po:

I read a few forums to keep up with it all and feel the need to post somewhat of a 'po' provication post to help bring people's paradigm out of the google spell. Basically because I have read a lot of newby posts from people learning from outdated info and experienced seo's still caught up in the addiction of creation and incremental change. So here it is.

Outcomes in search engine optimization can only be measured in search results for phrases or words you are targeting...

Outcomes in search engine marketing can only be measured in profit...

So with respect I submit this reality check...

Focus on movement in serps and the money you make as a result.

If you have the #1 site you win in seo.

If you have the #1 site and the #2 site is making more money than you they win in sem.

Refocus on the end game.

.

 

what does "po" mean?

 

Edward de Bono... po: a provication moving outside yes and no - thinking outside of categories and questioning assumptions.

He uses it to designate a statement... po: statement....

To say, I am designating this statement as a provication towards creative thinking.

[at least thats the way I understand it]

 

Is that Edward De Bono guy Cher's deceased ex-husband? Or the lead singer in U2?

 

minstrel you will love his books, an amazing man. Last one I read was 'I am right, you are wrong.' The must read is 'six thinking hats,' another fav. is 'Serious Creativity.'

Anyway, my bad for the odd title.

 

I thought my 13 year old son wrote that book

But back to the original post, you're absolutely right, although sometimes it's about visits and repeat visits rather than sales. Too many people get caught up in the SEO race and forget that point.

 

I'm not sure if I agree with that; it should be:

"If the no.2 site is making more money from their SEM efforts, then they win in SEM."

The no.2 site could also be making more money due to offline marketing, higher profit margins, less overheads and so on. This is not because they're "winning" in SEM.

You're quite right though in saying that people get lost looking at rankings, when the bottom line is really what counts. Thanks for the reality check

 

well, in a way they would be winning SEM... You can do offline search marketing too- getting your name out there in real life so people notice it when searching for your products later when they go online is still SEM.

 

With all respect, I don't think getting your name out there in real life can really be considered SEM at all. It's just plain marketing. Perhaps it makes SEM easier, but it's still not the same. All forms of marketing affect other forms - ie.. a tv commercial generates recognition that in turn helps the radio ad that in turn helps the print commercial that in turn helps the tv commercial and so on..

Measuring the effectiveness of any specific type of marketing isn't as easy as stating; 'if the company makes more money, then that xx type of marketing is working'. Any marketer has to consider which particular types of marketing are the ones earning the money and which ones might be a waste of time and money.

 

SEO is part of SEM. They can't really compete against eachother as suggested in the simplified example.

 

I think Domenic's point was that too many people focus on PR when they should be focusing on traffic to their websites and conversion of that traffic into "sales". We've all seen spammy looking sites in SE results but we don't click on them usually... we go down the list until we find one that looks like it might actually offer something useful. Or if we do click on the spammy site, we click on the back button as soon as it loads.

The point is that what we should be focusing on is getting people to our sites and keeping them there. SEO is only one part of that process.

 

Of course we do so - but all the "normal" Goolge-Users that dont have any interest in SEO do so too?

If all these spammers dont take place with ist - would they do it then?


Im new in this buisness, but i think they are more successful than one thinks...