For marketers who walk the walk
You know the theory. Now here's the practice. If you want opinions you can trust, advice you can use and real-world experience to learn from, then there's no better collection of marketing experts than here.
Google – The Next Big Marketing Failure?
Like Hoover, Sellotape and Coca Cola, Google has become part of our daily vernacular. We Google someone or something online and receive a myriad of responses in a fraction of a second. It is a fantastic business success story and its impact on how we market many goods and services is no less an accomplishment. But enough ego-stroking. My point is more to do with the sustainability of the Google marketing model and how the future might shape up. The clambering for space in cyberspace has reached epidemic proportions. We all want a slice of exposure to a global audience in the vain hope that it will boost business profits. And indeed, for many companies it continues to serve them well. As a result, Google’s profits soar into the billions – next stop world domination. Such is the frantic competition for search engine appeal many businesses may never experience the benefits of Google’s optimisation techniques – more likely the cold reality of who pays the Ferryman!
Transient and Promiscuous Buyers
Although ubiquitous and immensely powerful as a channel to market, Google isn’t all things to all people. Far from it – it represents a one dimensional marketing perspective with some pretty obvious shortcomings. Let’s take one large one. Most business leaders consider their brand and market leadership to be very important to them. No surprises there, after all they will have invested a lot of money and effort in achieving the required association and recognition. It represents all this hard work; customers will stay loyal and continue to buy products and services. Google, on the other hand, treats brands like commodities, attracting transient, promiscuous buyers that are intent on a ‘good deal’ or the cheapest purchase – buyers that have zero brand loyalty. There is a clear mismatch. Google certainly doesn’t serve its customers on an ‘I’ll provide a proportionate service for you’ basis. In cyberspace you are reduced to bits and bytes and little else matters.
The other question I pose is whether many of these price hunter customers are the ones you want to sustain as part of your long term business goals. B2C fairs better than B2B but the very nature of ephemeral buyers is that they are literally gone tomorrow.
Google’s business model is based on ‘he who pays the most gets to the top of the queue the fastest’ and as long as you continue to pay you will remain in the sponsored red zone for all to click. It is pure genius in its simplicity. The plethora of advertising options and links has created a deluge of domain names and slick marketing claims all vying for your attention. Fair play I say. But there is a large chink in this model. To gain a place on Google’s mantelpiece you have to be the highest bidder. Competition forces this cost up and up for each ‘segment’ that represents you, resulting in a proverbial commercial bun fight. I’m not anti-competition. Quite the reverse – it is in the customer’s interest to have healthy competition but neither am I blinkered to the limitations of this model. To gain exposure with Google, the clicks and stakes can be very high indeed, eliminating many would-be players from the ring. This is not dictated by customer demand or preference but purely the highest bidder so in some respects it could be considered anti-competitive. There comes a point where the ROI for Google ranking and other digital representation becomes unsustainable for the business it promotes. The crowded screen of sponsored links and me-too advertising flashes and irritating pop-ups will undoubtedly contribute to dumbing-down the effectiveness of business promotion and hence its attractiveness as a primary channel to market in the future. It is one dimensional. For the rest of the marketing hopefuls on page 2 (to 500,000), you might need to consider an alternative strategy to bolster your future fortune.
One size doesn’t fit all
For those businesses that do not have a bottomless marketing budget and need to see a real return from investments, a more integrated approach to your target market might be a little more appropriate. This should start with your existing customers and a set of clear, pertinent questions. For example, who are your best and worst customers and why? Are you getting the most from your best customers? Are your least favourite customers costing you too much to service? Can you be doing things differently? Are you treating all of your customers the same? Some of these points you may find soul searching – others a simple reality check. The point is that you can learn more about your own business through your customers than anything else – and that’s both good and bad! Customers are not all the same because they do not all represent the same value yet so many companies adopt the same approach to everyone. If you are spreading your attentions equally – those that really need more may feel neglected and leave. Those customers that contribute little or no profit deserve treating relative to this fact. Use the marketing channels that are most appropriate to communicate with your customers and question ‘one size fits all’ thinking. Money Mapping has developed from the need to understand the real monetary value of customers which helps business leaders to re-engineer their businesses on logical grounds. It’s a sound place to start – even for established businesses.
At this point let me clarify that I think Google is an important part of a multi-dimensional marketing strategy for many businesses, but it is just that – part of a bigger picture. You might like to consider how you can take greater control of your marketing investment through more structured, intelligent techniques including Money Mapping rather than casting your net blindly into cyberspace. So, better to drive people to your website perhaps – for the right reasons – than rely on market forces at the behest of Google’s perfect marketing model! Time to go fishing then but better you know where the biggest fish are to be found.
+44 (0)20 8614 0277
Iain, is Google mainly competing with advertising media or direct marketing?
How are the dynamics of the two changed by social media?
Where does golf fit into the mix?
Thanks for these great questions Neilson. I think that Google is competing in the DM and Ad space and eating both for breakfast right now. In time people will also see that TV media also provides other services besides just creating todays leads and revert back to TV ads as well as Google and DM will revert back to paper mailings as well as email and google searches. What is for sure people will realise that Google is just one dimension of a complex customer and prospect markeitng strategy.
As for social media it is important and gaining ground very quickly but I see as more in the PR and word of mouth marketing stream right now. It will develop and require significant attention but yet again is just one channel to market.
As for golf, if appropriate to take you number one client to a golf club and play golf with them to gain a stronger more personal relationship, do it. People buy people and the creatyion of stronger more personal contact with your bigger and more valuable customers is critical to all businesses. bird in the hand is worth two in the bush as they say.
Iain, interesting points and to some extent I agree with you. However, is the beauty of Google the fact that you can compete in segments which you potentially would never be able to reach usually?
I agree that a bun-fight of epic proportions could exist if every company goes after the same keywords, however the savvy companies (and marketers) should instead be looking at their Analytics data (which Google gives them for free) and optimising their site for niche keywords which their bigger competitors are not currently thinking about. They can then bid on these. It is pure market segmentation, positioning and targeting, but with a 21st century spin on it.
The problem is that a number of misinformed companies believe they have to be at the top of Google on the most common keywords to compete and are willing to pay good money after bad to get there. Google gives us marketers a plethora of tools for free and it is up to us to use them to the best of our ability rather than chase the magical top position (which is only going to be temporary anyway).
Thank you for your comments Neil and I agree that Google provide you with a range of tools to try and understand your customers and buyers better but they are limited in their ability to give you a true lifetime value for each of the customers who sign up with you.
They are a one dimensional view of the customer based on getting them to you business and as I say so often ‘not all customers are equal’ your best customers can be worth 5 to 50 times more than your worst.
But it is the marketers who fail to understand this and Google are more than happy with this that want to be number one at all times and waste so much money attracting customers who will never make it past beak even at best.
It is about the analytics and understanding that customers are not equal and all channels have something to offer when trying to get a good new customer on board.
Being one dimensional and using Google for everything is bound to lead to tears in my view, maybe not on day one but at some time soon it will come back to bite you.
I have to say that I don’t agree with this article very much.
I think its not a very balanced view and a little ‘mischievous’. The fact is that whether you are a B2B or B2C company, potential customers will want to vet you online.
Whilst Google makes millions via PPC their model is actually based on providing quality content. If your website has quality content and is interesting enough that people will link to it, then your website will be successful and without paying a bean. I don’t use Adwords at all and the company website generates millions in extra client business in a B2B environment.
Yes, Adwords is a fastrack method which bolsters the Google coffers but is not as sustainable as organic SEO growth. Taking Adwords aside (and lets face it, most people look at organic listings over sponsored links), Google actually offers a level playing field for businesses and rewards companies who publish quality material.
I can’t see any flaw in that?
Like Microsoft before it, it seems that yet more people are jumping on the kick Google bandwagon. My only dissappointment with Google as a business is that they have not gone full steam ahead with cloud solutions to bury Microsofts dated business model.
Also how many companies out there will let internet marketeers make money for nothing through Adsense. Yes Google are covered by the PPC costs but I know for a fact that Google is paying 60% PPC income on adsense clicks. Hardly highway robbery is it?
So in essence Google is saying, “if you pay for it you can benefit but it will cost you” or “if you develop websites properly with good quality content you will benefit and it costs nothing”. What on earth is wrong with that?
A quick footnote. Its a know successful SEO practice to post controversial blogs. Mission accomplished I think.
great topic! google is really dominating this days..
“To gain a place on Google’s mantelpiece you have to be the highest bidder”. Yes its a factor, but its not the only one (or the main), relevance is equally important as reflected by quality score (includes CTR, landing page relevance, load time etc) so slight misrepresentation of the business model.
Secondly, innovative use of search isnt just about DR, check out the Converse case study http://www.effie.org/winners/showcase/2009/3412 then view video.
Thanks for your comments so far everyone and but I just wanted to be clear on the issue being debated. It isn’t ‘does Google adwords work’ it is will they give you the best most profitable customers and work forever?
The answer to both these in my experience is no.
Google ad words will deliver transient, more promiscuous price sensitive customers who will buy once or twice and then move on. They will not buy as frequently or as much as your biggest and best customers.
Seen the results from the work we do with clients to analyse their customer bases.
Google won’t fail but if you base your marketing strategy too heavily on Google ad words your business will not optimize it’s customer mix. You will end up with more smaller more transient customers.
will not
Iain, I think the issue you raise is valid in the sense that Google should never be the single most important marketing option for a business as there are valuable alternatives.
But your comments on the fact that businesses will not be able to maintain the client mix is simply NOT true.
I perform online marketing for a steel company. 70% of our business is export. That business has grown considerably through SEO by reaching global customers that otherwise would have remained anonymous.
As I have made clear to my employers and I will make the same comment here, all well crafted SEO delivers is enquiries – how those enquiries are serviced, how much client retention you get and customer loyalty, is down solely to the expertise and diligence of the business.
Google merely serves the purpose of getting you in front of the client. Then you are on your own. Our business has seen a huge increase in account led business from initial enquries of the web.
If your response rate is poor, customer service poor or indeed the overall package you are offering is poor, then you will fail. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with Google.
The majority of our clients repeat order. We have products they want at a competitive price. The only way these clients will drop off is through lack of management from the business.
Google ranking and promotion should be seen as a massive opportunity because done well it is by far one fo the best marketing tickets in town.
But how you business performs and how you engage with new and exisiting clients is actually where the success lies.
We should not confuse the merits of organic SEO vs PPC. Much of the comments you make about Adwords is correct in my view. But the organic route is powerful, far-reaching and sustainable.
One last point. I know a company that trades end of line sports goods on line. 5 years ago they were two small factory outlets and now they are a £40 million turnover company. There premises are state of the art and are they are a major employer. And their sole marketing strategy is based around Google Adwords. This has been going on for over 5 years now and their profits and turnover continue to grow.
So creative Adwords marketing works too but I agree that it is not right for everyone nor should it be a substitute for going down the natural ranking route.
If you are having difficulty making Google marketing work for your clients then I can only presume that your not experts in it because I’ve traded healthily with these skills for over 10 years.
John, you have certainly made SEO work for you and some businesses have made Google Ad words work for them and I agree whole heartily with you that it is the staff and how you handle enquiries that deliver results and relying on SEO or Google to deliver customer service and experience is not part of equation, people still buy people.
But when it comes to customers I would contest that customers are not equal and in the B2B world which is where I specialise a good customer is significantly more valuable than a poor customer. In specialist markets such as the one that you operate in then the generation of an enquiry is a primary achevement and closing it critical, but if you operate in markets such as our clients do a good customer may be worth £250,000 per annum( and there are few of them) and a poor one just £250 (and there are very many more of those upwards of 10,000 times more than good.) So spending a lot of time dealing with lots and lots of small enquires burns valuable sales time that could be better used chasing large opportunities. I have seen clients spending 35% of there efforts to chase just 9% of the sales. I contest this is not a good use of time unless the business is set up to deal with lots and lots of small enquiries.
So in conclusion I would agree with you in all aspects but it does depend on the type of business you are and customers you want. Using Google or SEO to generate your enquiries will not distinguish between large enquiries and small enquiries, it delivers enquiries so unless you have balanced marketing program that uses all forms of marketing SEO, Ad words, Direct Mail, Sales Staff etc then you not get what you think by using Ad words and I mean Ad words not SEO you will get what Google can deliver and that will be a mix of enquire is both big and small, profitable and not profitable. If Google deliver the wrong mix beacuse you don’t understand your god and bad customers and you get the wrong business and your marketing will have failed and ended in tears, maybe with you out of business.
I see a lot of businesses trying to find the silver bullet by spending more and more on Ad words and the market gets more and more competitive and the way out is not to spend more its to spend the same amount on better more balanced marketing.
I am sure that you have spent 10 years getting your skills honed and have had ups and downs, successes and failures but it has taken you 10 years to get up to speed and see the benefits of all the tools at your disposal and from your comments I would sumise that you don’t spend lots on Google Ad words either having learned that there are other ways to deliver the results.
Actually, ti be honest, I think your response here Iain is pretty well spot on.
A great point you make is regarding the mix of enquiries. We have to politely ‘decline to quote’ at times or indeed we would become busy fools. However a client today who may wish to buy a £250 pipe may spend £1million in six months time on a major project.
You are right about Adwords too. The problem with adwords is that it is like throwing a lot of mud against the wall to see what sticks. The problem is that irrelevant clicks cost you money and the process is better controlled through web page SEO driven content.
I hope that you have not taken my comments as in any way being over zealous. In essence I believe we are singing from the same hymn sheet but come from different ends of the spectrum. You have also presumably guessed that I am passionate about this topic.
Like you, I do not believe that everthing is Google and know from experience that a mix of marketing strategies best serves a business. I also think that Adwords is a potentially flawed marketing practice.
But I am a fan of Google due to the opportunites it affords to businesses who are prepared to put the marketing effort in. In PPC terms Google may well fail one day but in organic terms I can only see it going from strength to strength. And I think that is a good thing. Rewarding websites who post meaningful content is no bad practice.
I look forward to viewing further blogs from you Iain on the future. Very interesting reading.
Thanks for all your comments John. I don’t take any of it personally because none of this is personal it is simply a view based on the observations I have been able to make with our clients data.
Ad words and SEO are a channel like any other and have the same quality issues and the need to be worked hard by clients and the sales team to make them work. What I wanted to get across and I feel our debat has helped is that Ad words are not the only channel to use and if treated as such will lead to asmany issues and problems as all the other channels.
I hope you like th other blogs I publish, and I try and do one a fortnight then I look forward to having more debates in the future a well.
Hehe. I certainly look forward to it Iain. Keep up the excellent work!
regards
John
I think john is a good SEOER
Since Google has around 90% market share in the UK. Are you saying the valuable customers are all to be had at Yahoo/Bing? I think not.
Everyone I know has used the Internet, and all of them have used Google – so surely all potential customers use Google?
For example, one person might search for “cheap shower cubicle” and another may search for “designer walk in shower” – the higher value customer to be had here is likely to be the second one. With proper tracking this can be identified at the keyword level.
You also get people who solely click on position 1, these are the people with little time and just want the best – they aren’t comparing prices. At position 8 you may find you get the tire kickers who are prepared to spend an extra 30 minutes to save a few quid.
Position 1 is often the company with the best marketing – they offer a good product, they listen to their customers and they probably have a well converting landing page. If companies bid at number 1 and it is unsustainable they will either go out of business or stop. That is why Google is so effective.
So I think Google does a good job – maybe next they will go into the CRM side of things…
Sorry to come back to this, but with Google’s new Advertising product, Remarketing, you can target people that have bought from you before and reach them with repeat ads.
If nobody here is using Remarketing or hasn’t heard of it, I urge you to check it out and take the time to learn about it, it will be extremely powerful, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it double’s Google’s ad revenue.
John Winterton
filure in china?
I think Google does a good job – maybe next they will go into the CRM side of things