Entries from March 2008 ↓
March 28th, 2008 — SEM, SEO, SEO Writing, Tips
March 26th, 2008 — SEO, Tips
March 26th, 2008 — SEO, Tips
by Catharine P. Taylor , Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Granted, it’s way too easy to dump on Starbucks these days, but I was taken aback when I started to Google the name of the coffee chain’s so-called social networking site on Monday and discovered the glee people seemed to take in dumping on MyStarbucksIdea.com.
“You know social networking has jumped the shark when Starbucks gets into the act,” said Elinor Mills at News.com’s News Blog. At Jim Romenesko’s (yes, that Jim Romenesko) Starbucks Gossip blog, one commenter said that “the new ’site’ is just a rebranded Starbucks centric Digg. Just kind of bland.”
Said another: “The website is a complete joke. All of us know they already view this site [Starbucks Gossip] to read everyone’s opinion. Although I’m sure they will read and maybe even use others’ suggestions, it’s nothing more then another PR move to let customers know they’re here to listen and to be able to monitor something, unlike starbucksgossip.com.”
New York magazine called it “The biggest (and possibly worst)” idea to come out of Starbucks’ annual meeting last week.
So is the Starbucks social-networking site that bad? Well, yeah. At least if it’s defined as a social network. New York termed it “a virtual suggestion box” and that description comes closer to fitting the bill, except that visitors can vote on ideas submitted by other Starbucks registrants (yes, you have to register), and comment on their ideas. Not that the most popular ideas will necessarily be implemented, mind you. To me, being able to comment and vote is a big “so what?” That level of interaction is just the baseline cost-of-entry for this kind of site these days. There’s nothing particularly special, or all that social network-y, about My Starbucks Idea, though it would have been considered revolutionary three or four years ago.
In fairness to Starbucks, the company itself doesn’t seem to be calling it a social networking site. After combing Starbucks’ own release about the site and other “Strategic Initiatives To Transform and Innovate the Customer Experience” — enough of the corporatespeak! — all I could find was a reference to it as an “online community network,” which might be something slightly different… I guess.
But I’m probably splitting hairs with the definitions. Some of those who complained about the site on blogs and news sites can rightly be charged with indulging in gratuitous Starbucks-bashing; Starbucks has been built up, even revered, over the years, so now it’s time for the tear-down. But the site — and the Starbucks brand — does have deeper problems than a bunch of people who like piling on. Whether it’s called a social network or an online community network, My Starbucks Idea doesn’t do much to connect Starbucks loyalists — or even haters — to each other. In fact, somehow, even though it solicits ideas and feedback from consumers, the site feels like it’s much more about Starbucks than the people who go there. It’s like the popular kid who wants dozens of friends around her, as long as all they do is talk about her.
Allowing Starbucks consumers to connect with one another is a missed (or maybe future) opportunity. Few brands have the opportunity to build a real-world community into a virtual one, and vice versa. Think of the ways you could expand this virtual community out into the real world of baristas and chai tea lattes, by building communities around individual stores, adding Twitter-style feeds to let consumers weigh in on whether the new Pike Place Roast was any good, and building upon some of the corporate responsibility initiatives the company has in place by further involving customers. Instead, the site is a series of disconnected blog posts, and while some of the posts have garnered hundreds of comments, the site, as it is today, isn’t particularly sustainable.
Though one person who responded to a tweet about the site I posted on Twitter said she’d stayed engaged with My Starbucks Idea for 30 minutes, there’s only so long that one can read about ideas for in-store coffee tastings and drink-of-the-month specials before the content gets old, and you find yourself thinking it’s time to head over to TMZ to catch up on the latest with LiLo and Brit. They are endlessly fascinating; MyStarbucksIdea.com isn’t.
Catharine P. Taylor has been covering digital media and advertising for almost 15 years. She currently writes daily about advertising on her blog, Adverganza.com and can be reached at cathyptaylor@gmail.com
March 12th, 2008 — SEM, SEO
March 10th, 2008 — SEM, SEO
Are SEM Salaries Too High, Too Low, Or Just Right?
by Mark Simon , Monday, March 10, 2008
AS I’VE MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY IN this column, acquiring and retaining talented people is one of the biggest long-term problems the SEM industry has. In my view, while automation is crucial, so are people, and employees — whether they work for in-house teams or at agencies — have to be paid fairly and treated well, or they’ll walk across the street to a competitor. So imagine my shocked surprise when I read the following posting on a popular job Web site:
Major company looking for a hard working, talented person. Responsibilities include leveraging social networks, content creation and editing, e-mail marketing, creating online press releases, SEO, Paid Search, plus learning how to set up podcasts and online videos.
That’s quite a demanding job with a lot of responsibility requiring a very well-rounded skill set. But guess what the pay for this job was — $35K? $45K? $60K?
Nope — more like zero! Incredibly, this listing was for an unpaid intern position (although it did mention that “pay was possible after an evaluation period”). Just as disturbing is that this firm’s management clearly doesn’t regard SEO and search marketing as mission-critical activities, but as mere line items on a laundry list of marketing tasks. This kind of attitude is a recipe for mediocre, under-performing online campaigns, plus a guarantee of employee burnout (if you’ve ever had to juggle e-mail marketing, SEO, PPC, and podcasting production tasks, you know exactly what I mean).
Fortunately, there are few companies out there that are as stingy with their SEM staff budget as the company above. The overwhelming majority seem to agree that these people should be fairly paid. According to SEMPO, which published its 2008 SEM Salary Survey in January, two-thirds of survey respondents with 0-3 years of experience reported making less than $40K per year, which is a fair wage (unless you’re attempting to live in Manhattan or Silicon Valley). Among staffers with 5-7 years of experience, none made less than $40K per year.
These salaries might not be very competitive in terms of the larger technology industry, but they’re high enough to ensure a continuing supply of young professionals into the field, which is essential if we’re going to avoid the kind of rampant salary inflation characteristic of the last tech bubble. Interestingly, in-house SEM teams are handling more money than ever. One third of respondents report managing accounts over $200K per month. This figure was unexpectedly high (SEMPO expected the figure to be only $100K per month).
Far less is known about compensation at SEM agencies, which may skew higher than in-house salaries given that there’s more job specialization (many in-house SEM staffs share other non-search marketing assignments, which just doesn’t happen at SEM agencies). SEMPO is trying hard to fill this knowledge gap; in late February, it launched its First Search Engine Marketing Agency Salary Survey, which can be filled out online at http://www.sempo.org/news/sempo_agency_salary_survey/. The results will be announced at ad:tech San Francisco (April 15-17).
If you’re employed at an SEM agency or know someone who is, contributing 12 minutes to SEMPO’s salary survey is a worthwhile use of your time. While it sometimes seems that the SEM profession has been here forever, it’s really a brand-new field. Getting some good hard data on salary numbers can give you a good sense of whether you’re being overpaid, underpaid, or whether your compensation package is just right.
 |
Mark Simon is vice president of industry relations at Didit, an agency for search engine marketing and auctioned media management based in New York. You can reach Mark at msimon@didit.com. |
March 6th, 2008 — SEO, Tips
March 5th, 2008 — SEO, Tips
March 5th, 2008 — SEO, SEO Writing
by Anna Schibrowsky, Wednesday, March 5, 2008 9:00 AM CST
My client’s website ranks in the top ten on relevant keyword searches.
The strong calls-to-action on every page convert traffic to phone calls.
His site gets huge ROI and generates most of his business.
Now what?
I’ve started thinking about the people who are looking for the results he provides, but don’t know the “right” keywords. What are they typing into search engines? I’ve identified three kinds of keywords that I’d like to see reaching the site that fall outside the scope of the service description:
—Problems my client’s service resolves.
—Results the service provides.
—Competitors’ services.
Now how can I get those keywords into my content?
Competitors’ services sound like the hardest to get onto your site, but I’ve found them to be the easiest. In the business’s monthly email newsletter, which I also post to the website’s News section, I’ve expanded the scope to include competing services and service providers. I always put them in a positive light, running top-ten and best-of lists, though I do like to note that my client’s service is local and less expensive.
Problems the service resolves are tougher, just because there are so many of them. I haven’t taken action yet, but my plan is to focus on specific conditions that experience and research have shown the service helps. I’ll need to scatter them throughout the website to keep the keyword density high.
Results will be the most difficult, and it’s a task I’m dreading, because descriptions of results can be even more vague than problem keywords. For this I’m going to make a list of all the outcomes I can think of, and then check AdWords to see which phrases are getting the most traffic.
Wish me luck! Hopefully this gave you some ideas for additional keywords to increase your websites’ search engine traffic.
Learn more about Anna at http://www.banoonoo.com.