Written by Scott Van Achte and published at 8:50 PM
Near the end of 2006 Yahoo officially unveiled the new back end for Yahoo Marketing Solutions, widely referred to as the ‘Panama’ Update. Since then they have been slowly allowing the upgrading of accounts from the old into the new system. While not everyone has had a chance to have their accounts switched over, it is expected that all will be upgraded by the end of this quarter.
After several months of waiting, this new backend is a welcomed change as Yahoo finally moves into the future but as with any new system, it is not without its pros and cons.
New System Pros
The new system is certainly a great improvement over the old. While adjusting to a new interface and ranking algorithm may take a little time for advertisers, the end result will present more relevant ads to the searchers, which will ultimately mean a higher quality of visitor and should provide a better bang for one’s buck.
Previously you were stuck with only one live ad for any given phrase; now you can create multiple ads for a given ad group. With the ability to have multiple ads for each phrase opens the doors to easier testing of which ad copy is better suited for your ads and prospective clients.
Ad approval is now instant for most ads and keywords. While there is still a “pending approval” process for some sets of phrases, in many cases your ad changes and keyword additions are now instant. No longer do advertisers have to wait a number of days for their ads to go live.
With the old system, the level of geographic targeting was very limited. Under the new Yahoo Panama the options are much more sophisticated. For example, there is an option for blocking entire continents for your ad campaigns. Rather than selecting each continent/country you want to appear in, if you are only trying to avoid one specific region, you can easily block it from your campaign.
The geo targeting options have also expanded to allow for more specific ad targeting. Advertisers now have the ability to target specific states and provinces – a feature previously unavailable. Canadian advertisers were forced to advertise to the US even though they wanted ads only to appear for the Canadian market. This update now provides the option to target Canada only – a big plus for any advertisers who are only able to sell in the Canadian marketplace.
New System Cons
There are a few negative aspects that have been widely noted in many forums and by Yahoo advertisers. As with any new design and back end, it is expected that there will be some wrinkles. Most of the problems are relatively minor, and for advertisers on top of their campaigns, these should not present any major issues.
One of the downsides most discussed is the transfer of account stats from the old system to the new. Once your account has been transferred, the new system will not log any of the old system historical data. While this information is still accessible by logging into the old interface (which is made read only), it would certainly make more sense if stats were available under the new account login.
Another issue campaign tracking. After the switch has been made, as long as you do not change any tracking settings everything should continue to work as normal; once you adjust the analytics or tracking options, you will need to replace your tracking code with a new piece of code provided by Yahoo. There have been reports where after the account is upgraded, the conversion stats no longer appear and the code needs to be immediately replaced. While not everyone seems to be having this problem, it is certainly a bug worth noting. If you have not yet upgraded, or upgraded but not checked your tracking codes, it would be best to tackle this issue right away to ensure everything will work correctly.
There have been some reports that after the account transition some ad titles, descriptions, and even keywords, have been disrupted. Upon upgrading your account be sure to check all your ad copy and phrases to ensure that they are still correct or you could end up spending money on incorrect phrases, or damaged ad copy.
The system is certainly not without its flaws, but generally the interface is much cleaner and certainly more functional. While the ability to edit many more aspects of one’s account are now in place, it can be a little daunting to find the right place to make the change. Some items such as campaign and ad group settings are more difficult to find than they need to be, and require more steps than is really necessary. As an example, below I compare the steps required for the simple task of renaming a campaign for Yahoo versus Google:
Yahoo
Log into your account. You will be presented with your account dashboard.
Click on the name of the campaign you wish to change
Click on “Edit Campaign” in the top right.
Click “Edit” at the top right of the “Campaign General Information” box.
Change the account name.
Click “Save Changes”.
Then click “Dashboard” to return to where you were.
Google AdWords:
Log into your account. You will be presented with the “All campaigns” view.
Click the checkbox beside the campaign you wish to rename and click “Edit Campaign”.
Enter a new campaign name.
Click “Save Changes” (also brings you back to where you were).
Why is it that Yahoo takes 7 steps to do something that Google can do in only 4? Not to mention multiple campaigns edits. If for some reason you wanted to rename all your Google campaigns at once, it would still take only 3 main steps plus 1 step for each campaign name changed. For Yahoo you would need to repeat all 7 steps for each campaign. These same basic steps are also required for other edits such as campaign budgets, start and end dates, and to turn a campaign on or off.
This example is not really a big deal in the large scheme of things, but is simply an indication that while Panama is a large improvement, there is still much room for refinement. As Yahoo moves forward into 2007 I am sure we will see more advancements and changes to the main navigation.
Click Through Rate Increased by New Ranking Algorithm
Along with an entirely new backend system loaded with new features, Yahoo has also adjusted the way in which they rank ads. The new ranking algorithm is very reminiscent of Google AdWords, and miles away from the old bid-for-position model previously used. Under the old algorithm an advertiser could dominate the top ranking simply by having deeper pockets. Now under the new Panama algorithm to guarantee top spot for a competitive phrase, not only may you still need deep pockets, but you also need the right phrases, relevant ad text, and a quality website – giving an opportunity for top rankings to those with smaller budgets.
According to comScore there has been s significant increase in the overall click through rate of Yahoo paid ads since the introduction of the new ranking algorithm. Compared to the week ending February 4, the last day of the old system, the week ending February 11 saw a 5% increase in clicks. By February 18th the total increase in clicks was reportedly at the 9% mark; a sign that the new system is of significant value to advertisers, and of course Yahoo. Now these figures may have been skewed slightly with both Valentines Day and Presidents Day falling into that range, however, “Bank of America analyst Brian Pitz said in a research note that he expects click through rates to grow about 15 percent to 25 percent starting in the second half of the year.”
What has been specifically responsibly for the increase in traffic? While it may be too early to know for sure, the most likely reasoning is ad quality. Under the old ranking schematic it didn’t matter what your ad looked like or where you directed traffic, if you had the dollars, you had the rank. Now that there are other factors at work, the most relevant, high quality ads, take the rank, and searchers are obviously noticing the increased relevance and clicking through.
Scott’s personal take on the new system
Generally I have to say I like the new system. It makes account management easier than using the archaic system we had all grown used to. The new system is much more streamlined and clean cut compared to the old. That said, when compared to the Google AdWords, it still falls short. It’s a great first try, and within the next year or so I expect to see some more adjustments to make navigation and functionality improved. For a system with so much hype and such a long time coming, it seems less desirable than expected. Editing ad copy and URL’s is still much more cumbersome than its competitor Google, requiring more steps. The account transition could have been made smoother and items such as historic stats should have been made more easily accessible and transferred over to the new account. Since its early days the Google AdWords system has evolved a great deal, and the same can be expected from Yahoo. Now that they have implemented a more scalable and comprehensive system, it will certainly improve as advertiser feedback is received.
One irrelevant feature, if you can call it that, is that I am very grateful for the removal of the “security code” requirement when signing into the account. While I can appreciate the reasons for having it there in the first place, these security codes that were popping up everywhere really did drive me crazy, and it is nice to see this condition being removed. What does it mean to an advertisers account? Well, really nothing, but it does put a small smile on my face.
While it is not without its short comings, this new system is a large improvement and I for one welcome it with open arms.
Yahoo has revamped its paid inclusion program and it appears to be the forefront of a push to revitalize this archaic submission format. More on the history of paid inclusion and my opinion later, for now let us review the changes.
What Does it Cost to Submit to Yahoo? The price to submit a URL is $49 which guarantees (for sites that are accepted):
Addition to a database of sites "that powers algorithmic search results for Yahoo! and other major web portals such as AltaVista and AlltheWeb."
URLs are refreshed (essentially re-indexed) on a 7 business day rotation.
Access to a new personalized reporting centre that provides: - top 10 click through information itemized by the keyword clicked (see sample here) - trend charting which provides a visual reference for ups and downs in traffic - best practices SEO information
What are Yahoo's Guidelines for Paid Inclusion? Yahoo's guidelines are extensive but nothing surprising. To sum it up don't bother submitting your site if it:
offers no value to Yahoo's readers
is composed of a significant percentage of affiliate content
endangers users
has offensive content
has pop-ups, pop-unders, or exit consoles
is designed purely to drive traffic elsewhere
infringes on copyrights or trademarks
So essentially Yahoo is exactly like any other search engine; provide them with unique content that adds value to its index and it won't bat an eye.
Is Paid Inclusion at Yahoo Worth It? It is too early to say if there is any certain advantage to submitting a website to Yahoo with paid inclusion. I submitted one URL into the new system and will provide feedback as soon as I have anything to report.
Aside from inclusion, there are of course the added reporting capabilities in this reinvented service. The analytics that Yahoo provides may be of benefit to some users but the information provided is hardly very useful. After all, increasing how many times a listing is clicked on is only a part of the analytics process; you still need to ensure they stay on your website when they get there. All of the information provided by Yahoo is far more powerfully attained, and your money better spent, using affordable traffic analysis solutions like ClickTracks.
Paid Inclusion: The Past and the Future Most major search engines dropped paid inclusion services back in 2004 amidst pressure from users and industry leaders. Many felt it provided an unfair end result. After all, is paid inclusion fair to websites that cannot afford to use paid inclusion? Should their path to results be any slower than those who can afford it? I can understand the need to embrace capitalism wherever possible but the fact is that search engines are "supposed" to cater to the masses in a totally fair manner within organic results; in my opinion paid inclusion flies in the face of that.
Jeremy Zawodny of Yahoo defended paid inclusion here but his defense is questionable since paid inclusion undeniably provides an unfair advantage; not for rankings but simply for the speed in which a paid site is indexed versus an unpaid site. Add to this that Yahoo is providing additional statistics and reportable data that the non-paying public cannot take advantage of and frankly this all smells rather sulfurous. Food for Thought Back in June 2004 Jim Lanzone, VP of Product Management at Ask explained why Ask.com dropped paid inclusion. He explained that the "improved freshness in the search results achieved by its Teoma technology" meant they no longer required site owners to submit URLs that Ask's site spider had missed. He further noted that "keeping this program alive just because people would pay for it would be hypocritical." With this reasoning in mind, by revitalizing paid inclusion is Yahoo saying that their spider is insufficient to index the web? On the other hand, is Yahoo's bottom line so bad that Yahoo needs to reinvent and push this money grab?
I am intrigued to see how this new service launch is received by search engine users and industry leaders and I invite your views on this matter.
Google took a big step recently by finally allowing Canadian companies to become Adwords Qualified; a stamp of a approval previously denied to Google's ignored neighbors. Yes, that is ever so subtle bitterness you sense. Thankfully however I can begin to put to rest my ill will now that Google has come to its senses.
To become a Qualified Company in the Google Advertising Professionals program, a company must:
Have a billing and mailing address in a country where company qualification is available.
Employ at least two Qualified Individuals in the program. Individuals must be qualified under the main company-registered My Client Center account and not their own account. See the requirements for becoming a Qualified Individual.
Build and maintain the minimum 90-day required total client spend (spend requirements vary by country) for the company's My Client Center account.
South Korea's Fair Trade Commission has ordered Google to change the wording of Adsense contracts to comply with domestic fair trade law. Here is a snippet from the YONHAP News article that broke this news and handily describes some of the more crucial issues:
The FTC highlighted several clauses in the AdSense contract that violate domestic fair trade laws, of which one provision allowed Goggle to "reserve the right to refuse participation to any... participant at any time in its sole discretion."
It also pointed towards an unfair clause, which said that "Google makes no guarantee regarding... the amount of any payment to be made."
Concerning revenue division, FTC noted the disadvantage towards website operators, as one clause stipulates that "no other measurements or statistics of any kind shall be accepted by Google," when calculating payments.
In addition the Korean FTC is forcing Google to switch the jurisdiction for all legal complaints from California to a location within South Korea.
How Will Google React? The online market in South Korea is booming so there is little doubt Google will be as accommodating as possible with all of the issues raised. Still I have to wonder what will happen if they get stuck on an issue that can be chalked up to a cultural difference in conducting business. After all, how can Google guarantee payments?
Is Adsense as we know it going to prove compatible with the South Korean marketplace, or will it need a complete overhaul? I am very interested to see what happens next.
Complete Question: "How about duplicate content for resellers where the manufacturer or producer of a product describes a product with technical details and so on. Do I have to rewrite text, create my own descriptions? Or is Google able to recognize that i have to use the original text from the manufacturer and not to punish me?"
Answer: Google has a powerful algorithm that may be able to determine "right" or "wrong" duplicate content. That said, I would not rely on it. In this scenario I would rewrite the product descriptions wherever possible and improve the optimization of each description while I was at it. After all, many default descriptions are boring and less than ideal for rankings anyway.
But allow me to remind you of one thing... If you are talking about a shopping cart system where you have thousands of widgets and they all appear using similar text then DO NOT be overly concerned about this duplicate content; it is not a threat to your rankings. Yes it is usually ideal to have unique content but in this case just concern yourself with balancing this duplicate content with added value within the rest of the site. You can do this by adding unique pages dedicated to each widget. These pages can be created whatever unique content you want (diagrams, specs, reviews, etc.) but they ultimately serve to introduce a particular widget to users (and search engines) while providing direct links to the appropriate section of the cart.
Answer: Excellent question. The fact is there are a few ways to ensure you are chosen as the primary content provider. The best option is to require that all who syndicate your content provides a inline text link directly to your original posting of the article. For example they would say something like this at the end of the article included in a link: "SEO Answers #15 by Ross Dunn". This way everyone who repost's your article is sourcing your content as the original.
If you do not source the original release in this manner the website who publishes your article and gets the most attention for it (via links or publicity measurable by Google) will have a better chance of being chosen as the original content provider.
In conclusion, unless you strictly enforce your ownership to the article you may not get the final credit when Google is forced to guess who published it first.
I have a lot to learn about sending out email newsletters so I constantly keep an eye out for interesting articles on this subject. Well here is one from Lyris that really spoke to me and I expect it will for many of you who are in the same position I am (a newbie).
Essentially the article boils down to one conclusion... using CSS in a newsletter is foolhardy. Why? Well apparently a large portion of email clients and web-based email portals (Hotmail, GMail) ignore CSS. Personally this is bewildering to me since CSS has been so widely adopted but I have long since learned that some things just don't make sense. As a result, any newsletter formatted with CSS may be entirely unreadable when viewed by an email client; which does not exactly bode well for the success of a CSS-driven newsletter.
Anyway, this is likely a very obvious fact to any of you with more than average experience with newsletters out there. But for those of you who are new to newsletter creation read this article and follow the advice: format the whole newsletter with inline HTML and you are off to the races. You can expect StepForth's SEO newsletter to be significantly better as a result of this simple change - all CSS has been removed and reformatted in HTML. I am now looking forward to seeing the first readable edition of the Step Forth Weekly Newsletter in GMail next week :-)
Written by Scott Van Achte and published at 12:44 PM
For some time now a feature not previously part of Google AdWords, has been requested by many webmasters and online advertisers. Last Friday, Feb 16, Google finally implemented a small, but notable feature that will make advertisers lives a little bit easier.
We have always been able to pause Campaigns and AdGroups, and now this functionality has been applied to individual keywords and specific ads! Before there was no way to temporarily remove keywords - one would have to delete it entirely and re-add it at a later date. Now by simply pausing keywords and ads, it will allow you to retain all statistically data, and easily reactivate at a later date.
It is certainly nice to see Google listening to the advice of its users. I, along with many others I am sure, had specifically requested this feature, and it's great to see it implemented.
Written by Scott Van Achte and published at 12:27 PM
A copyright lawsuit filed by Copiepresse last year over the publishing of articles, images, and links to Belgium newspaper websites will not only see the material removed, but will also cost Google in fines M&C reported this morning.
Along with the removal order, Google also has a hefty fine to pay of $32,390 per day for every day the copyright material was posted in Google. This retroactive total could be in excess of $4.7 million.
While Google argues they are simply sending traffic to the news sites, many of these Belgium sites do charge for access to their articles and images after a certain date, where it still ends up remaining in Google's Cache.
The date has not yet been set for Google's appeal.
Written by Scott Van Achte and published at 12:25 PM
If you are looking for an alternative to YouTube, MSN has officially launched the public beta version of soapbox. For several months now it has been available on an invitation basis, but now the general public can go see what’s been happening.
The beta launch was announced with a very brief blog post yesterday by the "soap box team".
With all the copyright issues and controversy surrounding Google and YouTube one must wonder if the same issues are possible with soapbox, and what MSN has done, or what they will do, to help avoid copyright issues.
Written by Scott Van Achte and published at 12:24 PM
Google's Valentines gift to more than a million webmasters who have already joined is the removal of the beta status for webmaster tools. Vanessa Fox made the announcement early this morning at the Official Google Webmaster Central Blog.
"In addition to the many new features that we've provided, we've been making lots of improvements behind the scenes to ensure that webmaster tools are reliable, scalable, and secure."
The official blog is also now allowing for comments to be posted by readers, a feature previously unavailable.
In a move that has been long in coming Google has chosen to provide a safer environment for its patrons by blocking access to sites that appear to have malicious code.
The genius, in my opinion, is they are not blocking the sites from appearing but offering a warning under the title of a 'harmful' listing. The site may even appear number one and two as in the case of the search phrase "beautiful free screensaver" where the top 2 listings from the same site have the "this site may harm your computer" warning listed below the title.
So what happens if you click on the cautioned listing? Thankfully nothing, the page takes you to a site advisory page warning the website you were trying to reach may have harmed your computer. There is in fact no way to get to the website short of typing it in by hand or copying it into the address bar.
As far as I am concerned this is a brilliant move that will hopefully trigger similar implementations from the other major search engines. After all, search engines are there to provide us with a quality search experience, not to send us to websites that may have us tearing our hair out as the latest virus lays waste to our data.
Last Wednesday Google released the results of a survey they conducted on the Valentine's Day shopping habits of 2214 adults. Here is an excerpt of the most interesting data for retailers:
Highlights From Survey Results:
Among U.S. adults who typically buy Valentine’s Day gifts:
50% indicated that they purchase multiple Valentine’s Day gifts.
Although men and women (both 71%) are equally likely to typically buy at least one Valentine’s Day gift, women (56%) are more likely than men (44%) to buy multiple gifts.
55% of men indicated that they plan to buy for spouse, compared with 44% of women.
These adults are more likely to buy Valentine's Day gifts for their pets (6%) than their fathers (5%) or grandfathers (1%).
Women (83%) are more likely than men (74%) to indicate that they typically buy a Valentine’s Day gift for at least one family member.
41% indicated that they plan to purchase from more than one store/website this Valentine’s Day.
11% indicated that they typically spend $10 or less. On average, U.S. adults spend about $70 in total on Valentine’s Day gifts.
Among U.S. adults who typically buy Valentine’s Day gifts for a significant other:
Men (50%) are more likely than women (37%) to indicate typically buying multiple Valentine’s Day gifts for a significant other.
The purpose of the survey was to pitch the benefits of being found on Google Checkout but either way the information is intriguing.
To be as clear as possible with my answer I am going to break it down into two sections: one for those who syndicate their own content and the other for those who publish syndicated content.
Please keep in mind, however, duplicate content is not an exact science or anything close to that. As I wrote this article, I often imagined exceptions where a penalty would or would not take place. That said the following answers are based on what my experience dictates to be the most common scenarios.
Answer 1: Syndicating Your Own Content If you are sending out your own content for syndication (on other websites) you need not worry yourself with duplicate content penalties because you are the original source of the article. However here is some winning strategies you should use to ensure you get the maximum benefit from your article.
First-off it is often beneficial not to syndicate your content right away but to wait a day or so after writing your article so that the search engines can index the content first on your own website. Why? Because if you syndicate your article before or at the same time you publish it on your own website a 3rd party site may post the article before you do. If that 3rd party happens to be highly credible your article might get spidered there before it does on your website which may reduce your website’s exposure.
This next factor is the most important: all articles must have a link back to a copy of the article on your own website to establish ownership. This will show the search engines that you are the original content creator, which will provide some backlink benefits and increase the chances your article will be found in searches. In some cases, like StepForth’s, we have chosen to point the article to our flagship home page to build backlinks; another reasonable choice.
The downside to such a technique is the original article on our news website is not often credited with the first publication because a source backlink does not exist.
Answer 2: Syndicating Other People's Content Publishing content that has recently been released for syndication will not result in a duplicate content penalty. Why? Because the content is fresh and the major search engines do not penalize fresh content. It is paramount to note however that publishing older content under the guise of new content is a bad idea and not recommended. For example, if you were to post an old article you found online you would be wasting your time as the search engines would compare this to their database and immediately notice the content is outdated and previously syndicated; they simply would ignore it.
So What Happens to the Majority of Duplicate Content? Over time, duplicate content is weeded out of the search engine databases for the sake of search efficiency. Generally, the version of the article that is hosted on the most credible website or has the most backlinks (source credits from republishing) is considered the authority source and gets the bulk of the top rankings for that article. This is why sometimes, when looking through search results I occasionally find my own articles sourced from the more popular Search Engine Guide instead of my own site where they were originally posted.
When Does a Duplicate Content “Penalty” Occur? For the most part, older duplicated content is simply ignored by search engines so the ‘penalty’ per se is really quite benign; meaning the page is not worth the bytes of space it uses. A major search engine such as Google would consider a SPAM penalty for a website that only consisted of content that had previously been syndicated or had repeatedly tried to pass of old content as new. A penalty might be as small as a drop in rankings or as significant as an outright blacklisting. How the ultimate decision is made is buried deep within Google’s SPAM protection algorithms.
In Conclusion If you syndicate your own content, you have nothing to be concerned about but ensure that anyone who syndicates your content gives you proper link credit.
If you republish syndicated content, you need to be sure the content is fresh, topical to your website and that you have the rights to post it. Ultimately, I suggest following the lead of the best marketing sites on the Internet and intersperse your own freshly written content within your website. After all, over time syndicated content loses its lustre in rankings due to its nature of duplicity so if you have your own unique content your site will fare better in the end.
If you have additional questions be sure to send them my way. I cannot promise an immediate response but I will try to get to yours as soon as possible. If you need a faster response please contact Bill Stroll who can arrange some consulting time between us.
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
So what happens if you click on the cautioned listing? Thankfully nothing, the page takes you to a site advisory page warning the website you were trying to reach may have harmed your computer. There is in fact no way to get to the website short of typing it in by hand or copying it into the address bar.
This SEO answer is a follow-up to a common question I received from my recent article "