RKG Logo

In my first two posts on SEM Pricing models, SEM Pricing: Revenue Sharing and SEM Pricing: percent of Ad Spend, I discussed the relative merits of revenue sharing vs percentage of ad cost models. I concluded that basing the fees on ad costs, with clear efficiency limits applied to the competitive search terms and well-constructed maximum caps provided the best incentives to align the SEM’s interests with the retailer’s.

Let’s turn to the next question: is it best to bundle services into one pricing bag, or have individual services that can be priced separately? Are you better off with a pricing structure that encompasses Adwords, Yahoo, MSN, Ask, and the myriad tiny search platforms with the Comparison Shopping platforms, with your affiliate marketing management and Search Engine Optimization (SEO) work as well?

Bundled pricing seems simple and appealing. Like an All-You-Can-Eat Buffet, it might stand to reason that the prices are fixed such that the light eaters subsidize the heavy eaters. Buffets are then a good deal for the heavy eaters; not such a good deal for others.

Unfortunately the online advertising world is not that simple. The cost of providing food to a buffet is linear: the guy who eats two steaks costs twice as much to serve as the guy who eats one. In advertising, the bundle contains a mixture of services of varying costs to the provider, and varying value to the retailer. The high cost products are not always the high value ones and therein lies the rub.

Bundled pricing takes away the retailer’s ability to pick and choose which services are worth the cost, forcing retailers to pay for some of the high cost/ low value services that they might prefer to drop given a more transparent pricing model.

Dare I name some of these products/services that cost a great deal to provide, but generally provide little value to the retailer? You Bet!

Second and Third Tier Search Engines. Huge amount of work to support and a trivial amount of quality traffic available. “But my SEM provides this service for free as part of the package!” – No it doesn’t, it simply charges more for the package to cover the cost of the service. If they “do everything” for a reasonable price, the issue may be: how much of your attention goes to the important first tier engines and is that enough?

Comparison Shopping Engines. Datafeeds are easy to send, but difficult to manage. The CSEs have no coherent systems for reporting clicks and costs, thus the IT cost of pulling the data is high and requires ongoing expensive maintenance. For non-sku based retailers the sales volume from the CSE’s is miniscule compared to the cost of providing the service. For SKU-based merchants CSE’s can be valuable, but a la carte pricing for the full service might even raise questions for those folks.

Affiliate Network Management. Managing and controlling a huge network of affiliates costs a great deal of money…at least in theory. It would if the Networks actually did control and manage the affiliates. Anyhow, retailers pay a great deal for Affiliate advertising, but anyone who has looked under the hood knows that very little of the traffic is incremental. Mostly you’re paying commissions on sales you’d get anyway.


Search Engine Optimization.
Oh my gosh, did I say that? Yep, I did. Here we have an entire industry based on two false premises: 1) That a large percentage of web sales come from “natural/organic” search – not true when you correctly exclude brand searches; and 2) that outside firms can meaningfully impact your rank on important competitive retail terms.

“But I’m seeing growth in my Natural Search sales.” Cool, does the growth translate to overall growth in site sales, or are you simply giving credit to your SEO firm for orders that used to be free? If the total site sales are growing, that’s great, but everyone’s site sales are growing as more people become comfortable shopping online. The real measure is: has the growth rate increased as a result of SEO efforts? The answer may be disappointing considering the price tag.

I’ll rant in more detail about SEO in my next post, and better define what SEO services can and cannot do for you.

The power of a la carte pricing is the transparency that comes with it. Seeing exactly how much you’re paying, for exactly which service, and tracking the incremental value of those services is the best way to keep your online management firm on the straight and narrow.

If you like this post, consider subscribing to our RSS feed. You can also have new posts sent to you via email.

Share this post (via email, Digg, Delicious, etc)

Similar Posts

Trackback

http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2006/09/08/sem-pricing-bundled-services-or-a-la-carte/trackback/

Blogs Citing This Post

  1. Pingback: Rev-Share Comp Models Considered Harmful on December 19, 2007

Comments

  1. Sandra Steven, March 2, 2007:

    I appreciate the article. I also second the thought that the organic search really is helpful increasing traffic/sales but at the same time is really difficult to implement.

Your Comment

We "do-follow" links in comments. This may help your search rankings. Learn more...

Email Updates

Categories

Recent Comments

  • Catch Him and Keep Him: Larry, you are so right-on-the-money on this topic. My dating advice site leads to the very opt-in gateway page you...
  • Mike Moran: I will check out both of these, Alan. I never thought of using e-mail this way before I started using gootodo as my to-do list. I can...
  • Sue: Open source can definitely be a cheaper way of deploying software but smaller businesses need to make sure they either have in-house skills to...
  • Adam: Great article, good advice. Here are a few other questions, in no particular order, that you should ask if you are looking for first-class...
  • Tracy Glomski: "...we are taking business away from traditional data brokers, because when you click on data brokers and others and you take...
  • George Michie: Hi Jon, thanks for your comments and excellent question. I agree that affiliate orders driven by non-brand PPC are incremental and...
  • Jon: George - I really enjoyed your post and agree with the majority of your statements. Can you provide your point of view on affiliates that make...
  • Mike: It's about time for a service like this. I was surprised to learn jsut a few years back (when Choicepoint lost all their data)that there are...
  • Ryan Douglas: George, Thank you for the reply. Great minds do think alike, and I appreciate the citation in your recent post.
  • Alan Rimm-Kaufman: To Harry's credit, it was vanished at that particular moment in time due to a WP bug. As Geld points out, the trackback link has...
  • Geld Lenen: Harry -> Here. BetterRetail, I still buy stuff through search, even though I try to get a commission from it. My parents, friends...
  • George Michie: Hi Ryan, I don't blame you for asking, but in fact I hadn't read your post until just now. Chalk it up to great minds thinking...
  • Barry Wheeler: Sure this may be important to the "paid dating services", but how does this relate to the massive movement that is taking place with...
  • Ryan Douglas: George, I find some striking similarities to my recent blog post from the 9th... http://www.plumbersurplus.c...
  • Alan Rimm-Kaufman: "He who converts best wins" -- Amen, Chris, we're reading from the same book on that one.

Blog Stats

  • Posts: 670
  • Words: 288,453
  • Comments: 897

Administration

Close
  • Social Web
  • E-mail
Powered by ShareThis