-
Did he really say that???
RSS Feed Sign-Up
Search
Categories
- 2008 Election Recount
- 2012 Primary
- Advertising
- Bloggingstocks.com
- Business and Commerce
- Campaign 2008
- Conversion Strategies
- Disney
- eCommerce Ideas
- Film
- Financial Services Marketing
- Fun
- Games
- Harrisdirect's Elsie Lee
- History
- Long Valley
- Managing Career
- Microsoft
- Mobile
- MySpace
- NJ
- NJ Politics
- Obama
- Old School Facelift
- Online Advertising Secrets Revealed
- Online Marketing
- Politics
- Politics of Business
- RSS Feeds
- Search Marketing
- SecondLife
- Social Networking
- Sports
- springsteen
- telecommunications
- Television
- The Family and Me
- Travel
- Web/Tech
- Weblogs
- Website Marketing
- Yahoo
- YouTube
« February 2007 | Main | April 2007 »
My Yahoo Is Advertising A Lot These Days
Just yesterday I was following a link to an article and ended up over at Reuters.com,
but before I could see the article, of course I got blocked with an introductory message. And, guess what - it was for Yahoo's new Personal Finance page. The intro message was well done and you should have expected no less from Yahoo. After, I was redirected to the article, it turned out that Yahoo has a block on almost the ads on the homepage, including a sponsorship on the upper right, two box units, and a small banner unit on the left. Hmmmm....
Then I found a purple ad spread over three pages in today's Wall Street Journal print edition touting their new sponsored search platform, code named Panama. The ad was again tastefully done, but I thought to myself, only MSN was so desperate to advertise in newspapers for their search platform. I wonder what gives because both are slightly odd.
The Reuters ad buy is a little strange because Reuters already powers a lot of the news article in Yahoo Finance so there is a huge overlap between the two. In fact, this was confirmed in a test I did with Reuters a few years back when I looked at the actual audience duplication. Plus, doesn't Yahoo already have a huge advantage with the traffic on Yahoo Finance and the cross promotion found on their finance homepage? I know you are probably saying, maybe they got it for free or as a makegood, but nothing is free in web advertising and Reuters has to be "charging" something because they didn't sell the spots to another advertiser.
While Yahoo might have some valid reason for the Reuters buy, the print advertising campaign for Panama is even stranger. At first, I wasn't going to bash this, but then I remembered that this is an online product targeted at a unique audience (media buyers and advertisers) promoted with a highly untargeted, expensive, and in my opinion a complete waste of an advertising channel. Yes, I have no love for the print ad in a national newspaper and when I've been associated with campaigns, I've seen ZERO results attributed to this and that includes new accounts, sales, visits to a website, word of mouth, etc. The only reason it could possible make any sense was to target it to Wall Street and other industry execs to show that Yahoo is fighting back versus Google. Again, even that is a waste of money and surprises me a bit.
Both advertising campaigns seem a little off for Yahoo and typically of what you'd find MSN doing on behalf of their search products and website pages. I didn't think Yahoo was so desperate to advertise in this manner especially when they have one of the crown jewels of advertising channels, themselves.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
Music, YouTube, and Making Money
A very interesting article on the front page of the Wall Street Journal today called Sales of Music, Long in Decline, Plunge Sharply. I can't help but thinking this foreshadows the big TV versus YouTube and other video sharing sites battle. However, before we jump into that, here are the high or low lights from the article:
- CD sales declined 20% this year and they account for 85% of music sold
- 800 music stores including 89 Tower locations closed
- Apple sold 100 million iPods proving that someone still listens to music :-P
- Digital sales of music has picked up by 54%
- According to one source, one billion songs are downloaded illegally
The article also talked about how individual CD sales are declining for folks like Norah Jones.
However, those individual declines can easily be explained if you believe in The Long Tail and that record companies should no longer be relying on mega hits. This also explains the decline in retail stores and shelf space where storing music and songs online and downloading what you want, legally, is more efficient and cheaper than stocking shelves and betting on a hit. BTW - I don't feel sorry for Norah Jones because she stole a Grammy from Springsteen for The Rising.
Enough background and back to my post. Do I care about retailers? No and I don't care about the music industry having to change how they produce music because the term hits is quickly fading as individuals determine what they like and join communities around their music tastes. What I do think is interesting is that the music industry has paid to produce the CDs and paid the musicians who made the CDs. That gives them rights to protect their product just like Viacom in their battle with YouTube.
Who are we to say how someone makes money? If a musician signs on with a label who produces their music, why should they have that stolen from them. Who are you to say how someone makes a living? Don't give me - well tough, they should tour more or figure out some other way to get paid. Or, the classic, well take less money. Who is to tell you how much is too much money? Isn't this America where you can plot your own way? Last time I checked it was.
If you want to distribute your music for free, good for you. If you think you have a better revenue model that gets you paid what you think it is worth; then go for it. How about a share of the advertising revenue from the downloading site? Great. If you sign on with a record company because you believe it is more efficient or you'll get paid more; great, but guess what, they are going to want to protect their investment which means your fans may get in trouble for illegal downloads. Or, sometime in the near future your contracts will get smaller and smaller.
This is simple. A company produces your work, they want copyright protections which means places like YouTube and music download sites have to pay attention. Why should the dollars involved with this transaction (viewing TV clips or listening to music) be shifted from going to the legal copyright owners to the sites that facilitated the transaction?
Advertising revenue is generated because someone paid the site owner who stores the information and makes it easy to download; what gives you the right to determine how the transaction is paid? Last time I checked, nobody should tell you how much you should sell your product for or how to push it out. Again, this is simple - it is about how someone gets paid and their rights to determine that method.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
Clinton Walking With The King in Second Life?
So, I needed some downtime today from one of my more complicated projects, so 
I logged on to Second Life and decided to take a tour when it came to Presidential candidates. I was curious to see what was happening so I searched on the big three. My first stop was what I consider the classic SL retail establishment - a place where a smart entrepreneur recognized an opportunity and started selling candidate yard signs and t-shirts. The top three on the list as you can see from the screen shot, were Clinton, Obama, and Ron Paul (?). Of course, I didn't buy a sign or a t-shirt because I have my own, so then it was off to a Hillary Clinton SL destination under construction.
The location which is being built by Second Life resident King Zuhal a UK resident in his first life is a definite upgrade from all other SL unofficial/official HQs. It includes a large conference room including a video screen, electoral map of the US, a platform for SL town halls, plenty of pictures, and a really clean, professional look. I 
asked King a few questions about the project.
PMF: Are you officially connected with the campaign? King: Not yet, we are contacting the RL HQ
PMF: I like the design, it is much better than other executions. King: Obama's is impressive, but hey this is a long campaign, we just want to have some fun and some good debate in SL
PMF: Are you concerned with some bad press from other unofficial HQs? King: Hey, this is SL, we should not be afraid and embrace it. I love fireworks sometimes.
The chat was very informative and here's my take on it as a SL resident and somebody, if you've read my history of posts, has a completely different opinion on SL; one that is very upbeat. A) These are again the classic SL entrepreneur building something and hoping to cash in with a very professional design B) SL residents are not aware of how the RL political world is viewing SL locations and when a location is attacked, while it might be fun for residents, it is not something that a campaign wants to be associated with C) Campaigns are going to be dragged into SL whether they want to be or not, because just like a website or blog, anyone can build something.
While this design is closer to what a professional might develop, I still don't think it is a destination that will keep residents coming back. As a potential official HQ it has all the amenities you could ask for, whether a campaign uses it or not, that's a different story. At least residents are stepping up to the plate now and starting to build locations that showcase what a 3D environment can deliver.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
GoogTube Buying Ads on Political Names
As I was checking through all the major campaign's search campaigns, I started to notice that a YouTube ad was appearing on all the candidate's names and I thought hmmm that is interesting. I only browsed through the top candidates of each side and as long as they are featured on YouTube's You Choose '08 page, there is a corresponding Google text ad directing the clicks into the individual candidate's YouTube video page. Some screen shots are shown in this post, but here are a couple of interesting observations:
- Mitt Romney's own text ad was consistently listed
in the third spot behind declare yourself and YouTube. BTW - I'm not commenting on their search strategy, they may have valid reasons for not being #1. - Hillary and Edwards who don't have any PPC ads of their own, now have YouTube in their #1 slot.
- Any other campaigns that are running PPC ads now have YouTube solidly in their #2 slot.
Of course, their ad buying raises a couple of questions, namely:
- How much does this effect the actual CPCs people are paying and is that fair?
- What is the impact on their search marketplace?
- Why is Google actually paying (assuming they are paying) to drive traffic into YouTube? I thought they wouldn't need to do that. And, even if they're not paying, there is an opportunity cost to not having someone in that second position.
- Are the ads actually driving bid amounts up for advertisers on those words? What happens if someone wants to outbid YouTube for the placement.?
I wrestled with what I actually think about it and I guess I'm coming up in a neutral to positive position. If you are not running any PPC ads (not sure where the logic is for that 
move.....), but you care enough about YouTube, than Google is doing you a big favor. If you are running PPC ads, I also think it could be helping you by keeping someone else out of the #2 position and sending people into a page that hopefully you've been working on. The most negative aspect of it could mean your CPCs are going up or you are dropping in the rankings for your own name.
You thought search engine marketing was complicated in the private sector? Try outbidding Google for your own brand name....
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
ClassesUSA and Cleavage
Like most men (and some women), I like cleavage and from my Elsie Lee posts from a few weeks back, I'm not ashamed to use attractive people to s
ell products and services. So, when I see someone using the cleavage technique to boost clicks, I often get a kick out of it. In fact, just the other day, I saw this ad from ClassesUSA which of course prompted a click from me.
Ahh, the sexy woman with the cleavage thinking about what college degree she needed. Not only is the photo nice and crisp, but they did a great job matching the colors so that the whole ad POPS and that's before the cleavage shot. I thought, wow, this should attract a lot of young people and get them some traffic. However, as you should know, just generating clicks doesn't mean much unless it converts on the back end.
Unfortunately for ClassesUSA their landing page doesn't complete the deal and the older married couple staring at you is a little shock to your system. Kind of like when your 6 
year old walks in on Mommy and Daddy in a bedroom moment. Seriously, the clicks that they are generating from this ad, can't be interested in the landing page image, in fact, it probably is scaring them off.
I never believe that the image on an ad has to appear on the landing page, but I do believe that that messaging, creative, and branding should be in sync. Clearly, there is a disconnect between their two creatives.
Anyway, I don't know too much about their product or service and I really don't think the ads are bad - definitely not in the LowerMyBills awful category, which by the way, I still get a lot of traffic daily from people complaining about these crappy ads. I just thought I'd share with you my shocking experience from clicking on an attractive women and ending up on a landing page featuring someone that looks like your Aunt and Uncle....BTW - that guy's smile is creepy - like your Dad catching you in a funny moment.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
World of Warcraft Inflationj
A while back I wrote a post called Working Through World of Warcraft's Burning Crusade in which I wrote about how much better the game is since the expansion pack. One of things I've recently noticed is the inflation of all the prices of items within the game itself which I've found very interesting, Every item in the auction house seems pricier now and it is due to all the level 60+ in the Outlands getting enhanced equipment and the easy flow of gold from the quests and drops.
Just last night one of my guild friends gave me an unbelievable helmet
for free even after I told him the one I had on was much better. He didn't care and said I could sell it. If you aren't too careful, you could drop a few gold pieces out of your armor if you do a complex move and sadly you wouldn't notice; that's how easy it is now to get gold.
Instead of having a tough time getting gold, I now find myself hovering in the high 100s and wouldn't think about twice dropping some serious coin. I wonder if Blizzard realized that this would happen. It definitely causes issues for new players who don't have an alt that sends gold down to them. Now, prices in the auction house are much higher which means it takes you longer to get items that you need. I wonder if anyone else realizes the inflation....
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
Vonage Spin Out of Control
I know two Vonage posts in a day, but their press release is laughable. Seriously, this is the type of commentary that gets investors confused. That's why you must get different points of view whenever you invest your own hard earned money. That's why I stressed to you this week in a post called Only The News That's Fit to Sell, that you need to read multiple sources if you are concerned about a subject or want to invest in stocks. Here's what the brilliant PR folks at Vonage said about their ruling yesterday:
Vonage Vindicated on Four of Seven Patents
HOLMDEL, N.J., March 8, 2007 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX News Network/ -- We are delighted that the jury rejected Verizon's meritless claim that we infringed their two billing patents. Of the seven patents Verizon originally sued on, they prevailed on only three and we expect that verdict to be reversed on appeal. The jury's damage award represents a 70% reduction from Verizon's $197MM claim. The jury also unanimously rejected Verizon's claim that Vonage willfully infringed its patents.
In
addition, we don't believe there is any basis to support Verizon's
request for an injunction and we will have the opportunity to present
our position to the trial court shortly. If the trial court does impose
an injunction, we will seek an immediate stay from the Federal Court of
Appeals. Vonage's customers should see no change to any aspect of their
phone service.
That's awful and misleading and before you say "oh come on you are too harsh" read it again and figure out what they are selling. They are selling that their service will still be good and that you shouldn't dump their stock (which people are doing right now). Just more bad spinning on an awful stock.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
Only The News That's Fit to Sell
This morning I did my usual routine - helped my son get ready for school and then I sat down to read newspapers and my RSS feeds while my daughter watched Sesame Street (BTW - I like the Mr Noodle version that was eaten by a dinosaur in Jurassic Park 3). Anyway buried on page 6 of the Newark Star Ledger in a page with snips of Associated Press articles was this title White House board clears surveillance, which I of course read. The small article with little fanfare wrote about how the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board setup to investigate the White House's electronic eavesdropping and financial tracking found that the White House did not violate citizen's civil liberties. Now whether this board did a thorough job or not, I can't tell from this article, but what I can see is that this wasn't featured on the front pages of newspapers. Hmmm?
Not to hold the Star Ledger up as a pillar of fair news reporting, I looked in the WSJ and found nothing. How about the NY Times? Well, I did find an article with a little more meat in it called Privacy Board Clears US Spy Programs, but that was only after I searched for it. It had no link from the main US News page. How about the USA Today that was involved in reporting of the wiretapping story? Nothing but the AP article and once again only after I searched for it. Am I missing something here? Maybe because this wasn't a scientific experiment and just a casual browsing of news sites.
People, the news world has one mission in life - to sell more advertising by upping circulation numbers and only articles that can do that get your attention. There must be so much pressure to go after falling circulation numbers and advertising revenues that perhaps the news you are reading is not as perfect as you once thought it was.
Just like the blogging world where one of your best tools to get an audience is to be controversial, the MSM has to do the same. Call it the J.Jonah Jameson of Spider-man fame (hyphen included as that was the original version of the name) strategy. Jonah would only print articles or photos that he thought would describe Spider-man as a menace, whether he really believed it or not. Why? Because he was solely focused on selling newspapers.
Am I writing that you should ignore main stream media (MSM)? 
No.
What I am writing is to not stay so focused on reading only one source of information. To really be involved in a subject try reading multiple media sources in a day including blogs
and other online news sites. Perhaps with enough versions of the same article, you'll actually get a better view of what is the truth. Reading multiple views of the same subject (liberal and conservative) will only help you understand and see the only truth which is that All The News That's Fit Print Are The Ones That Are Fit to Sell.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
BTW - on the front page of the Star Ledger is an article about a pretty wife's trial for murder and dismemberment of her husband. Very interesting article and one that I've been personally following. The title of the article is No one saw her chop him up, state admits - nicely done.
Incoming Traffic from Outpost-Earth
A few months back I received a message via MyBlogLog inviting me to check out Outpost-Earth. Usually the messages I receive are people who enjoyed reading my post and sent me an encouraging message. This time, I realized that Outpost-Earth was a blog directory, but aside from the typical one I've joined in the past, I could see that my posts might actually get on their homepage and I might actually get some traffic.
When you just start out with your blog the first thing you discover is that the only people that really read your blog are friends and family. I once had a fellow blogger tell me that whenever she made a new post she emailed her list; while that is a good strategy, it kind of defeats the purpose because it is a one time traffic hit. So, your next step to get traffic is to join a series of blog directories and get yourself listed in the major search engines. Again, all good strategies, but what I've found is that you see very little return for your time invested. That is until I actually tried Outpost-Earth. (BTW for more traffic generating tips read these posts).
What makes Outpost-Earth so good for a blogger is that you get your post featured on their homepage plus in the sections that categorize your blog including your topic as well as region. Another key feature is the readability of the posts and user interface to actually find content you are looking for. So, instead of sites that categorize you based on existing traffic and/or votes by people who think you had a good article (bringing up a chicken-egg problem) you actually have a fighting chance to be discovered. (Side note: new bloggers find that they can't get listed or voted until they get traffic and of course can't get traffic without getting listed or voted sending you into a dizzy traffic building stroke)
Outpost-Earth is a great traffic driving tool for bloggers as well as readers looking to tap into new authors without following the herds of everyone else in the blogosphere. If you own a blog, check them out and join their community. It is also a good place to discover new blogs to read.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
Marketing Rapid Fire 3-01-07
Hey, it has been a while since I did a marketing rapid fire, mostly because I use the tag posts for you readers. Anyway, a couple of random observations from the last day or two...
- On a subway train today I saw an ad for MSN Direct's coffee maker
which I found surprising. Not that I thought they shouldn't advertise, but that it was on a subway train which is pretty much not targeted. Plus, I found it interesting that the product does NOT connect to the internet for data but to FM. Interesting that MSN's brand to me stands for computers and connecting to the internet and this product doesn't do that. Heck, I might have bought it if it connected to my home network. How hard could that be for Microsoft? - Speaking of Microsoft, I've had a lot of problems with their search platform lately. Not the results reporting but what seems to be an over zealous editorial team rejecting words left and right. And, to top it off a new mantra to differentiate their marketing campaigns from Yahoo and Google. Not sure what they mean, but with their low search volume, I think they should be more forgiving to marketers hanging in there with them.
- Speaking of search there were two small, but very good articles today in The Wall Street Journal. First, Yahoo Ad-Ranking Tools Clicks With Online Users which shows the success that Yahoo is having with their new search algorithm for displaying ads. Basically, there new model positions ads based on cost, click rate, and relevancy (and others) and this is generating more clicks for them. And, in a related article a Federal judge ruled that Search Engines Can Legally Decline Ads which allows them to continue this practice.
- Staying in the search mode, quite a few search queries have ended up at my website from the search terms "Springsteen social security number". 1) This is scary that people are trying to do that 2) Shows how natural search isn't always reliable because that is just a concatenation of two mutually exclusive posts. I of course have no access to that type of data.
- Finally, people still consistently search on my website for results on the crappy Lowermybills.com ads which no matter how they dress them up with presidents, people shaving copy into their hair, are just plain the worst banner ads I've ever seen. And, judging by the traffic, you readers agree too.
PardonMyFrench,
Eric
Stuff
- Eric Is AdWords Qualified
