Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!


Sponsored Content

 

 
 

Photo
- - - - -

Rankings Vs Conversions


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#61 jc129

jc129

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 20 May 2004 - 04:20 AM

IMO, the "real" job is to help a customer make their site effective. What "effective" means will depend upon the client. It may mean building brand equity, taking orders online or generating phone calls to sales, finding or communicating with investors, providing post-sales service and support. Only some of those activities comfortably fit the narrowest definition of "relevant traffic times (online) conversion rate".

If that's the core objective, it involves several skill sets. The more of them that can be (truthfully) represented in a single contact by the customer, the better for the customer, because it reduces the amount of time that the customer has to spend on non-core activities. For example, if you are a carpet supplier and fitter, you need to care more about carpets than HTML and the vagaries of which search engines use what algorithms - what you need to care about is whether this marketing activity through this agency brings in sufficient profit and builds sufficient brand equity that the activity should be sustained, grown or decreased, or whether the problem is the agency.

I believe that at least the following skills may be required to make a web site effective - the only question to my mind is the decision as to where to draw the line(s) on SEO:
  • Domain Name & Administration
  • Email accounts and mailing list management
  • Web and mail server administration (headers, etc)
  • Web page templating (download speed, accessibility, usability)
  • Information Architecture
  • Visual design
  • Copywriting
  • Legal framework (US and Europe have fundamentally different approaches)
  • Ethics, privacy policies, oversight and administration
  • Directories, Banner Ads, Sponsorship, Interaction with Portals, Vortals, etc.
  • Integration with other marketing communications (telesales & other offline activities)
  • Metrics (abandonment, conversion, visitor sources and referrals, search phrases, etc)
  • PPC, PFI and other SEM
  • Buyer Behaviour Models
  • (Sometimes) e-Commerce systems
  • CRM
  • Marketing Information Systems
  • Web application development
  • Workflow - content management, order management, issue tracking
  • Content Management Systems, and their specific features and failures
  • Inventory control and presentation
We've been focusing on professional service based SME's, so we've not had to handle any instant sales with credit cards. But that has had the effect that we have to consider conversion rate over long time periods and using offline responses. Web sites can still be successful for a consultancy company, even if a web visitor's response to the site is to phone to talk to a consultant, or to visit a trade show stand, which won't (easily) show up in an online campaign management tool.

Part of the definition problem in this thread has been, I think, that different customers have different needs, can offer different complementary skills and that success measures for some sites are only measurable over a whole company's activities.

We've definitely done work for customers who do not understand that the web is not a magazine or a TV and we've spent time educating them about what they can do and how this might affect their entire business activity, if they had suitable product and services. We've dissuaded some people from spending quite large sums, because, in our opinion, we didn't think they'd be satisfied with the response (the buyer model didn't involve a phase in which any internet activity would be significantly useful and there were no other stakeholders in sufficient numbers that the cost-per-contact would be better than picking up the phone, and the brand would not be sufficiently enhanced by a large and complex website). We've also spent time with people who've solidly understood their market and have taught us about their customers and what their marketing needs are - they just can't translate that into technology.

FWIW, I've come from a tech heavy background, and I am co-founder of several small successful businesses. I do understand the business processes, the marketing activities and the separation of sales, marketing and customer service (and other components). I'm also taking a part time course to get accreditation with the UK's Chartered Institute of Marketing - and despite hanging around marketing for more than a decade, the courses are still eye-opening. We work with some major agencies for large accounts where we take on technical/marketing specialist roles and we work directly for smaller businesses where we are their online agency and provide everything, down to the hosting, in order to be able to offer search engine marketing and optimisation.

One hat isn't enough. One definition won't work. Just as there is not a single definition of marketing that works for every expert, or even a single definition of CRM. Being effective involves flexibility and matching your services to customer need - and if your services are limited, selecting only those customers that you can satisfactorily service.

US$0.02 ;)

Cheers, JeremyC.

#62 anthonyparsons.com

anthonyparsons.com

    33 & Retired ... What to do, What to do?

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Location:Nth Qld - Australia

Posted 20 May 2004 - 04:32 AM

We've definitely done work for customers who do not understand that the web is not a magazine or a TV and we've spent time educating them about what they can do and how this might affect their entire business activity, if they had suitable product and services. We've dissuaded some people from spending quite large sums, because, in our opinion, we didn't think they'd be satisfied with the response (the buyer model didn't involve a phase in which any internet activity would be significantly useful and there were no other stakeholders in sufficient numbers that the cost-per-contact would be better than picking up the phone, and the brand would not be sufficiently enhanced by a large and complex website). We've also spent time with people who've solidly understood their market and have taught us about their customers and what their marketing needs are - they just can't translate that into technology.


Right on brother. Well said.

#63 Randy

Randy

    Convert Me!

  • Moderator
  • 17,540 posts

Posted 20 May 2004 - 05:59 AM

Welcome JeremyC! ;)

Excellent first post. You've set the bar pretty high for post #2... :D

#64 layover

layover

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 20 May 2004 - 08:52 AM

#1 You need high rankings to get visitors to your site in order to get a conversion in the first instance!
#2 A high ranking on any term, competitive or not, I don't think as an SEO you have finished your job!
#3 As an SEO I believe it is my job to get my customers high rankings that convert to give a substantial ROI for the customer!

My Opinion - They kind off go hand in hand. Bit hard to convert sales with no quality visitors to begin with and a bit hard to convert visitors into sales if the website doesn't work for the customer.  :D



I handle all my SEM in house, and to a degree I agree that ranking and conversions go hand in hand. But I will say, I have found some scenarios where I am getting higher conversions with lower rankings. Also, I have found..which is slightly off topic, that with a little work, my conversion can stay pretty much the same, with my ranking slightly lower, thus my cost per conversion is less.

I spend a good amount of my day doing SEM, and I don't always feel being listed 1st..or even 2nd is the best place to be. ALthough I cannot identify why (although I have a theory)...I see better results from the 3 & 4 spot.

My theory is this....for terms where there are many results, I think the user may actually be clicking back and forth, from site back to search engine to visit different sites to see what they offer. I am thinking that once they visit 3-5 sites, they have decided to finally take an action, which may be when they are at the site listed number 3 or 4. Thus, the lower ranking site got the conversion.

For me....I focus very heavily on conversion, which not only involves ranking strategies, but working with things like landing pages, copy
for ads, etc...

#65 Netbird

Netbird

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Location:Hertfordshire

Posted 20 May 2004 - 10:44 AM

don't always feel being listed 1st..or even 2nd is the best place to be. ALthough I cannot identify why (although I have a theory)...I see better results from the 3 & 4 spot


From a user point of view, I rarely click on the number 1 result in Google - probably too accustomed to ignoring the crap that usually comes at the top of web pages, i.e banner and stuff. I think also, that generally these first couple tend to be directory sites and other uninteresting stuff. Harsh on proper sites that have workd hard to get there though!

#66 Jill

Jill

    High Rankings Advisor

  • Admin
  • 32,311 posts

Posted 20 May 2004 - 03:16 PM

Welcome jc129 and layover! :dance:

Jill

#67 anthonyparsons.com

anthonyparsons.com

    33 & Retired ... What to do, What to do?

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Location:Nth Qld - Australia

Posted 20 May 2004 - 04:32 PM

I spend a good amount of my day doing SEM, and I don't always feel being listed 1st..or even 2nd is the best place to be. ALthough I cannot identify why (although I have a theory)...I see better results from the 3 & 4 spot.

Nothing odd about that. I think netbird pretty much well said everything. A front page listing is the place to be, not second page. That's what SEM is all about, gaining those conversions from a lower more targeted ranking. I am not saying by any means that ranking is everything, cause it couldn't be further from the truth. What I am saying though is without it, your not going to get the visitors to convert.

Traffic is one thing, targeted traffic is what we all aim. Once the targeted traffic is upon your site, if the search and the site match up, then you stand a good chance of converting that visit to a sale. That's my point.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users