Please excuse me while I try to refer to this issue in as many ways as possible.  I couldn’t find this solution online and I looked for hours.  Hopefully the next person will find my blog if they have to import their Google Adwords Editor to their new computer, if  he/she has to migrate Google Adwords Editor from one computer to another computer, or he/she is wants to know how to migrate ape.db files from one version of Adwords Editor to a different computer.

Alright, I think I covered the bases.

Some things you need to know:

1.  When you download accounts in adwords editor, each account appears as ape_[xxxxx].db within a folder on your computer.

2.  Account downloads are not cross-compatible from one version of Adwords Editor to another; They are not cross-compatible in any direction: old files don’t work with newer versions of Adwords Editor and new files don’t work with older versions of Adwords Editor.  I know it sounds ridiculous and hard to believe, but it’s true.   Sadly, we are going to have to leave cross-compatibility to Microsoft.  Go figure!

Soooo, how is it done?  Let’s assume that you are moving the data from one computer to another…

1.  Make sure the new computer has the same version of Adwords Editor as the old one did.  You need to make sure you have installed *exactly* the same version [Note: I prefer the versions pre-2009 by FAR.  They have significantly better functionality. We will leave that to a later post].  If you don’t install the same version it won’t work and I will point you to an indicator. 

2.  Open Adwords Editor and download an account, any account.  This will help you spot whether you do the following steps correctly.

3.  Close Adwords Editor!

4.  Go to C:/users/UserName/AppData/Local/Google/Adwords-Editor/Profiles on the old machine. That may not be the exact path for your version, but you should be able to spot a path that looks very similar.   If you still can’t find it, do a search of your machine for the file ape.db;  this file is located within the Profiles folder.

5.  Find the same Profiles folder on your new machine.  Because you downloaded 1 account, you will find the ape.db file which essentially is a pointer to each of the account files.  You will also see 1 account file (because of Step 2) and that account will be labeled ape_[xxxxx].db .  Replace the contents of the new Profiles folder with the contents of the old Profiles folder.

6. Open up your new Adwords Editor.  If you can open up the individual accounts, then it worked!  If the individual accounts are labeled “Not Downloaded”, you only made 1 mistake: You installed the wrong version of Adwords Editor!  

7.  If it failed, uninstall Adwords Editor and install a different version.  You can skip steps 2-5 because uninstalling will not delete the Profiles folder nor even delete the Adwords-Editor folder within the local user. 

That’s it!  Don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Social Bookmarking

So, Google doesn’t allow ALL CAPS anything within their search results.  In other words, Google will not approve an ad written as such:

FIVE MILL ALL CAPS TITLE

Black Hat Trick #1 by Five Mill Inc

Here is a FIVE MILL ALL CAPS TITLE!

www.FiveMill.com

Dynamic Keyword Insertion

One very important thing to note is, it doesn’t matter what the user has searched, per se, rather what keyword was bid on that caused the ad to display.  For instance, if the keyword is “Search Marketing” (phrase match) and someone searches with the query Five Mill Search Marketing, then the phrase that is dynamically inserted is Search Marketing, NOT Five Mill Search Marketing.

If you want to see this in action, but don’t want to go through the effort, you can either search “five mill inc” on Google, or you can check out my screenshot.  I’m going to leave the ad live and let’s see how long it is until Google catches me!

Social Bookmarking

Rather, if you’ve read my previous tips and you want a deeper explanation and/or questions answered, please feel free to check out my webcast that will be airing LIVE tomorrow.  I will be directly addressing the tips I have just recently explained in this blog. 

Follow this link to register: http://searchmarketingnow.com/webcasts/wc091112

Below are the details as posted on SearchMarketingNow.com

Thursday, November 12, 2009 – 1 PM EST (10 AM PST)

Speaker: Dan Soha, CEO, Five Mill, Inc.

Webcast Details

PPC advertisers use geographical targeting to create more focused and targeted advertising campaigns. By limiting the geographic target, you can increase the efficiency of your advertising campaign, cut costs and increase conversion rates and ROI.

In this webcast, we’ll look at some advance tips and tactics for using geo-targeting in your PPC advertising campaign. Find out how, why, and when to use geo-targeting in your paid search campaigns.

You’ll learn:

• how to maximize geo-targeting with keywords
• how to geo-target by physical location
• how to use geo-targeting to outbid your competitors
• differences in geo-targeting among the main search enginesDan Soha is CEO of Five Mill, Inc, a San Francisco-based search marketing firm. He has developed innovative techniques that draw not only on his skills in marketing and advertising, but also on his academic background in the field of Algorithm Theory. As the Principal and SEM Specialist of Five Mill, he provides his expertise along with custom-tailored SEM strategies to clients in such varied fields as lead aggregation, retail, broker, brand advertisement, and more.

Social Bookmarking

So, I figure, let’s keep the posts coming!….

We’ve always been told that, with regards to Google ads, the headline must be no more than 25 Characters and each line of the description must be no more than 35 Characters.  This is not entirely true…

[NOTE:  A majority of Five Mill, Inc.'s work is in the Insurance vertical, which is a very high traffic vertical.  In fact, we like to say that due to the Insurance vertical's very unique nature and the time we've spent working in it, that our greatest expertise is in Insurance SEM.  That having been said, you will notice that I will tend to use the Insurance vertical for my examples.  Further, I will tend to write about the Life Insurance vertical, because it's the most fun (yes, I said "fun") and I'm legally allowed to ; We don't have a Life Insurance client.  Sorry, I had to give that explanation, before readers started thinking I have some sick love for Insurance. ]

So, as I was saying, let’s take a look at a few quick screenshots.

When you search “Term Life Insurance” (one of the top searched terms in the Life Insurance vertical), you will see that SelectQuote has used the phrase “Term Life Insurance” in their title.  That makes plenty of sense to me!  Give the user exactly what you are searching for, especially when you are already #1.  This most definitely maximizes CTR. 

One more quick example from another HUGE word, “Life Insurance Quotes”:

As you can see, SelectQuote, IntelliQuote, Matrix Direct, New York Life, and AccuQuote all use “Life Insurance Quotes” in some form in their ad.  Once again, makes sense to me! MetLife, on the other hand, seems to be going with a Brand play in their ads.  Can’t hate on that either.

But, now let’s take a look at two more screenshots.  The first one is for “Online Life Insurance Quotes” and the second is for “Term Life Insurance Quotes”.  Both of these keywords are definitely large enough that they are worth monitoring…

For the most part, you can see that we are looking at exactly the same advertisers.  At first glance I thought that there wasn’t one advertiser in either example with the keyword in the title.  But I found one at the very bottom, IntelliQuote (Nice work!).

The obvious question is: Why don’t they use the keyword in the title as they did in the previous examples?

And the less-obvious answer: Because those keywords are longer than 25 Characters.

Buuuutttt…. How did IntelliQuote do it!?

The final answer: Dynamic Keyword Insertion (DKI).

Google has an unwritten policy that the title cannot be more than 25 characters, unless you are utilizing DKI, in which case you can go up to 28 Characters!

It’s really quite simple.

It is impossible to type this as your headline in a Google ad because it is 27 characters:

Online Life Insurance Quotes

But, on the other hand, if you use DKI like so:

{KeyWord:Life Insurance Quotes}

and a keyword in your adgroup is online life insurance quotes, then the headline of your ad will read:

Online Life Insurance Quotes

There ya go, I figured a simple, yet HIGHLY EFFECTIVE,  little trick was due after my long Google rant yesterday….

Social Bookmarking

So, I’ve already discussed the Five Mill Tree Method, but it was a high level explanation.  In order to do the actual “slicing and dicing” of keyword traffic, you need to have the tools to make this possible.  Unfortunately, Yahoo doesn’t give you the tools to effectively and efficiently do so, but Google does.

Let’s first go through a couple quick basic rules of Google keyword matching…. and then I will explain how Google just recently made it better, then made it worse.

Match Type “Trumping”

Let’s say you are running:

- 2 Identical Ads

- 2 Different Match Types

- 2 Different Bids

We are dealing with 2 different Ad/Keyword/Match combinations.

#1

Keyword:  socks

Match Type: Broad

CPC: $3

#2

Keyword:  [socks]

Match Type: Exact

CPC: $1

Let’s now say that a user searches the query: [socks] (Exact match)

One might assume: The match type for combination #2 is the same, but the bid for #1 is the higher.  Due to the fact that both match types could address the query [socks], the corresponding bid/combination would be the higher bid; the higher bid broad match has cannibalized the traffic.  This assumption is entirely WRONG.   Google associates the keyword of closest match with the query. In other words, first Google notes that there are multiple keywords that are the same (but different match types) and matches the one with the most restrictive match type.  In this case, the keyword is [socks], and the bid corresponds to the lower bid because the match type is most restrictive.

Geo-Target “Trumping”

This time:

- 2 Identical Ads

- 2 Identical Match Types

- 2 Different Geo-targets

- 2 Different Bids

#1

Keyword: [socks]

Match Type: Exact

Geo-Target: USA

CPC: $3

#2

Keyword: [socks]

Match Type: Exact

Geo-Target: California

CPC: $1

User Query: [socks]

User Location: San Francisco, California

Similarly to Match Type “Trumping”, the query is mapped to combination #2 because the Geo-target is most restrictive, despite the lower bid.  No canibalization occurs (but it would cannibalize with Yahoo!).

There are a few caveats, but, for the most part, the above is correct.  Two major changes have been made, one for the better and one that is not.

Change #1: A Keyword Below Minimum Bid Threshold, is Still a Keyword

Previously, if your keyword was below the minimum bid threshold, it would not compete in the bid auction.  For example, let’s say that in combination #2 in the above examples, the bid was below the minimum bid requirement.  If this were the case, Google pretends that the keyword doesn’t exist and it would map to the higher bid despite the keyword of closer match.  This change NOW takes into account keywords that are below the minimum bid threshold.

This change is fantastic.  This gives us the opportunity to target keywords in as much granularity as we desire and bid based on our metrics of success.  We no longer have to worry about the effect of a keyword dropping below the bid threshold.

Change #2: Google Matches Keywords When it is Better “Quality”

So, everything I’ve said above blows up (although very marginally) based on this new caveat that Google adds to the equation.  The deal is that everything above is true, EXCEPT in the case when a keyword that is not a “closer match” has a lower max CPC and higher Bid x Quality Score (essentially Bid x CTR) value .

This is how Google says it:

”

On rare occasions, the system will prefer to use a keyword that is cheaper (i.e., it has a lower bid), has a higher Quality Score, and has a higher Ad Rank. Here’s an example:

Query: plumber tool
Keyword 1: plumber tools (maximum CPC bid = $0.10, Quality Score = 30, Ad Rank = 3.0)
Keyword 2: plumber tool (maximum CPC bid = $0.15, Quality Score = 4, Ad Rank = 0.6)

Ordinarily, Keyword 2 would be preferred because it matches the query more closely than Keyword 1. However, Keyword 1 is cheaper, has a higher a Quality Score, and has a higher Ad Rank. Therefore, the system will prefer showing Keyword 1 in this instance.

Keep in mind that Quality Score is calculated every time your keyword matches a search query — that is, every time your keyword has the potential to trigger an ad.

”

As a result the ability to be extra granular gets thrown off, because at anytime Google can match your less granular keywords with queries when it gives Google an opportunity to make more money. (You can word this sentence however you want, but it will mean the same thing.)  Google will argue that you are getting a chance to appear on a better performing keyword combination.

So, here is where Google entirely fails.

1.  When you take away an advertisers ability to be as granular as they want to be and when you make advertising less clear, the ability to advertise most effectively gets impaired.  The venn diagrams that you see in my previous posts are now better drawn with dashed lines because it is now impossible to be definitively granular.

2.  The person/people at Google that came up with this one may or may not have thought they were doing advertisers a favor, but the reality is that they have created extra revenue for Google in the short-term and that’s all.  Personally, I advertise with so much granularity and analyze keywords at the keyword level, that changes like this will only make my advertising less effective.  In fact, any advertiser that is scientifically managing their bids will be hurt by this change.  By making advertisers less effective, advertisers cannot optimize for metrics of success as scientifically as they were previously able to do.  Assuming that advertisers are advertising with financial efficiency (which is a gross assumption with many advertisers), the long-term effect, by definition, is a loss of revenue for Google, a devaluation of Google advertising, and a financially negative effect on its advertisers (until they realize that less money should be spent on Google).

Keep in mind, though, that this change is very negative, but it’s effect will be barely noticeable.  But, in “advertising equilibrium”, as I like to refer to it, it is bad for everyone.

In short, I challenge anyone to find an example where this change actually benefits advertisers…

Ps. Check out this link: http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66292 to read more information about Google Keyword Matching

Pps. in light of this post, i’m adding a parent category and a sub-category: “Google”, “Fail”

Social Bookmarking

Let me now dive right into the “Five Mill Tree Method”, which has really been the impetus for 95% of my Search Marketing methodology.  In the previous post I discussed how we we were stuck in 1998, and as much as I loved that song by Next, there have been so many opportunities to optimize accounts that have been shadowed by “long tail” tunnel vision.

As I said, the advertising landscape changed from a list of keywords to one advertising space with many different ways to dissect it.  We have been given the opportunity to become more granular (my favorite buzz word).

I like pictures, so here’s my graphical explanation:

[NOTE: At this point I'm starting to regret choosing "socks" as my example.  Oh weeelllllll... looks like we're committed to thoughts of warmer feet]

In the new keyword landscape you can cut the advertising landscape into as many parts as you want.  You can target by Geography, Match Type, Daypart, and Network.  Using just those few options, you can create quite a few different match types, but I’ll get to that later.

Picture Time!:

Previously, I noted that the way to build out and optimize campaigns was using the following methodology:

Step 1.  Build Adgroup(s) for “Head” word(s)

- Test ads

- Pick best performing ad

- Bid keyword

- Re-bid if/when performance changes

Step 2: Build Out “The Long Tail”

- Keyword tools: use whatever “proprietary” and non-proprietary tools to do so

- Spreadsheets:  form a dirty relationship with the concatenate function

- Web logs:  analyze the queries that actually bring users to the site and add them to the keyword list

With this very fundamental change in the the Search Marketing algorithm, I feel that it is absolutely necessary to throw out 1998 and look at and utilize the tools that are in front of us.   My methodology changed to one better explained by a graphic.  In the below graphic think of “KW1″ as the circle that defined Socks (in broad match).  As we develop more information, we break up the traffic source by performance, and performance alone.

Now, let’s imagine we’ve gathered enough data for KW1, to make a decision.  In other words, let’s say we find out that after running the broad match for “Socks”, that [socks] performance better and the remainder performance worse.  We then branch out and bid accordingly.  Let’s say that we then look just at [socks] and find that traffic from California performs worse and, conversely, the remainder of the [socks] traffic must perform better.  Etc…. etc…  Of course, we are also adjusting bids accordingly.

Here’s a graphical explanation, as per usual:

Note:  *For the most part*, the most efficient and rapid way to optimize your account in this fashion is by making sure that each branch/split in traffic is a roughly 50%/50% split.  There are some caveats to that statement, but for the sake of not entering some complex match, let’s just try to keep splitting 50%/50%.

Everything I have explained above is simple.  In fact, it’s painfully obvious in many respects.  But, for some reason, many advertisers still think in terms of “head keywords” and “long tail” keywords.  One major added benefit of the Five Mill Tree Method, which should not be overlooked, is it’s ability to create awesome Barriers of Entry.

Barriers of Entry:

The Five Mill Tree Method is great for optimizing and becoming more granular.  But, it’s ability to form Barriers of Entry is just plain fun.

So let me give you a very simple example of the usual extreme case where the Five Mill Tree Method is “useless”:

“Why should I optimize?! I’m already #1 on my keywords and I’m #1 EVERYWHERE!”

I see this scenario often.  Occassionally, a “Mom & Pop” company will enter the Search Landscape (or for the sake of being SF PC, how about we say “Pop & Pop” or “Mom & Mom”?  Eh, I will maintain the more famous idiomatic expression “Mom & Pop” in order to make this story less confusing).  They typically come in, bid some arbitrary sum which, in fact, tends to be much higher than is typically worthwhile.  We’ve all seen it.  We typically then assume: “My product/offering is better than the next guy and they won’t last long”.

It’s really fun to make that assumption because it’s the easiest thing to do.  Unfortunately, though, it’s not always right.  Some one will come in, with a highly competitive product or offer at lower prices and rock your world… at least in the short term.

Dear Five Mill Tree Method, how are you going to help me here?

Well, let’s say we determined that the the northern half of the US converts at a higher rate when click on ads for Socks then does the Southern half.  So, what do you do?  You bid accordingly… obviously.  So, no we’re advertising $5 per CPC is in those colder Northern states and $1 in the Southern states.  Per our previous statements about always being “#1 Everywhere”, we are not shocked in this hypothetical scenario, that we will maintain the #1 position everywhere.

Let’s say “Mom & Pop” comes in and puts out a $3.50 Max bid per click.   Now, we have the #1 position in the North and “Mom & Pop” has #1 in the worse performing South.  The overall mix has left our competitor with worse traffic and you with the better traffic.  Overall, we are roughly ad position 1.5 and the competitor is roughly 1.5.  [NOTE: i'm making gross assumptions that our ad CTRs and Conversion Rates are relatively or proportionally the same and there aren't really many other true competitors on the landscape.  We can nit-pick this example all day, but it doesn't deny the barrier of entry that we have created].  Here’s yet another graphic to help explain.

As a result of this Geo-Targeting use of the Five Mill Tree Method, here are some important assumptions we can make:

1.  Competitor gets good ad position.

2.  Competitor gets relatively worse traffic.

3.  Competitor does not analyze traffic closely enough to realize that conversion rate has been worse due to disproportionate traffic.  Typically, competitors dip their toe in the water, run away, and call Search Marketing unsuccessful.

I can almost feel people rolling their eyes thinking that this little change doesn’t make much of a difference, but I really must disagree.  As you continue to Optimize, the Barriers of Entry pile on.  You constantly make the landscape more and more complicated for your competitors.  Imagine the complexity created by the Five Mill Tree Method in this purely Geo-targeted version of the Five Mill Tree Method:

1. As you “slice and dice”** …

a.  Competitor CPA will increase and/or conversions will decrease.

b.  Your CPA will decrease and/or conversions will increase.

2. Optimization will protect your margins from competitors who start to bid more aggressively.

3.  As a side effect…

a.  Your newly targeted adgroups will [hopefully] lead to the creation of better targeted ads.

b.  Your history with optimized ads will lead to high quality scores and low CPCs

c.  Increased granularity and profitability.

In sum, Optimization with the Five Mill Tree Method will nearly always lead to…

1.  Increased conversions (or revenue) at the same overall CPA

2. Decreased CPAs (or increased margins, depending on your “metric of success”)

3.  Increased Barriers of Entry.

ONE FINAL NOTE!!!: A very important reminder that the Five Mill Tree Method is not just match type manipulation or geo-targeting manipulation, it’s a combination of all these things.  Further, there are tricks you can utilize with this fairly simple method to make optimization even MORE interesting.

Next entry, I will explain some tricks and techniques that can be utilized with this method.  If not that, I will add in my most recent Google rant…. :-/

Social Bookmarking

Theeeennnn, PPC Advertising came around.  It was invented by GoTo/Overture in 1998 and it was the first time we’d pay *per click* on Search Engine ads.  At the time, they went with the most obvious approach;  Like when we paired the space on websites with opportunities to place banner ads, GoTo matched keywords with the opportunity to bid on them.  In other words, each “keyword” mapped itself with a list of search queries.  For example, a keyword could be mapped like this:

From this “keyword mapping” came the notion of “head keywords” and “tail keywords” [barf].  In fact, I’m going to give 99% of the credit to the Overture Inventory Tool.  It was our friend and business partner.  I spent so much time on that thing.  I would point to the top keyword (or group of keywords) and call it the “head” and the remainder was the “tail”.  I would then take note of the words that were related to my target audience and the ones that were not.:

Once I got this data, this was the game:

Step 1.  Build Adgroup(s) for “Head” word(s)

- Test ads

- Pick best performing ad

- Bid keyword

- Re-bid if/when performance changes

Step 2: Build Out “The Long Tail”

- Keyword tools: use whatever “proprietary” and non-proprietary tools to do so

- Spreadsheets:  form a dirty relationship with the concatenate function

- Web logs:  analyze the queries that actually bring users to the site and add them to the keyword list

It was fun.  It was easy.  It was boring.  With the right offer, it felt like we were printing money…

Google Changes the Game.

Google launches Adwords in 2000 and takes GoTo’s model and makes it worse.  It was a CPM Model and the details aren’t worth discussing.

In 2002, they re-launch Adwords with a CPC Model based on CTR and Bid Price.  It was the first step in “Bid Jamming” going out the window.  But this was of no interest to me.     What excited me was when Google added different ways to target.

Over the years, Google has made lots of changes and, to me, the least important is the new interface (which I will rant about in a later post).  The important features are:

- Match type (broad, phrase, exact, negative and all the ways you can play with them together)

- Geo-targeting (my FAVORITE!)

- Dayparting

- Bidding by “Network” (Google.com vs Syndication)

After all these changes, how do we continue to discuss the “Long Tail”.  We can break up the landscape in any shape we want.  We can target keywords in any manner.  Google has made it one big advertising landscape, but people are still stuck on “keywords”.  How do marketers look at the “head word” and not break it up with dayparting, geo-targeting, etc!?  How do marketers look at keywords and call them “long tail words”; didn’t those words come from a root of data before adding them to the account?

HOW DID WE GET STUCK IN 1998!?

…. But while we’re stuck here, why don’t we listen to Billboard’s top song of 1998 “Too Close”, by Next : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHH23QYX9Yc .  One of the Five Mill, Inc contractors, who will go unnamed, has noted it as: “The most genius song of all time.  It made #1 and it’s a whole song about a guy with a boner on the dance floor” (I noted only a hint of sarcasm).

[This is my segue to the "Five Mill Tree Method".[ segue:  a fun word to say and a really awkward word to type... not unlike "awkward". Ironic, me thinks.]]

Social Bookmarking

For years I had been advertising on Search Engines by manipulating keyword bids, keyword jamming, and adding keywords.  The goal was, and has always been, for the purpose of maximizing profits.

For some reason, it seems that “the game” has never changed.  Whether it be a conference panel about “tail keywords”  or a bid management company who has expertise in “long tail keyword bid management”, these previous notions of Search Engine Marketing have never real changed. It erks me.  In fact, I only have two pet peeves: people who eat loudly and the phrase “long tail keywords.”

Google made one major change which has revolutionized Search Engine Marketing; they enabled advertisers to look at the Search landscape as an advertising space instead of a list of keywords.  From this spawned my style of SEM which I have [conveniently ] coined “The Five Mill Tree Method.”

This blog is going to be an ongoing explanation of my method and how utilize it.  I will also constantly post new tricks/techniques as I find them and give examples about how you can use my methodology to integrate them.  Further, I will answer questions as I receive them (on and offline).  Finally, you can be guaranteed to hear rants about whatever is happening in the SEM world.

I’ve been asked over and over why I speak about my tricks at conferences and why I give away “my secrets”.  To tell you the truth, I don’t really know why.  I think I just don’t care.  I enjoy Search Marketing, I find it oddly fun, and I love the competition.

Watch this space.  More to come…

Social Bookmarking