 SEO
News From StepForth Search Engine Placement Inc.
Wednesday, April 7th, 2004
Dear valued subscribers,
Welcome to StepForth’s weekly SEO update.
» If you wish more information then
please view our news
section.
» View StepForth's latest search
engine optimization and search engine placement services
» Images not loading? This could be
a result of your Outlook settings. View
the online version.
» StepForth now contributes articles
to both Search
Engine Guide and WebProNews
» Do you want to hear about the news
as it comes? The SEO Blog
is our daily events post.
Sorry Subscribers! : Here is the corrected version of today's newsletter. Enjoy!
| Highlights
of the Week: We Bet it won't be Found on Google
or Yahoo... |
| The US Justice Department is
serious about its crackdown on online gambling. Last year
they forced the major credit card companies and US based Pay-Pal
to stop processing transactions for online gaming. Now they
have reached into the legal departments of the worlds two
largest search engines, Google and Yahoo.
Traditionally, the US Government has had a major problem
in their fight against online casinos. Since millions of dollars
are at stake and taxation is a major issue for most casino
owners, most online casinos are located in territories outside
of American legal jurisdiction. If the Government can't target
the casino owners directly, the US Feds are going after websites
and search engines that provide advertising space for online
gambling companies. Citing the Interstate
Wire Act of 1961, also known as the Federal Wire Act,
the Justice Department is targeting website owners who "aid
and abet" what the US Government considers an illegal
activity. This week, the US Feds scored a major victory in
their fight against offshore companies taking US dollars when
both Google and Yahoo announced they would no longer run advertisments
for online casinos. What this means exactly is still in question
and at the time of this writing, I have had the most difficult
time getting anyone to offer a solid opinion, much less an
attributable quote that actually tells us what's going on.
As quoted by the Associated Press, Overture spokesperson
Jennifer Stephens attributed the casino ban to a "lack
of clarity in the current environment" and a desire to
conform with its parent company's policies. Yahoo stopped
displaying banner advertising for Online Casinos in late 2002.
Google spokesperson David Krane was quoted by AP stating the
ban will, "...help provide the best search and advertising
experience for its users." (ed note: uh-huh) In other
words, neither Overture or Google like this but are accepting
it, at least as it applies to advertising in the United States.
Yahoo will continue to serve casino advertising opportunities
in 14 countries outside of the United States.
There are many questions raised by this move and, as mentioned
before, very few answers are forthcoming. We would like to
know if this move is targeted at paid-advertisments only or
will the traditional listings be effected? What about US-based
online gaming such as off-track betting sites run by the New
York's Off Track Betting Corporation? When will the US Justice
Department go after independent website owners running banners
for online casinos?
Can the Feds Control Traditional Listings?
This is a good question, one we don't have a lot of answers
for. The short answer is, of course they can, if they really
want to. Google has already bowed to pressure in other cases,
most notably one brought by the Church of Scientology against
Google for websites that gave away Scientologist secrets and
other materials considered copyright infringement by Scientology.
Google directly manipulated its traditional listings on behalf
of the Scientologist organization by removing links to contested
materials. In thier defense, Google did put in place a link
to www.chillingeffects.org,
a pro-First Amendment website founded by the Electronic Frontier
Foundation and several law school clinics. A note from the
US Justice department will likely carry as much weight as
a note from Scientology's team of lawyers. The same can be
said for Yahoo.
On the other hand, traditional search engine returns pages
are much more difficult to manage for algorithmic search tools.
The advent of personalized and local search features will
likely make it easier for search engines to limit listings
that cross legal barriers. Another recent example is the US
Government's fight against Canadian online pharmacies selling
prescription drugs to US customers at a fraction of the cost
charged by US pharmacies. Both Google and Yahoo have stated
they would no longer accept advertising for online pharmacies
though Google continues to display AdWords for the sector.
Both Google
and Yahoo
continue to display literally millions of traditional listings
under the keyword phrase "online drugs". We don't
see why there would be any difference for online gaming.
There is another aspect to this case that should not go unnoticed,
especially by site operators living outside the United States.
US Law vs International Law
Recently the United States has made a practice of ignoring
International laws, treaties and agreements when it suits
the aims of the US Government's agenda. Nevertheless, the
ban on casino advertising is being disputed at the World Trade
Organization by the tiny Carribean nation of Antigua and Barbuda
where over 5% of the population is employed by the online
gaming industry. Antiguan government officials are arguing
the ban constitutes a restraint on trade and is designed to
protect the massive gaming interests of American casino operators.
They may be right and may even win the case but as Canadian
provinces depending on lumber revenues have learned, being
right does not necessarily mean getting the US Government
to comply with International agreements it signed. Even if
Antigua wins the case, as is likely under International law,
chances are it will make little difference while costing the
tiny state a lot of money. Regardless of International laws,
treaties and agreements, the US Goverment considers its national
interests to trump all else. Like Canadians doing business
with Cuba, (a perfectly legal practice in Canada), online
casino operators and those providing advertising for them
may find themselves in deep trouble with US Immigration, which
is now run by the Department for Homeland Security.
|
|
|
Important ©Copyright Note: readers are welcome to republish the content from StepForth Weekly newsletters
but we do require credit in the format that follows: "Article by <author>, StepForth Search Engine Placement Inc." |
|
Major
Player Updates: Is Google Getting "evil" with Gmail? :: Yahoo's First Quarter |
 Is Google Getting "evil" with Gmail?
On April 1st Google announced their new and free web based email system amongst rumors of an April fools joke. The program, Gmail, the account size limit, 1 Gigabyte! It wasn't too hard to believe that Gmail was a joke, in fact it seemed downright certain. It didn't help when we heard that Google was planning on scanning every email in the system and adding keyword matched Adsense advertising to each mailout... that just seemed way too 'overtly evil' for Google to be seriously considering it. After all, Google's motto (as I just love to remind everyone) is "Don't Be Evil!" But alas, the StepForth staff were in complete awe to discover that every feature of Gmail announced was in fact true! What are they thinking?!
What is the Issue?
Gmail's automated system will scan a user's email to find content that it can match to applicable AdSense advertisements. Once it finds an ad that matches the content of the email it will place the advertisement on the side of the user's email. The issue is the scanning... Google claims that since the scanning is entirely automated they are respecting the privacy of their users. Since this is an unprecedented move into the limited grey area of privacy rights, the issue has prompted some fairly raw emotions.
Hitting the Fan
It didn't take long for privacy advocates to smell blood at Google. The World Privacy Forum, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, and the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse are among the most prominent privacy organizations raising serious flags over the email match advertising policy at Gmail. On April 6th an open letter was sent to Google from 28 privacy organizations requesting that Gmail be put on hold while significant privacy concerns are considered. Countries such as Canada, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands also voiced concern within the open letter.
Will Google stick to their guns? Do they realize the evil precedent that will be made if Gmail's Adsense advertising goes ahead? Google may not be conciously choosing an evil objective (that is for the world to decide), however, you just know that others will take advantage of this marketing tactic if it is approved. I shudder to think what ethically challenged spammers will be able to do with this technique!
Yahoo! Posts First Quarter Results (2pm PST today!)
This is hardly a suprise; Yahoo is doing well!
See below for their first quarter results and links to financial statements:
|
2003 |
2004 |
Total Revenues: |
$282,948,000 |
$757,786,000 |
Cost of Revenues: |
$43,132,000 |
$281,705,000 |
Gross Profit: |
$239,816,000 |
$476,081,000 |
|
Net Income: |
$46,703,000 |
$101,212,000 |
|
| Pay
per Click Tip: AdWords Update |
 Recently Google has made some adjustments to AdWords
such as appearance and pricing models. Here is a summary of a few
of those changes.
Google AdWords New Look
Recently Google changed the appearance of their Google AdWords dropping
the ‘post it’ look for a more streamlined clean-cut
approach. AdWords Ads now look much more like their neighbors to
the left, the natural SERPs, which makes them appear less like paid
advertisements. Could this be an attempt to increase click through
rates? Google Claims it is simply cleaning up the look, and from
what I have seen with client PPC campaigns, there has been no drastic
increase in CTR’s since the new look has been in place. If
it does begin to increase clicks, I don’t really see a downside
to this. After all, advertisers want their CTR to increase, and
are only billed their daily budget anyways, so it won’t cost
advertisers any extra. If this is a ploy strictly to increase CTR’s,
then to me it simply seems like common business sense. Should this
change have a negative effect on the AdWords revenue stream, I would
imagine that Google would revert back to their old look.
Google AdWords Smart Pricing
To put it simply, Google says that it will decrease the amount you
pay for less relevant clicks. As stated by Google, “ a click
on an ad for digital cameras on a web page about photography tips
may be worth less than a click on the same ad appearing next to
a review of digital cameras.”
This is great for advertisers, hearing that they may pay less for
less relevant links. But the real question is why are the ads being
displayed there in the first place? In my mind, rather then introduce
a complex pricing scheme, would it not be easier to simply place
ads on totally relevant sites only?
Gmail and AdWords
As soon as Gmail goes live, Google will analyze every email sent
and place relevant AdWords ads along side. This will increase ad
impressions, but the impact it will have on click through is yet
to be seen.
Like many Internet users, I have a hotmail account for to help
reduce junk email in my outlook inbox. I only use the hotmail address
when submitting online forms when I am unsure if I may receive mountains
of spam as a result. I must say I have never clicked on a single
advertisement that I have seen along side an incoming hotmail email.
So will it be different for Google? My thoughts are the ads posted
along side Gmail messages will likely draw very limited amounts
of qualified traffic, possibly making this a waste of money to advertisers.
Since Gmail is still in a testing phase, there are no useful information
on traffic numbers, but once it goes live I am sure there will be
plenty to say. Hopefully, as it does for their search and content
networks, Google will give advertisers the option to prevent their
ads from being displayed in Gmail. |
|
Not to Miss! Software Feature |
|
| In the Client Spotlight
this Week: Chiro-Plus :: Orange County
Chiropractic Clinic |
Living in Orange County California can be interesting. The traffic,
the intensity and stress and the smog from neighboring Los Angeles
can all add up to a major pain in the neck. That's where StepForth's
newest clients, Chiro-Plus can help.
Chiro-Plus' "...fully dedicated staff & doctors offer
gentle, drug-free care to provide you with the best health care
experience in your life." (from Chiro-Plus.net). If you are
seeking in chiropractic
services in Orange County, look no futher than Chiro-Plus.
|
| Weekly
Quick Tip: From Each According To Their Abilities
… |
As one’s business develops there is
often a growth in what the business is called on to offer.
Take for example, a chiropractor. As a chiropractor you have
a very specific and specialized practice, however that practice
will naturally attract people with additional needs. These
needs may vary from massage to general physiotherapy.
As a businessperson there are two main reasons that you will
want to be able to give your clients a solution. First, whenever
you can provide a solution you stop them from going elsewhere.
Any time a client has to seek out their own solutions there
is a risk that you will lose them as a client. If you can’t
provide a physiotherapist for them they will have to find
their own. If, in searching, they find a physiotherapist who
also does chiropractic then you stand the risk of losing them
to an “all-in-one” solution.
The second reason you will want to have a solution is for
the additional revenue it can provide. Any time you can provide
a solution someone will be willing to pay you for it, either
with a referral fee or with reciprocated business. Either
way this is a winning situation for you.
So let’s say you’re that chiropractor and that
you get asked periodically for massage therapists and physiotherapy
specialists – what should you do? There are a couple
solutions: you can go back to school for a few more years
and become an expert in these additional fields OR you can
outsource. Going back to school is generally not the best
option. First, because it’s costly in both education
costs and in lost revenue from not working during that time;
and secondly because you will never be able to be the best
at everything.
If you choose to outsource you again have options. You can
hire people who are experts in these various areas, or you
can refer your clients to them. If you hire them you are assuming
additional costs such as salaries, rent for offices, etc.
If you refer your clients directly to them you assume no additional
costs but don’t stand to make as much money.
There is no hard answer as to which route you should take
in this scenario, as there are too many factors to consider
in a general example like this. You will have to consider
what the market is like in your area, what the various costs
are, etc. That said the conclusion is still the same, don’t
try to do it all yourself. It is easier, more efficient, and
more profitable to do what you do best and leave others to
what they do best. If you refer your clients to the massage
therapist down the block and they in turn refer their clients
to you, you don’t have to go back to school, incur numerous
costs, and spend years of your time to improve your client
base – it will happen through referrals. And if they
pay you a referral fee instead, you can be earning revenue
from massage while providing a chiropractic adjustment to
a different patient.
This philosophy is not exclusive to chiropractors and can
extend to virtually every industry. We have web designers
who don’t want to spend years learning SEO and then
hours every day in keeping up with the current developments
in the search engine world. They refer clients to us, we provide
excellent service for them, their clients are happy, we never
mention any other designers to their clients so they retain
their client base and make a commission off the referral.
There are arrangements like this in virtually every industry.
They are beneficial to all businesses involved and most importantly,
they are good for your business because they are good for
your client. Which means not only do you have more money today,
you have a loyal client into the future.
|
|
|
| The
Net Reality: Read the Fine Print before you
Cash the Cheque |
HEY CANADIANS
-- PAY ATTENTION TO THIS ONE...
Receiving a cheque in the mail is a nice thing, especially if
it appears to be a rebate for items or supplies purchased. We
received a nice cheque in the mail last week for $4.50. Though
the amount was very small, it looked like any other rebate cheque
we might receive. Written from the Toronto Main Branch of the
Royal Bank of Canada (one of the largest banking institutions
in the world), the cheque was issued by YPCOM.CA
based at 3012 17th Ave. SE in Calgary Alberta. The memo section
of the cheque stated that it was written for Internet Services,
(something we provide on a regular basis).
Our accountant did not recognize the name of the company so the
cheque ended up on my desk for confirmation. That's when Ross
the boss noticed the small print on the back of the cheque which
reads (and I quote), "Please list my company's information
as shown on this cheque in the YPcom.ca online business directory.
I am over 19, and authorized to place this advertisment by
depositing this cheque and by doing so I agree to pay
$37.95 per month for this advertisment. I agree to the Terms of
Offer and the Pre-Authorized Debits ("PADs") Agreement
which were enclosed with this cheque and authorize Telco of Canada
Inc. to bill such fees on the company's phone bill, or to process
such fees by monthly PAD against the company's bank account, which
I have signing authority over and into which this cheque is deposited.
I give my continuing but revocable authorization to process such
PAD payments according to the PAD Agreement. I understand that
I can cancel and receive a full refund by simply calling 1-800-549-0015
within 120 days." This notice was written in very small print
and is reproduced verbatim here.
A call to YPCom produced a fellow in Arizona who assured me this
promotion was totally legal in Canada. As it turns out, it is
not legal in the United States (which is a good thing). This is
so legal in Canada, apparently major banks are doing it as well!
Don't cash these cheques or any unsolicitied cheque. While this
is legal, the offer will not produce strong results for advertisers.
YPCom's medium stinks as does their methods. With a Google Page
Rank of 3/10 and very few listings, an ad here will not likely
do much for your business except cost your business money.
Again, this is legal but likely shouldn't be. The folks at YPCom.ca
should be ashamed of this tactic and advertisers should be wary
of any medium that feels the need to either trick or buy your
business for $4.50 CDN
|
|
|
|
|
Visit the SEO BLOG Regularly for Daily SEO Tips & Updates
If you have any questions please
do not hesitate to call the StepForth staff:
Toll-Free: 1-877-385-5526 | Local: 385-1190
http://www.stepforth.com
To unsubscribe from this weekly newsletter simply reply to news@stepforth.com
and include "unsubscribe" as the subject
|