| LED Digest 2269: On Motivating Clients |
|
|
|
How DO you get clients to do things that are good for them? What tricks of the trade have you learned to really motivate your clients to help themselves? Plus, the SEO-as-marketing thread continues to develop. ================================================== The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" Data > Information > Knowledge > Wisdom pair Networks: The LED's Web Host Hosting and Domain Registration from a Trusted Leader pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest adam, led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com .............................................. October 18, 2006 Issue no. 2269 .............................................. .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ====== NEW ====================== <Moderator Comment> ~ LED Digest Web Forum? --== Motivating Clients ==-- ~ Beth Ann Earle "...how DO you get clients to do things that are good for them?" --== Publishing Text Content as Images ==-- ~ Baruch Avraham "I wanted to ask if it will be a good idea to turn some text into an image..." ==== CONTINUING ================= --== Another Bubble? Google & YouTube ==-- ~ Ronni Rhodes "What can "GoogTube" offer us that will add value?" ~ Andrew Bourland "[This] is validation for the coming dominance of video as a primary media type on the internet." --== Natural Search Effectiveness ==-- ~ Adam Jusko "...we believe there is still a place for human- powered search." <Moderator Comment> ~ Shaun Johnston "...I am essentially pooling my customers' marketing dollars..." --== YouTube for Marketing ==-- ~ Dr. Mani Sivasubramanian "I found some great presentations by Seth Godin on YouTube..." --== Usability and Search ==-- ~ Alex Hughart "...in today's world everything is a 'product' that needs to be marketed..." ~ Michael Motherwell "We shouldn't let definitions be the crux of our arguments..." ========== NEW =================================== <Moderator Comment> Quick question: do you have any interest in a Web-based forum for the LED Digest? The idea I have is for an advanced blogging platform similar to Slashdot, where the community is moderated by the community. Stories, posts, moderating, etc are shared responsibilities. The code that powers Slashdot is open source. It wouldn't replace the LED Digest. Just an additional communications medium, and much faster response time. Probably it would be less formal, too. Another cool feature is you can filter out comments from "foes" and have lists of "friends." Journals, RSS syndication... there are a ton of features. I don't want to develop this if it's not going to be used, though. Would you use it? Or are there too many Web forums already? (this one would be a bit different than what's out there - think: "a slashcode-powered site for Internet Professionals.") I've had the idea for a long time, but need feedback to really consider it. On with the show... -Adam ---------------------- From: Beth Ann Earle Subject: Encouraging Clients to Do Their Part [was: Natural search] > I keep track of what is going on and support, cajole, inspire > or nag them into doing their part. It doesn't always work; > sometimes they just never generate that needed content. - Michael Linehan, LED Digest 2268 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1242/55/ This brings up a good question -- how DO you get clients to do things that are good for them? With my kids, it's easy: I just ground them or give them extra chores till they capitulate. But our clients ... well, they seem to fall into a different category, mostly like the business owners Michael mentions who may believe "they are 'too busy' running the inn to market effectively (in their own minds, anyway)." We've tried being nice ("It'll be great to get this going for you. And, as soon as you do the required task, we'll get our part going and get everything finished up so that you'll start reaping advantages A, B, and C, provided by this project"). We've also tried being stern ("If we don't have your info by such-and-such date, the project will be marked inactive, and you'll be charge X amount as a re-start fee"). Neither approach seems particularly effective. So, here's my request: If you've have any success in this, please provide concrete suggestions or real-life stories. Look at it as official sanction to brag. Wishing all LED'ers the very best, Beth Earle www.pilotfishseo.com -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Baruch Avraham Subject: Text Content as Images for Non-keywords? Hello all LEDers, I wanted to ask if it will be a good idea to turn some text into an image (text that is general info and hardly has keywords in it), so that visitors will be able to read it but search engines will not read it. So that the the content for the search engines will be more concentrated with the keywords that matter. Best regards Baruch Avraham Aris Jeweley http://aris-titanium.com/ ======== CONTINUING =============================== From: Ronni Rhodes Subject: Bubble > Just as the internet allowed anyone to play in the print media > space, high speed IP allows cheap entry into the television arena. - John "Zeke" Brumage, LED Digest 2268 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1242/55/ And is the above a good thing? How long will it take for people to tire of seeing someone's cat chase a ball? As we all lament the glut of worthless information we see in the search results, the growth of "splogs," and the endless barrage of advertising, won't we see the same thing happening in the video arena? I'd like to think the internet will allow the cream to rise to the top, but I do have a lot of doubts. When the truly creative get lost in a sea of mediocrity, we all lose. What can "GoogTube" offer us that will add value? Kind regards, Ronni Rhodes Ignite Your Site with Sound and Motion! Make Your Marketing Memorable with Rich Media http://www.wbcimaging.com -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Andrew Bourland Subject: Bubble > Youtube is just a first glimmer of the new power > that will come from flattening the network. - John Brumage John, I couldn't agree with you more. Those of us who seek to add a broader dimension to the content we publish now have inexpensive video production and distribution to add to our arsenal. Many bloggers regularly add Google/YouTube video content to their blogs, and now a whole slew of videoblogs (or "vlogs") have emerged with an infinite variety of content. You can't go to a major site any more without encountering video content and advertisements. Check out ESPN.com for a prime example. What is exciting to me is that there is now room in the market, and a business validation for "niche YouTubes" such as the business video site Cisco is launching and the technical video site which CNETTV launched not too long ago. I personally would love to see an ESPN YouTube where you could search for and find any and all video footage on any sport, athlete, coach, team, etc that ESPN has archived in it's vast warehouse of video content. Apply that thinking to movies, entertainment, music of various genres, industries... the list goes on. The Google/YouTube deal, far from being a bubble indicator, is validation for the coming dominance of video as a primary media type on the internet. To me, at least... the future looks bright! Andrew Bourland http://www.zbiz.tv ~ interviews with entrepreneurs -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Adam Jusko Subject: Natural search > What's new for me, using this basis, is that SEO for > natural listings comes way down that list. Directories > are rising up to the top. ROI analysis is much easier > for directories over any other method, I think. - Shaun Johnston, LED Digest 2267 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1229/55/ > I'm finding just the opposite... Organic SEO and social media > are mostly the highest returning channels at the moment... - Nathan Holley, LED Digest 2268 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1242/55/ In response to Shaun Johnston and Nathan Holley's discussion of the value of directories, I'm submitting this comment I left on Aaron Wall's site. I think / hope it's relevant to the discussion without being too self-serving: Directories have become worth little because little is put into them. A paid directory is not seen as legitimate, because if you don't pay you don't exist. From a user perspective the directory is useless because it is biased in favor of only those who pay, meaning it's not even close to comprehensive. Other than Yahoo, DMOZ takes the top spot by default, because no one else has really tried to create something worthwhile. At the same time, Webmasters know that DMOZ has countless fiefdoms where one must prostrate one's self before the mighty category editor in hopes of a scrap of acknowledgment. That's why I started a new search site, Bessed, that is a human-powered search site / directory. There is no fee for inclusion and, because it's built on WordPress blog software, you can request addition of your site directly on search results pages. You can also suggest other sites that are relevant, or even argue for why another site shouldn't appear or why the rankings should be changed. We think it's the next generation of directory-type sites, combining the benefits of human editors with a social media aspect to create better results. The site is ad-supported, not supported by inclusion fees, so it is something that is actually useful for site visitors instead of being merely a place for Webmasters to submit in hopes of increasing their "Google juice". And there will never be inclusion fees -- Bessed will either sink or swim, but it will never bait and switch. It's an ambitious project, but we believe there is still a place for human-powered search, and we encourage Webmasters to submit to us. Adam Jusko Bessed http://www.bessed.com/ <Moderator Comment> Cool idea, Adam. I've submitted a category request for the LED. I'd encourage everyone to check this out and submit their sites. I think we have a lot to see yet in the "human-powered" search realm. Thanks, Adam -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Shaun Johnston Subject: Natural search Michael [Linehan], you speak directly to my concerns. Maybe we should communicate directly if our posts get too long. Two issues: First, using lodgings directories vs each lodging doing its own marketing. Of course, this isn't an either / or, it's a matter of emphasis. Two part of my service for lodgings are 1. Running a directory for getaway lodgings in the 8 counties around me, target to visitors from NYC-Metro-Area. 2. Providing SEO to individual lodgings. I have come to the conclusion I can do lodgings more good by running the directory than through individual SEO. My directory delivers 12,000 visits to lodgings directories a (summer) month. Since I list only 200 lodgings, that's an average of 60 visits per lodging per month. Of course, those that pay for enhanced listings get more visits, up to 750 a month to my top customer, a resort. But even to inns of 10 rooms I'm delivering around 200 website visits a month, more than Yahoo and MSN combined. My visits come out better qualified than Google's. I now have 25 clients, I'm doing a lot of lodgings a lot of good, with minimal time needing to be invested in each one. I charge ppc, 10, 20 and 40 cents per visit delivered. When I have two or more customers paying 40 cents per click in a town, since I'm getting an average of 3 visits to lodgings' web sites per visitor, I can afford to sponsor broad search terms in the search engines, such as "hudson valley", and plug a little-known town itself there. Doing that has tripled visits to a listing page for a town that few online visitors know about. So I am essentially pooling my customers' marketing dollars and using those dollars to broker top search engine positions. I am also about to apply the same principle to a lodging association site, where I will partner with them to offer those of their members who want to participate visits for 25 cents per visit delivered. Here, since all those listed will be paying, and if I can get visits-delivered up to 3 (it's 2 currently) I will make 75 cents per visitor, pay the search engines 50 cents and pocket 25 cents. Everybody wins. If it works for them, I plan to offer this service to other lodging asociations. I thus get to take over more populated space on the Web from which to run this SE-brokering business. Suddenly, after lodgings complaining at paying 10 cents per visit, I'm getting no complaints at 40 cents. Partly that's due to improvements in my design and database programming that make my listings super-efficient. Traffic's rising. But also, they "get" this brokering of top positions in the search. It's where they dream of being, that they can't get themselves. Second, how to get lodgings to add their own content. I've tried Contribute, don't like it, so now I train people in using Namo Web Editor, and in how to keep out of trouble while doing so. Then they can change their own pages. I also thought of giving them a i-frame on the home page through to a Word html file where they can post a brief comment, but that wouldn't register as being content on the home page, would it? And what content do you suggest lodging owners add for themselves? Cheers, Shaun Johnston nycgetaways.com -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Dr. Mani Sivasubramanian Subject: YouTube Marketing > I heard a lot about You tube from British radio... > where a DJ was talking about using you tube to > see old music videos that are hard to find elsewhere. - John Smart, LED Digest 2267 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1229/55/ Not sure about that, but I found some great presentations by Seth Godin on YouTube recently - and wrote to Seth asking if he had any DVDs of his presentations... but no, he didn't. So, YouTube does have some stuff that's 'hard to find elsewhere' :) If you'd like to see the presentations, search for a Squidoo lens about 'Great Presentations'.... there's even one by Steve Jobs from way back, when he first launched the Mac. All success Dr.Mani -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Alex Hughart Subject: Usability and Search Hi, This is in response to Shari Thurow / Brett Atkins discussion in LED 2268 [ http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1242/55/ ]. Clearly, SEO is not JUST marketing and it's not JUST information retrieval - it is both. However, if you are a search engine or a library, the retrieval part is more important to you because this is the service you provide. If you are selling merchandise or some other services, you tend to look at SEO as a marketing strategy that happens to rely on information retrieval from the Internet (as opposed to the information retrieval from a TV ad, for example). Business owners in reaching their ultimate goal of selling stuff have to take into account - in addition to the specifics of the media - the product itself, targeted demographics, competition, pricing structure, etc. SEO companies hired to promote such a client have the obligation to do the same. Of course, the more you learn about how things work, the better you are, nobody is denying that. I congratulate Shari on her upcoming book and will ask her: how will you let people know about it? Will getting the ISBN number be enough? It sure is for libraries but, how many of your potential buyers are dutifully sifting through library catalogs (especially if they are looking for books on SEO)? Everything evolves and morphs into something new. Whether we like it or not, the science of information retrieval is never going to be the same after Google and the like. On top of it, in today's world everything is a "product" that needs to be marketed, including the very antithesis of commerce: academic achievements, public services and non-profits. Best regards, Alex Hughart -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Michael Motherwell Subject: Usability and Search > If SEO isn't about marketing, why do > you keep defining it that way? - Brett Atkin, LED Digest 2267 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1229/55/ I think one needs to be careful when reading anything by Shari, because her definitions are so different to everyone else's. Shari Thurow wrote, > ... I am very good at what I do... ... and notice she did not write "which is the same as what everyone else does". Whilst your post Brett was spot on, I think you missed the subtle undertones in Shari's post. As much as Shari appears to be lecturing us on what Search Marketing is, what she is really doing, IMHO, is trying to brand herself as different, and point out where and why she is different. That Shari chooses to use terms the rest of us thought we understood in an unconventional, unique way is unfortunate for the language we all speak, and communicating meaning more specifically, but is nonetheless her right. When / if Shari takes liberties with terms, rather than trying to debate the issue using a different definition, what we need to do is understand exactly how she is redefining the term/s, and start from there. Take SEO as an example. I would say the common agreed upon definition is the one you gave from Bruce Clay's site. That Shari chooses a different definition means that any debate is impossible until we can agree upon which definition to use. I don't know if anyone else did debating in high school (I was famous for swearing in context and getting away with it), but the first thing they teach you is "define the topic". It is amazing how many debates devolve into a definitional battle, where neither side can agree on what "freedom" or "better" means. Many times, people attmept to define the tem in way that guarantees them victory. Such debates are a complete waste of time, as trying to get people to agree on a definition that doesn't suit their argument is as likely as a 100 degree heatwave in the Antarctic. Lastly, as an industry (I hate when others start a sentence that way, but c'est la vie), I think we need to understand that search isn't, and will not remain if it is, a monoculture of sameness. We, as an industry, are evolving, and part of that evolution will be people who do radically different things. Inevitably, they will call themself the same old term, or use the same old words to describe themselves, but they will be very different. To be clear, I am not talking black hat white hat nonsesne, but practical differences in business models and scope. From AdWords only landing pages to full service webdesign to pure link building, copywriting or just consulting, the Search Marketing space has room for many people doing many varied things. What they choose to call themslves, and how they choose to define their role, does not, and should not, impact on everyone else, and attempting to force the rest of us to fit into a new definition is as silly as us forcing niche practitioners into a generic definition. I personally would like it if people made up new terms for new Ideas, but Search Marketing dictates that we use the terms people want first and foremost. I often say "don't use gizmo, people search for widget", and SM should really be no different. Sure, branding themselves as "Landing Page Specialists" is great, but if everyone looks for PPC management, what's a dude suppossed to do? Full circle and to wrap this up, IMHO, multiple definitions of what the role of an SEO is / should be are not only possible, but inevitable. We shouldn't let definitions be the crux of our arguments, nor what an argument is about at all. I will now hand over to the third speaker for the affirmative, who will speak about Jean Paul Satre and the emptiness of existence :) Michael Motherwell ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks: pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains Copyright 1995-2006 Orange Wheel, LLC. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- "If a man is as wise as a serpent, he can afford to be as harmless as a dove." - American Indian Proverb |
