Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Overture Sitematch - Replaces Inktomi Av And Fast
Posted 02 March 2004 - 08:58 AM
"As of the 1st of March, 6pm Standard Pacific time, the Inktomi, AltaVista and FAST paid inclusion programs have been merged into a single service titled 'Overture Site Match'."
"After this time, Inktomi Search Submit customers will need to change over to Overture Site Match if they wish to continue receiving search traffic from Yahoo!"
Why would I need to "change over" to anything...????? In the first statement, Inktomi (and the rest) have become Overture site match.
Oh - wait, you're only honoring my INK submit contract through April 15th even though I may be paid up through December. Yahoo is only a bonus.
But, then again, if INK submit truly has been merged into a single service with the others and that single service known as "Overture Site Match" and it includes a listing on Yahoo, then you're not honoring my contract with INK.
Oh boy, I seem to be walking in circles and I'm still trapped in the woods.
Seems to me that the legal department should have come in there and changed the words "have been merged into" to "have been replaced by" then all the lawsuits I am envisioning would be nullified. Looks like the marketing hand and the law hand aren't communicating so well over at Y!
Oh well, with all the INK stuff dropping out on April 15th, that'll move my free listings that much higher and make some sort of paid inclusion even less valuable to me.
My brain itches now. I need to go.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 09:03 AM
Just when it looked like Yahoo was going to be able to compete with Google as far as superior results go and then they go and do this greedy thing. It isn't enough that they are making heaps of money now from Overture PPC listings that they have to add a per click charge on organic listings?
A very greedy move IMO and they have just cut out the small business owner and given favor to the large corporate companies who have bottomless pockets.
This is a sad day for the Internet and search engines because the Internet since it's commercial birth, has enabled small business owners to compete with the big guys. It seems that is now changing. I just hope others SEs don't follow in this same path of greed.
Bad Yahoo, very bad. I like the annual inclusion fees but the pay per click charges for organic listings on top of inclusion fees - bad move.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 09:34 AM
Posted 02 March 2004 - 09:45 AM
This is a sad day, as Yahoo have just lost a lot of credibility, then again, we did say in a previous thread that both Yahoo & Microsoft are driven by the $$$ way beyond quality.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 09:59 AM
http://search.yahoo....nfo/submit.html still talks about the old options:
Inktomi Inclusion Programs
and the Yahoo Express directory submission.
No mention of SiteMatch tm
Posted 02 March 2004 - 10:01 AM
"Our primary goal is to discover all the content on the Web for free. In addition, the Content Acquisition Program serves to make a richer set of content accessible to users in a way that most search engines today are unable to achieve," said Tim Cadogan, vice president of Search at Yahoo! Inc. "This program enables us to develop direct, structured relationships with content providers to increase comprehensiveness, maintain the most up-to-date data, improve relevance and thereby deliver a higher quality search experience for users."
So, if my page is so crappy that it can't get listed for free, I can pay money for it to rank shoddily?
I'm usually pretty good at coming to the defense of actions of the big companies when other folks are saying that they made a big mistake - such as the whole Google-Florida thing. I can usually find a way to comprehend their intentions and goals - if even in an abstract sort of way - and try to put a positive spin on it. There's too much contradictory evidence in all of this to be able to do it with this batch of crapola.
<sigh> Sorry, Y! I was really looking forward to spinning the inevitable initial backlash into something positive in the forums I participate in when this day finally came. But frankly, I can't see the angle right now. Legal and Product Quality issues aside, your PR department is acting like a hydra with none of the heads in agreement as to just what's going on.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 10:02 AM
Posted 02 March 2004 - 10:29 AM
Look at the branding.
Overture SiteMatch = formally known as Inktomi Search Submit
Overture SiteMatch Xchange = formally known as Inktomi Index Connect.
This move is designed to add the PFI without harming the existing Overture PPC business, and if possible, to enhance it. It isn't nice, but it is good business.
It is inclusion for those companies who couldn't get into the Yahoo results at less than 0.50 per click.
Take this scenario:
Your company wants to be in the results for a term that 0.20 per click would get you ranked 147th in Overture. Top bid is around $6.00 and nothing under $5.00 per click is going to get you into the top three. You'd realistically have to bid around $2.00 per click to even get into the Overture top 10 results.
The new and carefully branded 'Overture Site Match' enables you to be at least in the top 100 or so SERPs far more cheaply. Sure, rank isn't guaranteed, but that's what you pay the extra cost per click for in Overture's main PPC product. This is simply another option.
It works this way because it is a part of Overture - just one of a range of product options.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 10:39 AM
It's seems at this point yahoo came out with old content in a new package with a lovely name. If you are advertising in overture there is nothing new. For PFI they charge you $49 for first url to be included in yahoo, inktomi, altavista and alltheweb.(imo this is good deal instead of forking $39 for first url for each one)
Also DMOZ will play major role for your free listing in yahoo.
Yahoo! Search crawls the web every 2-4 weeks and automatically finds new content for indexing. If pages already in the Yahoo! Search index link to your site, it will be considered for inclusion in the next update of the index. Getting your site listed in major directory services such as the Yahoo! Directory and DMOZ is an excellent way to be sure that there are links to your site.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 10:48 AM
Firstly, for those already in Inktomi, AV and/or ATW PFI, your subscriptions will continue to run for a year with your PFI results showing on the search engines and their partners for the duration of your existing subscription. Currently, INK PFI results are also showing additionally in the Yahoo.com search results, this will cease on April 15th prior to which you will be offered a special deal to encourage you to enroll in the new program. This deal has not yet been specified. So, existing subscribers will continue to get exactly what they paid for, with the advantage of having Yahoo referals until April. After that, you will show up in the search results on AV and ATW, if previously paid for and MSN (until/if they drop Yahoo).
Over the next few weeks Pure INK, AV and ATW results will all be drawn from the new Yahoo Search engine with the addition of pages included in their PFI programs (assuming you don't migrate to the Yahoo PFI program).
For non-commercial sites, there is going to be a new, free submission service and there are going to be faster and more frequent natural crawls.
As for how it is going to work? In the past PFI for site pages fell into 2 areas.
The first was XML feeds for larger sites. This was priced on a CPC basis, with price depending on the market being targeted. Feeds were subject to editorial review and results were evaluated via the standard SE algo and put in the appropriate position in the normal results. If a page was deemed the most relevant, it appeared at #1, if it was deemed less relevant than an already included naturally crawled listing, that would appear at #1 and the feed page would be outranked.
Nothing has changed with this model at all apart from the fact that a feed will show up in Yahoo's results as well as the sites they previously appeared on.
The second was single page inclusion. In this model, clients could submit a single page from their site for a fixed annual fee. This would then be included somewhere in the database for a year and it was up to the client to ensure that the page was correctly designed to enable it to be found for the appropriate phrases it targeted. The 48 refresh cycle assisted this. Pages already crawled for free gained nothing from paid inclusion apart from faster update cycles and pages in the paid program were also subject to standard penalties and had to adhere to the SE guidelines.
Despite many rumours to the contrary, in my experience, all pages on a site that was in paid inclusion would continue to be crawled freely although it could take a very long time. Provided a site was well linked to by external "respected" sites - like Yahoo - and had good site architecture, it was likely to be completely crawled by the "free" spiders by the end of the annual subscription and all pages would probably remain in the same positions in the natural listings even though they did not remain in PFI.
If a naturally ranked page found through the free crawl was deemed to be "better" than a PFI page by the search algorythm, it would rank higher than the PFI page.
In the new model on Yahoo things have changed here slightly. Instead of paying a flat rate of there is a charge (for most SEOs who will be doing a lot of pages) of for an initial editorial review and then a charge of 15c or 30c per click.
What isn't clear is if you still get a 48 hour refresh, if you will pay the CPC charge on existing INK listings in MSN etc if you choose to upgrade to the new model - or just pay CPC on Yahoo, what will happen if (after 3 months or so) you decide that you probably have been directly crawled and wish to pull out of the program (as you were only in for faster inclusion) if your crawled pages will show up at the next update, how the current geo-targeting on some partners will work and what is going to happen outside the US?
Certainly, there is little incentive currently for me to do the new PFI if there is no benefit to me in the UK!
As far as the other issues are concerned, it looks like business as usual.
PFI pages will not outrank free listings unless deemed better by the algo, natural crawls will still continue but at a markedly increased rate and the organic results are not going to be swamped by PFI pages anymore than they have been to-date.
If anything, because of the faster crawl rate, there is less incentive for the average site to go for PFI. Though I see a greater incentive to use the directory submission as an alternative paid way to get into the index after being reviewed and not having to pay PFI
What is not going to happen is that PFI pages will automatically take priority over free inclusion pages. As such, you are not going to have PFI pushing natural pages down to the second page unless the pages are optimised properly and have off-the-page authority to outrank a natural page.
However, I will hopefully use this model as quickly as it is available for my clients (where appropriate). I really don't see this as having any detrimental effects on results and know from experience that PFI can be of great benefit to clients.
PFI has certainly not been a "failed model" for my clients over the years it has been in place - I don't expect it to be in the future - when used appropriately.
I've also been doing the maths on this for my own benefit. As many know, my main business model has been on a CPC basis. In this, I pay for all SEM development and inclusion out of my own pocket. To get PFI for a 10 page site on AV, ATW and INK cost me $790! It now costs me $100 for inclusion and for the additional $690 I was willing to spend previously with no guarantee on click numbers I have to get 4600 referrers! So my up-front costs have just plunged and my ability to generate better cash-flow has just soared!
So, I'm a pretty happy dude right now
However, I see why others may moan. But I think you are a little premature. Yahoo states they are going to crawl faster and more frequently following links from authoratitive sites. What's the betting that if you have some decent directory listings you will not need PFI at all? I think it is pretty high
Posted 02 March 2004 - 11:14 AM
Incentive offers to move over are at present going to be around $25 to move over the the new program.
Trellian is also please to be able to offer SEO rebates on the annual review fees and also on the CPC componenet for the life of the account.
You need to be a Trellian partner using a custom template of our prioritysubmit.com system to qualify.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 11:15 AM
I am completely shocked that Yahoo STILL has not learned a darn thing from Google. NOTHING! My little spiel tomorrow here at the conference about the Future of Search, will be completely different from where I was going with it yesterday.
Now I will discuss the greed of SEs taking over once again, where as before I was planning to say that the other engines have finally learned from Google that good triumphs over evil and the almighty dollar. Just do good and money will come to you.
Nope. Apparently they just don't have a clue. They are unteachable!
And when Google goes public, watch them implement the same type of program. (Once Sergey and Larry are forced out of course!)
It's a shame.
For now, this is great news for Google, imo.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 11:31 AM
I have a problem with that, not for the sake of our large clients but for the small ones and small businesses everywhere. For most this will not be affordable so they will either have to hope their free listings will not get beat out by the paid ones or give up on search engine marketing.
I don't have any problem with annual inclusion fees. I don't have any problem for large sites with lots of pages doing trusted feeds and pay CPC. To to make everyone pay CPC is outrageous especially when you already have a very successful PPC program in place (Overture), paid inclusion for your directory (Yahoo Directory) along with all the graphical advertising.
Of course I don't have any confidence that all our whining and griping about it will change anything. What is done is done. We will just have to adapt to it. It is just sad for small businesses because everyday this once level playing field called the Internet is leaning more and more in favor towards those who have the biggest pocket books!
Posted 02 March 2004 - 11:32 AM
Except that since Yahoo now will have an incentive for those paid pages to rank higher than the non-paid ones...you just know they will make it so.
Yup. Their business model demands it. In order to make money, the sites need to be clicked on. In order for them to be clicked on, they need to rank. In order to rank, there needs to be something in the algo that favors the types of pages that people pay to put in there (withough specificially aiming at pages that people paid to get in there).
If they merely billed this as a "pay for crawl frequency and freshness" program rather than a pay for inclusion program (which is really what it is, at the end of the day) it'd be a heck of a lot easier for me to see value in it, it would be heralded as a unique and revolutionary idea by the press (even though that's pretty much what INK's been doing all along), and the public backlash would be nearly non-existent.
The more I learn about the program and what it does, the more I'm able to understand that motivations of Yahoo - and to be honest, they aren't as silly now that I've got a better picture of what's going on. The fact remains that the PR/Marketing department screwed up on the spin of it all. The way they've described it, it creates certain expectations within customers. Yahoo is going to have to meet those expectations if they want the people to remain customers.
PFI means that I'm paying to get something in there that wouldn't otherwise be in there, but Y! is all over the place saying that they are increasing the number of free listings in there - thus diminishing my perceived value of paying to get included. But, if they told me I could pay money to ensure that my listing was always current (which they say now, but it's as it it's an afterthought) then I can easily see a value. It's still up to me to get it to rank well. My only expectation as a customer is that they'll get my latest version of the page in there and keep it current. The rest is up to me.
Posted 02 March 2004 - 11:32 AM
Jill, it may be worth noting that both Barry and I are quite happy with this product and trying to see why.
Of course, the product has been geared to not be good enough to kill off the other products Yahoo have.
Thankfully, it isn't so good as to kill off the cost-effectiveness of hiring an SEO either. Celebrate.
One day they may release a product that really does offer comparable ROI to hiring an expert SEO, and on that day you'll have something to really be unhappy about.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users