Author: mwon

As a child I remember begging my parents for a new pair of batting gloves.  I thought they would help me hit better.  Later I asked for a new bike so it would help me ride better.  In Jr. High I asked my mom for a pair of Nike Flight ‘88’s because I wanted to shoot jumpers better.  A few years back I bought a nice surfboard hoping it would help me surf better.  I recently purchased a triathlon wetsuit so I can race faster.  All these things may be true but batting gloves, bikes, shoes, surfboards, and wetsuits are only going to be as good as the human being using them.  Many people think Google itself holds the keys to success.  I believe Google is only as great as the users who take advantage of the tool.

Recently, a Los Angeles resident wanted walking directions during her visit to Utah.  She used Google Maps and it led her onto a major highway.  She get’s hit by a car and files suit (sounds like she’s recovered from her fractures so I use this example in jest).  Here is her claim:

Defendant Google, through its “Google Maps” service provided Plaintiff Lauren Rosenberg with walking directions that led her out onto Deer valley Drive, a.k.a. State Route 224, a rural highway wit no sidewalks, and a roadway that exhibits motor vehicles traveling at high speeds, that is not reasonably safe for pedestrians.

The Defendant Google expects uses of the walking map site to rely on the accuracy of the walking directions given….

As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Google’s careless, reckless, and negligent providing of unsafe directions, Plaintiff Laren Rosenberg was led onto a dangerous highway, and was thereby stricken by a motor vehicle…

Now, I can go on and on about the whole “if Google told me to walk off a cliff” analogy and poke fun at Ms. Rosenbergs lack of common sense.   Believe me, I really REALLY want to.  C’mon, she walked onto a highway and blames a map?!?  But I’ll segue into a more important topic… the human element of Google.  I feel a growing concern as I have conversations with business owners.  I am happy to see so many organizations take advantage of online marketing tools yet I realize they are removing the human aspect from their Google & Yahoo! efforts.  Google is a good tool just like my cool new surfboard.  However businesses must realize it is up to humans to make it great.  Advertising on search engines will get you in front of customers but I don’t see enough companies taking the baton and running with it.

Here are some examples that may help illustrate my point.  Retailer X rejoices after getting an e-commerce sale from the search engine campaign.  However this same retailer neglects the fact that a follow up phone call or email from a HUMAN can turn that one purchase into multiple repeat purchases.  Local service provider Y begins online ads and gets her phone to ring.  This business never requests how the customer found them nor do they ask for referrals.  Worse yet, they’re rarely around to pick up the phone when a customer calls.  Company Z spends $1000 for a search campaign this month.  Based on a ‘gut feeling’ he decides to cancel the campaign or add to it without taking time to look at the metrics.  This leads to missed opportunity or wasteful spending.

Businesses are still built and operated by human beings.  Search engines are a wonderful tool to help us succeed.  We just need to make sure we, as people, stay engaged in the process to maximize the benefits and avoid walking across any “dangerous highways” along the way.  Sprinkle some humanity into your online marketing, add a dash of effort, and a pinch of emotion to turn a good Google/Yahoo tool into a great benefit.

Ok, so I can’t resist.  Here’s to you, Ms. Rosenberg: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIakZtDmMgo

– Michael

Nett Solutions is a SEM agency working with Yahoo! and Google. We are a SoCal based company built of an eclectic cornucopia of: marketers, mothers & fathers, husbands & wives, college grads & MBA’s, surfers, church-goers, athletes, comedians (and those who think they are comedians). Our common bond is that we like to help people succeed.

In college I was involved with a campus group.  Every so often we would host our brother or sister chapters from other campuses.  One week my roommates and I were asked to host a group from UC San Diego.  Being a house full of teenage males, we really wanted to impress the group from SD; mainly because girls were coming.  We had a roommate meeting and decided to go all out… BBQ Steak Dinner!  No cheap burgers or hot dogs at this party.  Steak was the plan.  There was just one problem.  I was a 19 year old video store clerk working for minimum wage and a couple of my roommates were barely making rent with their financial aid checks.  Whether it was ego or the allure of impressing the ladies, we still decided to serve steaks.  (I promise I’m going somewhere with this story)

I drove to our local supermarket and started looking at the filet mignon, porterhouse, and beautifully marbled rib-eye steaks.  They were marvelous cuts, but they were expensive.  Not knowing much about cuts of meat, I looked over and saw the packages of top round.  These were cut into very large steaks at a fraction of the price.  As a bachelor on a tight budget, the choice was simple… I loaded up the shopping cart with top round steak.

The night of the BBQ had arrived.  Our house was packed with about 30 guests.  I vividly remember carrying a stacked tray of seasoned steaks on my way to the grill to the “ooohs” and “aaahs” of the crowd.  Yes, I was a rockstar.  I grilled the steaks and dinner was served.  All the hungry guests grabbed a paper plate and plastic utensils to dig in.  Within seconds there was the sound of plastic forks and knives snapping into pieces.  The few souls unlucky enough to actually cut a bite sized morsel of leather steak were left chewing on it like a cow chewing cud.  The lesson of the day:  it’s not about “expensive” or “inexpensive”.  It’s about “cheap”.

“Cheap” is a word that is too often defined as “inexpensive”.  This is a mistake.  The top round steak was both cheap and inexpensive (you get what you pay for).  Some things can be cheap and expensive (Rip Offs).  Other things can be inexpensive but not cheap (Value).  But generally speaking, things that are not cheap are almost always expensive.  A lot of people we speak to feel internet marketing is, or should be, “cheap”.   Let me dissect this by splitting up the word “cheap” into two camps:

First, cheap is defined as low quality.  Search engine marketing (SEM) is highly targeted, easily trackable, and nimbly scalable.  When you understand SEM and fully digest the proper keyword strategies, it becomes the highest quality advertising medium available today.  High quality is NOT “cheap”.  Thus SEM is not cheap.

Second, “cheap” is often interchanged with “inexpensive”.  I’m generally defining expensive as ‘high perceived price tag’ and inexpensive as ‘low perceived price tag.’  My experience working in 2 dot-com’s and 2 traditional companies taught me that good advertising always seems “expensive.”  Sure I can send mailers out to a small handful of zip codes for less money, or set a very low daily budget in my PPC campaign but I’ve realized advertising generally takes a significant investment to do it properly; and reap the full potential benefits.  Print costs alone for a small, local circulation will run well over a thousand per month.  Relative ad costs are the same online.  Expensive or inexpensive, advertising is an investment.  Solid advertising investments always seem nerverackingly “expensive” at first, but once you receive a positive ROI it magically seems “inexpensive” after all.

The truth is Internet Marketing is not cheap (low quality).  When done properly it is an efficient, high quality channel to gain new business.  Much like a first class airline seat, a luxury car, or a Rib Eye steak, quality is rarely cheap or inexpensive.  However, the benefits usually outweigh the cost when done right.  Many SMB’s find it tough to invest hundreds or even thousands of dollars into their advertising.  I empathize with you.  However I encourage you to lower risk by exploring your options and chasing the higher quality ad channels to ensure you get a positive ROI.  Avoid the cheap ad channels… and by cheap I mean low quality. 

“Cheap” just leads to broken plastic forks and a lot of painful chewing. 

I was watching the latest episode of Donald Trump’s “The Apprentice” on Sunday night and was intrigued by two multi-gold medalists, Summer Sanders and Michael Johnson, facing off as Project Managers.  FWIW, I was just as intrigued by Donald’s awful comb-over.  The guest judge for the project was Gavin Maloof, owner of the Palms Casino, Sacramento Kings, and countless marketing ventures.  The task at hand was to create an Advertorial for the new Norton-LifeLock bundle package.  It was interesting to watch the two teams take opposite approaches to the task.  As an aside, an Advertorial is:

Advertorial = Advertisement + Editorial

Michael Johnson’s team put together a ton of wordy content in very small font.  Gavin Maloof’s criticism really stood out to me as a marketer.  He shared that the advertorial was too verbose so nobody would read through it.  His two key points were a) you only have 2 or 3 seconds to grab a reader’s attention and b) there was way too much copy for an advertorial.  In summary, Michael Johnson’s team followed the equation:  Advertorial = Advertisement + Editorial

Summer Sander’s team put together an advertorial with full sized images on each page and very little ad copy.  The pictures themselves were compelling and well put together, however Norton-LifeLock representatives and Gavin had a major concern… there was no phone number!  The Print looked great but there was no way for potential customers to contact the company.  In the end, Summer ended up with an off equation: Advertorial = Advertisement + Editorial

(view the advertorials here: http://www.lifelock.com/apprentice/submit-ad#)

Ultimately, the Norton-LifeLock representatives decided they need to combine the two advertorials to make an effective final print.  What does this have to do with your website succeeding?  Nett Solutions reviews hundreds of websites’ a month to see if they are a good fit for our advertising campaigns.  A majority of our prospective clients fall into two camps.

Camp Michael – Too Much Copy:  Some websites contain so much copy and content it loses the attention of the visitor.  Gavin was right when he said we only have a couple seconds to capture someone’s attention.  If your website is too wordy, people will click the ‘Back’ button and leave before you have a chance to sell them. 

Camp Summer – No Call to Action: We have seen many aesthetically pleasing websites without a call to action.  If you offer a service, your phone number or contact info should be strategically placed on each and every page of your site.  If you sell a product, you should have an easy to navigate shopping platform and eye catching messages such as “Free Shipping if you buy now!” 

Which camp does your website fall into?  If you need a set of fresh eyes to review your website and optimize your advertising, give us a call and we’d love to help.   Just click on the ‘Contact Us’ link above.

–          Michael

Nett Solutions is a SEM agency working with Yahoo! and Google. We are a SoCal based company built of an eclectic cornucopia of: marketers, mothers & fathers, husbands & wives, college grads & MBA’s, surfers, church-goers, athletes, comedians (and those who think they are comedians). Our common bond is that we like to help people succeed.

I stumbled across this article written in 1995 about the future of the internet. It is a definite MUST read as it prophesies the “trendy and oversold” hype of the internet concept. Take a minute to read it and have a good laugh.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/106554

A lot can change in 15 years, can’t they?

– In 1995 acid washed jeans were in. In 2010, MEN are wearing super low rise, skinny jeans.

– In 1995 a best picture nominee was Babe. 2010 has Avatar in 3D/IMAX special effects.

– In 1995 Juno was a major email service provider. In 2010 Gmail is the new Juno & Juno is now a movie about teen pregnancy.

– In 1995 Saint’s fans wore paper bags over their heads. In 2010 the Saints are no longer the Aints.

– In 1995 Prince’s lyrics, “Tonight I’m gonna party like it’s 1999,” had relevancy. In 2010 Prince no longer has a name, but rather a symbol.

– In 1995 Jay Leno hosted the Tonight show. In 2010, the host is Conan O’br… um, nevermind.

Working for a couple dot-coms during the 90’s I remember the e-commerce hurdles we had to overcome. Very little online credit card security existed, those who trusted online transactions were sparse, internet access was limited, and e-commerce software lacked sophistication. Online sales were just a blip on the radar.  I even remember looking for a new office suite and making sure our broker noted “T1 connections”, and “internet ready” as key criteria. In 15 short years, the tables have turned.

As marketers, we try our best to track the pulse of the marketplace. Our local paper (I read the online version, Mr. Stoll) has a section tracking local retail businesses. Here are 10 of the 15 most recent headlines:

• MainPlace store closes
• Disneyland store to close
• Struggling O.C. mall up for sale
• Bella Terra finds replacement for Circuit City
• Retailer to close 165 stores
• O.C. movie theater owner files for bankruptcy
• Sam’s Club closes O.C. store
• Crate & Barrel closes O.C. store
• O.C. surf shop closes, women’s discounter opens

A whopping two-thirds of the most recent posts in this periodical section are reporting closures or financial distress of brick and mortar businesses. To say this is the end of traditional retail businesses would be foolish. However, I do believe all businesses need to take advantage of the symbiotic relationship between their building storefront and their e-commerce storefront.

Multi-channel marketing has finally arrived. comScore reported that online Holiday retail sales reached $29.1 billion, an increase of 4% compared to 2008, and it was the traditional brick & mortar retailers who were pushing online deals from Black Friday through Christmas. (Note: this jump occurred while overall retail spending declined during the year). In the winter of 2009, retail stores finally embraced the multi-channel mentality.  A combination of: Foot traffic, search engine ad campaigns, eye-catching online display ads, mailers, coupons & customer support via Facebook, and announcing free shipping on Twitter has helped many businesses keep the doors open.

The benefits are just as powerful for local service businesses as they are for national retailers. Research from Nielsen Online shows that 82% of users search on engines like Yahoo! and Google to find a local business, 50% of internet users turn to the search engines FIRST in order to find a local business, and 40% of the searchers will use geographic keywords (city/state name) in their query. Local services can’t just rely on word of mouth.  Taking advantage of online advertising channels such as search and display will enhance your growth. Our team is always open to strategizing with you.

– Michael

Nett Solutions is a SEM agency working with Yahoo! and Google. We are a SoCal based company built of an eclectic cornucopia of: marketers, mothers & fathers, husbands & wives, college grads & MBA’s, surfers, church-goers, athletes, comedians (and those who think they are comedians). Our common bond is that we like to help people succeed.

One of the first questions sales teams face when meeting a prospective business for the first time is “what does your company do?”  We explain that Nett Solutions is a SEM who provides prime sponsored listings on Yahoo! and Google.  Over the past two years it seems there is a Pavlovian reaction to this statement which automatically triggers a response of “I don’t want Yahoo!  I only want Google.”

I believe that statement is a fallacy in the advertising world built upon subjective feelings rather than objective logic.  I am not here to argue Google’s market share or to downplay its incredible success.  In fact, Google tends to be my personal choice for search.  I am simply sharing the perspective that it is not wise to neglect Yahoo! in an ad campaign.  We have reviewed numerous metrics from our clients showing that some Yahoo! ad campaigns return a better ROI than Google.  In each of these instances Google certainly showed more volume but the relative ROI percentage leaned in Yahoo’s favor. 

I am a thirty-something who decided to re-enter the world of academia and pursue my MBA.  I was dumb enough to register for a Finance course my first semester… not the wisest decision after a decade long  layoff from school.  Now, if you detest finance as much as I do, this blog will bring you nightmares and may cause you to break out in a cold sweat.  On the first day of class our professor was refreshing our cobweb-laden minds about the topic of Capital Budgeting and Net Present Value (NPV).  As a quick Finance 101 review, NPV is simply the present value of all the future cash flows of a project you are considering.  In laymans terms, let’s say you wanted to buy a $100,000 machine for your business.  To see if it is worth buying you want to calculate what the total estimated future revenue of that machine is worth in today’s dollars. If the NPV is positive (ie: worth more than $100,000) you should buy the machine since it more than pays for itself.  If it is negative you should reject it.

So we calculated the NPV for three Projects and the answer came out as:

NPV of Project A = $3,986

NPV of Project B = $2,129

NPV of Project C = -$813

The professor asked the class “As a manager, which project do you want for your company?”  The entire class blurted out a knee-jerk reaction of “Project A”.  The professor immediately asked again, “As a manager, which project do you want for your company?”  An insecure and subdued, yet still unanimous “Project A” was given by the students.  After asking a third time, we caught on.  As a manager you want BOTH project A and B since they both bring in a positive cash flow! 

I believe this is a good parallel to the way people view Yahoo! and Google.  Sure, one may bring about more volume than another but as long as they both bring about a positive ROI or cash flow you would be foolish to ignore one over the other.  Whether it’s Yahoo, Google, print ads, or online display ads, all advertising channels will bring about different ROI’s.  As long as the campaign is putting more in your pocket than what you spend you should continue to go with it. 

Yahoo! just released their Q4 earnings report and announced their revenues topped analysts estimates.  Sales totaled $1.26 billion.  This surge in revenue was attributed to a rush in online spending.  Remember, search engines only make money when people click on their ad network.  People are clicking on Yahoo! whether you want to believe it or not.  According estimates from organizations like comScore Inc., Yahoo! still holds nearly 20% market share.  That’s 20% of the opportunities you may be missing out on if you have written off Yahoo!. 

Cheers and go Team USA!

— Michael

Nett Solutions is a SEM agency working with Yahoo! and Google.  We are a SoCal based company built of an eclectic cornucopia of:  marketers, mothers & fathers, husbands & wives, college grads & MBA’s, surfers, church-goers, athletes, comedians (and those who think they are comedians).  Our common bond is that we like to help people succeed.