better ROI.

  • Billy McAllister

    I couldn’t agree more. Once you have fine-tuned your AdWords
    campaigns, a direct import into Bing is a no-brainer for quickly increasing
    leads/conversions. While the amount of conversions are lower (50% lower), the
    CPAs are close to the same but still worth the time and effort.

    For the individuals dealing with editorial issues and
    headaches, I cannot comment on that since I do not spend much time or huge
    budgets on Bing.