Internet Marketing Blog

A recent press release from Nielsen/NetRatings provides statistics on U.S. search engine usage and market share. Data from approximately 60 search engines reveals a 69% increase in the total number of searches from 4 billion in January of 2005 to 5.7 billion in January of 2006.

What is causing this increase in traffic: more search engine users, more searches per user, or a combination of both? Perhaps a substantial investment in the Nielsen/NetRatings report would divulge this information, but it is not provided in the press release. It is probably safe to assume that this increase is combination of both. We can infer this somewhat vaguely from a quote by chief analyst Ken Cassar, “Web users are conducting more searches not because they can’t find what they’re looking for, but because search as a utility has become deeply ingrained into people’s everyday lives.”

The “Big Three” continue to dominate search: Google, Yahoo!, and MSN. In what is presumably a summary of searches only on their primary domains (not their partner sites), Google remains comfortably on top.

If you participate in the AdWords Content Network, Google now provides you with more information about partner sites, allowing you to select properties based upon your target demographic. In essence what they provide is the ability to filter their large list of content partner sites down to a subset that has the viewer characteristics that you specify.

It is important to recognize that ads and program are not any different than they were before. This new capability simply helps you select the most appropriate content sites.

More information can be found here.

Google has provided an excellent summary of click fraud and how they combat it in their Inside AdWords blog. This is highly recommended reading for anyone concerned with click fraud. As noted previously, I’m skeptical of the value of detecting and fighting click fraud unless you’re a big spender or have very strong evidence of improper behavior.

Google has purchased Writely, a web-based word processing tool.

Is this a shot across the bow of Microsoft? Many think so. I think this is healthy in that it provides more competitive pressure for Windows and Office, the cash cows that have made the Microsoft empire and that presently have a virtual stranglehold on their respective markets. (Mac fans, I only mean in market share.) Does it also mean that Google is becoming the new Microsoft? What does this development mean for Yahoo!, who has recently positioned itself as a provider of various information services rather than “simply” a search engine?

Speaking of click fraud, Google has announced a settlement proposal in a case brought by a company, Lane’s Gifts, an advertiser using Google’s AdWords service. As of this writing, the settlement has yet to be approved by the judge in the case.

The settlement includes several important provisions:

• Google previously would only consider click fraud complaints that covered the 60 days prior to notification of the suspected events. This time limit has been lifted entirely.
• Credits for fraudulent clicks will be compensated for with a credit for additional Google services, not cash or equivalent refunds.
• The settlement covers advertisers who have claimed uncompensated click charges from 2002 to the date of settlement.

More information can be found on the Official Google Blog.

While this case and settlement indicates that there is incentive for search engines to improve click fraud detection/prevention, one could also cynically interpret the settlement as a cap on liability. While I believe that Google will take the high road of continued development, this settlement will likely mollify some of the bearish Google investors concerned about the damage click fraud could do to the company’s bottom line.

A recent article at eMarketer discusses advertisers’ fears of click fraud. They cite a SEMPO survey indicating that click fraud has tripled to 16%. (Presumably this is the number of clicks thought to be fraudulent; the article isn’t clear.) Other studies indicate that almost half of all companies and agencies have experienced click fraud, and that most of the increase comes from affiliates attempting to manipulate click-revenues.

What does this mean for your company? Not much. First, there is very little reliable data describing the problem of click fraud, and it can vary industry-to-industry and company-to-company. If the assertion that most of the increase in fraud is from affiliate sites, then there’s no impact for the majority of companies that don’t employ them. If you’re using the content network in AdWords or Yahoo Sponsored Search, you’re probably more likely to experience some click fraud.

All this being said, you have probably had some fraudulent ad clicks, and for most companies with small to medium budgets, it’s the cost of doing business. Looking for, identifying, documenting, reporting to the search engines, and pursuing refunds will be more expensive than accepting the fraud in the majority of cases for all but the biggest campaigns and those circumstances where a concerted effort is being made to manipulate your ads.

Google has recently begun an experiment with AdWords placements in traditional printed magazines. (Remember them?) The initial auction for participation has ended with winners to be notified by email today. These winners’ ads will be shown in various popular magazines in April. They are testing newspaper ads in Chicago and are investigating broadcast media as well.

In this article, Susan Kuchinska describes how Google wants to make their print ad program an aggregator of both ads and media, providing advertisers with the ability to purchase exposure in places that they otherwise could not economically.