Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Pay Per Post
Posted 29 August 2007 - 11:30 AM
My understanding with FCC regs is that these must be announced as advertisements or paid reviews.
The WSJ article touted this as a cheap and excellent way to get your site/service/product out there in the online community as well as a way to build incoming links and improve rankings.
Personally it seems a little sleezy to me and could well diminish the credibility of one's brand, but I thought that I would check with you fine folks to see if anyone is familiar with this practice or has even used services such as PayPerPost.com
Thoughts? Comments? Suggestsion?
here is a link to the WSJ article:
Posted 29 August 2007 - 11:26 PM
One devil that come to mind from the article is search engine spam.
Posted 07 October 2007 - 04:17 AM
Jammin Jake I agree with you that this is not great for branding. What could happen is these posts start ranking for your site/product/service names in Google, and because these posts have to disclose the sponsorship, you could look a bit goofy. It could get you more exposure, depending on your targeted sites. A $400 post on JohnChow.com is probably going to send you much better traffic if you're a tech-related site than if you get joe-newbie to review-you for $10.
Another issue is "footprint" that these links are easy for SE's to detect, and could these links be discounted. SEOmoz has a great little post about how the search engines are handling these links (they're not doing anything about them at this time even though they frown upon paid links) http://www.seomoz.or...erpost-services
So for now these links might just give you an SEO boost, but of course that could change as fast as the SE's change their mind or find a better way of handling this.
Posted 01 December 2007 - 03:23 PM
Posted 05 December 2007 - 03:50 PM
It was funny last month when our marketing folks gave us the quarterly dog-and-pony about the Pay Per Post.
them - "You'll see that you have 5 good performers, all higher than PR3"
me - "Uh, the top one is PR0 according to the Google toolbar."
me - "and so's the next one..."
me - "and the next one..."
them - "Well, uh, yeah, you see, they HAD PR3 or higher when you paid them for the link but Google just did an algorithm update on the 28th"
me - "Yeah, whatever."
them - "But look, you have 3200+ links to you using link:yoursite.com"
me - "Uhm, but if you do +oursite.+com -site:oursite.com" it becomes 700-ish."
them - "huh? <<I repeat it>> uhm, well, uh, ah, ..."
They weren't having a good day that day since I've come on staff here. lol
Too bad I'm a programmer and not the decision maker!
But the bottom line is even the smoke blowers are starting to rethink the PPP model it seems and the rest of us know the house of cards has started to topple.
Posted 05 December 2007 - 05:40 PM
Other than that, the concept walks strange line between advertising and publicity. In the early search engine days, i remember being horrified that people could actually pay their way to the first page on sponsored links. But now that i'm in the business, i do use pay per click. Also, sometimes when you advertise in a magnazine, they'll also do a "story" on you about how great your products are. And it'll be a real feature, not an ad. Really, they're just trying to woo you for future ads.
Hmm. Well sounds like it's not such a good idea anyway from the other repliies, so i'll stay away unless i notice my competitors thriving on it:)
Posted 18 December 2007 - 10:12 AM
Posted 15 March 2008 - 04:48 PM
Posted 15 March 2008 - 06:30 PM
Everyone certainly has a right to post about any other site they want to post about, whether or not they get paid for it.
Posted 22 May 2008 - 03:58 PM
Posted 22 May 2008 - 10:40 PM
Advertisers and networks are hedging their bets. The scare of set top boxes allowing viewers to skip ad-breaks is encouraging em' to pursue other avenues for sticking logos in front of eyeballs.
Speed: micro ads blasted for 5-10 seconds without warning.
Stealth: Product placement .
Force: Sponsorships & such. Including brands actually making their own tv shows.
The stealth side is the wild card. Discreet product placement is currently only very small compared to 'normal ads' (I think its about 100m / 80b, but don't quote me). But it may be a rival within a few years. Starbucks & Dell in particular are (I think) doing some serious playing around. Word is the Autos are going to start some serious test runs too.
Take into account the value of web 2.0ish grassroot product promotion and the power starting to be wielded by bloggers and other web personalities, you come up with a pretty good case for major use of PPP by the big-buck advertisers.
Remember "Search advertising is great, but you can't advertise Coca Cola on Search." The big brands (and budgets) are still locked out for the most part.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users