RKG Logo 434-970-1010

As search marketing becomes increasingly sophisticated, I thought it might be useful to throw out some “requirements” for any system meaningfully vying for supremacy in bidding technology. These will come out roughly weekly until I run out of ideas :-)

I’m speaking on this topic at SMX Advanced in Seattle next week, but I can’t go into much detail on that panel, so I’ll take the opportunity to flesh each point out here.

Bidding is second in importance only to an exhaustive, well thought-out keyword list for generating results in search. Contrary to what some would say, not all bidding systems are created equal, and the performance differences are material. If you’re in the market for a SEM let these “requirements” help guide your process.

Requirement #1: Proprietary System with Strong Statistical Foundation

You can’t be the leader in the space if you’re using someone else’s tool. Even if the tool you’re using is pretty good, the fact that you’re not elbow deep in the bowels of the thing means your flexibility is limited, your understanding of how it works is shallow, and you’re beholden to someone else for important new innovations.

Consider for example a tale of two keywords: Keyword 1 has a conversion rate of 5.0 % and an AOV of $30, for a sales per click value of $1.50. Keyword 2 has a conversion rate of 0.2 % and an AOV of $750. The sales per click value is identical, yet most bidding systems will have a hard time reaching that conclusion for keyword 2 consistently. Likely the calculated value will fluctuate wildly and its bids along with it.

We’re constantly making adjustments/improvements to how our system functions. This is a complicated game, the rules change, the objectives change, and we learn more and more as we go. If those changes don’t get folded into the system then you get trampled by the competition.

Some companies present their bidding system as “The Perfect Machine”, give it some cute trademarked name and tout it as the ultimate. I’m deeply suspicious of any firm that wouldn’t describe their system as a work in progress. Sure, we play the marketing game of throwing Alan’s PhD in Stats from MIT at folks and suggesting that our smart math guy is smarter than our competitor’s smart math guy, but the reality is that human behavior is hard to model, and what we’re talking about here is figuring out patterns in human behavior.

We’re still learning and innovating, but that’s what having a proprietary system is all about.

Stay tuned for more in the series, and swing by my panel discussion in Seattle if you get a chance!

George

Technorati Tags:

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


Related Posts

    No related posts.

Comments

  1. Stephen, May 27, 2008:

    Good stuff. I am looking forward to reading the whole series. Thanks for sharing!

Your Comment

Tags

RKG Tags:

Technorati Tags:

Trackback

http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2008/05/26/bidding-technology-requirement-1/trackback/

Blogs Citing This Post

  1. Pingback: Bid Management in 2008: Requirement #2 on June 16, 2008
  2. Pingback: PPC Bid Management: Requirement #3, The Feedback Loop on July 9, 2008
  3. Pingback: PPC Bidding: Requirement #4: Ad level bidding on September 9, 2008
  4. Pingback: Why Position Bidding Wastes Money | Web Data Source on September 29, 2008
  5. Pingback: Why Position Bidding Wastes Money on September 30, 2008
  6. Pingback: Why Position Bidding Wastes Money - http://ex-brands.com on June 1, 2010

Email Updates

Categories

Recent Comments

  • George Michie: Thanks Adam, and your point is well taken. It is certainly worth pointing out that when the pendulum swings back to the middle the...
  • Adam Audette: Brilliant post, George. There’s something to be said for the ‘middle way’ to be sure, for dedication to what works...
  • George Michie: Billy, I’ve been predicting the death of Twitter for a long time. I try to keep those predictions to myself though, because I...
  • George Michie: Use the force, Luke, use the force! :-)
  • Siddharth Shah: Hi George, The paper chose books for a few reasons. This is what they say in the paper ” By focusing on books, we study a...
  • George Michie: Chad, thanks for the observations! Sid, the paper sounds interesting. I only read the abstract, but I wonder if they studied type of...
  • billy wolt: Hi George, this is the reason i have avoided twitter….the mob will move away soon. drop me an email, i want to pick your brain...
  • Siddharth Shah: Hi George, Your comment on retail reminded me of this paper I read a few months ago that investigated the online to offline...
  • Chad Summerhill: Hi George, sometime in my early 20’s I decided that if the mob was following something or doing something that I would be...
  • Chad Summerhill: No worries, I wouldn’t tell me either. But I’ve never been shy about asking smart people questions–has made a...
  • George Michie: Thanks Chad, I’ll answer these questions gladly…as soon as you come to work for us! :-) No question that the historical...
  • Chad Summerhill: Great post! Looks like I’ve got some work to do. Willing to share more about your bid-management predictive analytics?...
  • Chad Summerhill: Hi George, I would be honored. I’ll email you soon and we can talk about the details of the article. Thanks!
  • George Michie: Hi Chad, thanks for the link! If you’re willing to share the details I’d be delighted to do a feature at RKG Blog.
  • Chad Summerhill: Since I mentioned our in-house web analytics data warehouse earlier in the comments, I thought I would include a link to my new...

Blog Stats

  • Posts: 991
  • Words: 481,301
  • Comments: 3,360

Administration