19 replies to this topic

[Fuzzie Bear]

Do you advertise solely on the web through search engines, or would you advertise elsewhere - eg newspapers, flyers etc...

[BobetteKyle]

That would depend on your business and how you can best reach your target audience. An example...if the bulk of customers you want to reach are low income Senior citizens, you might find that most of them are not regularly on the Internet, so your ads would not reach them effectively. On the flip side, if your target customers tend to live, eat, and breath online then you may be better off advertising almost exclusively online.

<Note: I moved this topic from PR over to Internet Marketing. Public Relations has to do with publication of news of interest to the media and their readers/listeners rather than advertising. >

[Shane]

It also depends on your budget. If you have a very limited advertising budget, and can spend all of it effectively online, there's really no need to spend elsewhere.

[Randy]

You'll need to decide how much of your budget you can devote to different areas.

On the one hand it's potential business suicide to exclusively focus on achieving all of your traffic and sales through natural search engine rankings. They change daily, so it's not only possible but likely that at some point you're not going to rank as well as other times. If you have a single site and that's your sole source of income, put plainly, you're screwed.

On the other hand almost every business you can imagine can be marketed via the Internet. And can allow you to spread your customer base Nationwide or Worldwide in a very cost effective manner. So the vast majority of businesses would be foolish to NOT have some sort of Internet presence. You can not only advertise that to your Local customers, but can extend to customers that would not have any chance of reaching without the 'Net.

IMHO it's not an Either-Or choice. It's a choice of how much money do you dedicate each year towards the different methods of advertising. Sometimes one will get more funding than the other. Other times the other will get more funding than the one.

In my mind businesses these days absolutely need both, if they're going to have a chance of reaching their full potential.

[Shane]

If it's a choice of spending 100% of the budget on PPC or 50% on PPC and 50% on traditional media, I'd spend 100% on PPC every time because you know for sure what you're getting. If you can spend your whole budget on PPC effectively, I can't see a reason not to.

When you can no longer get quality leads from PPC, that's when I branch out into other arenas.

[Randy]

I agree but disagree Shane.

I absolutely agree that a well run, well thought out PPC campaign can most definitely produce fabulous results.

But I disagree that anyone should ever dedicate 100% of their advertising budget to one source, be it newspaper ads, magazine ads, natural SEO, PPC, etc.

Just my opinion from having dealt with a lot of different types of businesses, but you have to find a mix for the business to reach its full potential. For each one it's a little bit different, and with every market I've worked with you have to be flexible. Sometimes you end up putting more $$$'s in one pile, while the next year --or even the next quarter-- you may emphsize another arena more.

[Alarr]

Do you advertise solely on the web through search engines, or would you advertise elsewhere - eg newspapers, flyers etc...

When you discuss newspapers, are you talking about their Web sites?

I'll keep my answer simple. If the activity generates more exposure, and you measure a positive ROI... why wouldn't you do it?

[Shane]

I guess it does depend on the business, but I'm working with one business in particular right now where a lead is a lead is a lead. If we can exhaust our budget buying them for $5 via PPC advertising, there's no need for us to look elsewhere. We could experiment (and do) with some alternate avenues to lower that CPL even more, but we haven't found anything that does.

And all the PPC advertising I've done, in fact, has been for clients for whom a lead was a lead. That said, I'm quite sure there are businesses where the quality of lead varies and you would want to mix it up. I just can't think of any right now.

[Randy]

I hear ya Shane.

Believe it or not, I've even advertised on those cable tv public access channels where city/school meetings and such show up. I wouldn't call it extremely effective for my type of business, but it was a cheap buy in and would be a great ad spend IMO if you were trying to reach certain local markets.

Even though I knew my sites weren't a good fit, I still made a small profit from those ads (yes, I tracked the hits and sales) so maybe I should fire up those campaigns again!

[BobetteKyle]

I'm quite sure there are businesses where the quality of lead varies and you would want to mix it up. I just can't think of any right now.

If the goal is strictly sales leads and your budget/strategy is such that you are only focusing on people ready to purchase, then I think that makes sense to go for the program that will most economically get you the best leads (although I tend to agree with Randy about spreading things around).

But, if the goal is also to increase awareness and you want people to remember your product sometime later when they are ready to buy, then IMO that opens the door for mixing in other programs that increase your exposure but do not necessarily create immediate, direct leads. If people run into your brand/business multiple times...on the Internet, then in the paper, on TV, in the mail, etc. awareness is increased. Then, later on they are more likely to remember you and come to your site on their own.

Think about online stock trading, Internet banking, booksellers, and career/resume posting services. There are probably one or two of each that come to mind because we have heard/seen their advertisements multiple times. If these companies only advertised on PPC, then I don't think they would be as top-of-mind as they are.

Really, to me there is no right or wrong answer. It depends on each individual business.

[BobetteKyle]

Hey, Randy. Next time you do a local spot let me know so I can watch.

[meta]

Even though I knew my sites weren't a good fit, I still made a small profit from those ads (yes, I tracked the hits and sales) so maybe I should fire up those campaigns again!

How did you track them?

[DarrenSR]

I am considering trying direct mail. From the statistics I've read if at least 80% of the listings on a mailing list are potential customers then you could expect a 1% to 5% conversion rate. If you sent out 20,000 postcards or brochures a 1% conversion rate could keep you busy for a while.

Have any of you guys tried direct mail to get SEM or web development work?

[Shane]

That 1 to 5% sounds very high to me. The July 4 issue of Forbes, in an article about Anne Mulcahy turning around Xerox, says that "the typical direct mail campaign is lucky to get 0.2% of recipients to make a purchase or accept an offer."

[Randy]

How did you track them?

Each campaign/region were sent to a slightly different url, which recorded the hit then forwarded them over to the real home page. Pretty typical. The same way I've always done Adwords and the like.