Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

The High Roi Ways Of Doing Things


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 A.N.Onym

A.N.Onym

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 4003 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 02:42 AM

I've suddenly found myself in the middle of having to prepare a presentation for a conference about the ways to increase ROI of search/internet marketing in the English language Internet.

I can think of:
- a groundbreaking product, built by marketing/usability
- awesome, detailed and verry long content
- web usability
- persuasive content on sales pages
- magnetic copywriting everywhere, especially in headlines
- a/b/multivariate testing
- social marketing (where applicable). However, some might doubt the "high ROI" of social marketing, too.
- consulting with Ammon Johns

and there are other ways, naturally.

Now, which ones would you name?

Since I haven't been as active in reading SEL and other blogs lately, I am researching the topic more vigorously right now, but I'd still like to hear any suggestions from you.

Thank you.

Edited by A.N.Onym, 12 September 2011 - 02:49 AM.


#2 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 03:04 AM

One thing I've found easy to explain over the years, is to treat the website as if it were a top-class sales person/team. But it is a sales team that is omnipresent, in every home, shop and business that wants to hear the pitch, it works 365 days a year, and never takes a holiday.

It always surprises me that there are still business owners that treat their website more as a brochure or flyer than an automated sales person. Obviously, the ROI of enabling the website to make as effective a sales pitch as your best sales executive is huge. If only the marketing bod who wants to treat it like print can be pushed out of the way.

If businesses doubt that, sometimes it is fun to challenge them to an A/B split test where version A is created by the existing marketing/web dev team, while version B is done by sitting the company's top sales people down and getting them to walk through a typical sales scenario, translating that into the web.

The other thing that always hugely increases the ROI is to stop focusing entirely on getting a sale, and start thinking on how to get a customer. A repeat customer who will next time come direct to your company, or search for it by name, rather than on keywords. Customer Lifetime values are one of the most important considerations, and so often completely overlooked.

Amazon is always a great example of a company built entirely on gaining customers rather than winning a sale. They really understand the huge importance of relationship building, upselling and resupplying over having to 'buy' each transaction through investment in marketing.

There's some considerable further detail on Customer Loyalty and Customer Lifetime Value in the Marketing 101 thread I still have in my sig as The Most Important Thread of the Forum.

Most companies still battle to pay for each sale, each transaction, rather than using their marketing to ensure that next time the customer will come direct, or on a search for their brand names or trademarks that others can't compete for.

Building customer relationships is always a smart move, and one of the best reasons for using social media, running a company blog, etc. These things give a company the chance to become a 'friend in the business' to many people, making them the preferred company to go to, even where others are slightly cheaper. Its a trust thing.

Edited by Black_Knight, 12 September 2011 - 03:06 AM.


#3 A.N.Onym

A.N.Onym

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 4003 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 04:55 AM

Ah, yes, I've almost forgot the customer focus and learning more about the customers. I did initially have personas and close SEO client relationship in the list, however.

I did start reading your thread earlier today and I've specifically shown your post about customer lifetime value to my partner, because it so struck home so many times :) Even the example about your lingerie customer came useful, since that's the type of shop we are working on :)

Thanks again.

Edited by A.N.Onym, 12 September 2011 - 04:55 AM.


#4 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 06:26 AM

The high ROI way of doing things is to get closer to the customer than the competition.

The high ROI way of doing things is to make good on the broken promises of the competition.

That's how you, for instance, walk into an MP3 player market saturated with low-ROI competition and price cutting, with a ridiculously overpriced product called an iPod. And eat everyone's lunch.

When Gateway is closing its chain of stores, that's how you open a chain of Apple stores. And eat everyone's lunch.

But don't listen to me -- I cheat.

#5 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 5186 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 06:53 AM

Decide what you want visitors to do on the site from the perspective of your business. Then build a site that will make that happen.

If you want visitors to call you then be sure that your number is very obvious and associated with text that invites the call. If you want them to fill out a form, make it easy to find and quick to complete. Whatever you want them to do, steer them to the goal, make it easy to find, easy to understand, accomplished as quickly as possible.

Display signs of trust. This can be your authorize.net seal. Or, tell that you have been in business on the web since 1994... that you have over 100,000 satisfied customers... clear returns policy... etc.

#6 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 07:34 AM

Usability is okay. But you won't get a call to your easily seen number until the reader wants to use it.

Bad usability is a demotivator. But good usability just barely gets you to neutral.

Desirability makes the phone ring.

#7 RisaBB

RisaBB

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1437 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 07:54 AM

Are you speaking to an audience of big-business owners or small ones?

It is very daunting, though necessary, to do all those things, especially if you are a one man/woman show. Someone listening to you who is a small business owner might get overwhelmed with the tasks required to make a website succeed, so perhaps the tasks also need to be prioritized, though I'm not sure how, since website usability and content and social media are all simultaneously important.

I'm sitting on a list of at least 30 things that I know I must do to make my website better and my internet marketing efforts better, but my problem is time and knowing where to spend it.

#8 AbleReach

AbleReach

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 6457 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 08:10 AM

Desirability makes the phone ring.

Desireability may make the phone ring, but without usability they won't be able to find your number or figure out what to do with it.

Have you ever gone to a site, intending to buy something, but left after looking around and failing to figure out how to actually make the purchase? I know I have!

#9 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 08:33 AM

Desireability may make the phone ring, but without usability they won't be able to find your number or figure out what to do with it.



Which was why I stated pretty much just that ... to head off the inevitable "tastes great, less filling" tug o war.

I guess the topic of the presentation should then be the Hulk could sooo beat up Superman .

#10 A.N.Onym

A.N.Onym

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 4003 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 08:36 AM

Risa, I'll be speaking in front of:
- a good number (about 85-95%) of SEO professionals, who work in Runet
- a very small number (hardly more, than a dozen) of marketers, who work in the English language market (or foreign market, as we call it)
- maybe, a small, longtail variety of interested people: web developers, business owners, journalists, etc.

Since I am looking for ways that can obviously and relatively easily increase sales by 50-150% or more, those are the same strategies/methods one would use before any others.

I've just realized that while everyone's abuzz about conversion optimization, I haven't heard/read any Internet marketer, except Ammon (and Seth Godin, if we pile him in there), to optimize for the lifetime value of the customer (and to optimize, one must measure, analyze, test/improve and measure again, naturally).

Edited by A.N.Onym, 12 September 2011 - 08:52 AM.


#11 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 09:46 AM

CLV design isn't about just data collection.

Take the Groupons and such. Recently a business person was complaining about how they foster consumers over customers, and one shots that only happen due to low-ROI price competition and rampant discounting.

I continually make the distinction consumers aren't customers. And the vending machine (usability only ... find exactly what you came for ...then leave) model of ecommerce doesn't really support shopping behavior. There are no "stores" as such, just the bin at the bottom of the vending machine everything falls into.

Should you talk about CLV, I'd point this out. Then I would talk about LevelUp.

The LevelUp model completely upends the Groupon model. What isn't being understood is how to design something different. LevelUp gives first time buyers a small discount. Regular buyers get a bigger discount. With best customers receiving the lion's share.

Sorry, but that's not from the internet marketing camp. That comes directly from "leveling up" in game design.

This does everything catering to consumers with discounts does not. Repeat buys. Loyalty. Profit. It isn't rocket science. And is totally lost on the zeitgeist which views Groupon et al as the only possible model.

And completely unfathomable to designers who don't know how to design something different.

You can data collect everything about the Groupon status quo, and roll out a million minor variations of groupthink for testing without ever hitting on a LevelUp.

My whole schtick about visual merchandising is based around upsells, cross selling, repeat buys. The stuff of customer lifetime value.

Edited by DCrx, 12 September 2011 - 10:02 AM.


#12 A.N.Onym

A.N.Onym

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 4003 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 10:02 AM

I guess I haven't read many (ecommerce) blogs, after all. This seems to be a great article from Avinash Kaushik, for example.

But I meant more the longevity of a customer (repeat buys, supposedly) and how many customers he can bring, rather than the amount of products he buys within a limited time range.

Edited by A.N.Onym, 12 September 2011 - 10:04 AM.


#13 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 10:10 AM

than the amount of products he buys within a limited time range.



Exactly what time range beyond a lifetime did you have in mind?

There are a number of ways to expand the stickyness of the site so customers spend more time on the site. Touchpoint design.

Customer retention design is also a possibility to expand the length of the relationship. But we're still talking about that icky money thing.

Dotcom bubble logic aside, if they ain't spending money they are not customers.

Word of mouth is just the same thing as my post about Leveling Up. There are a number of ways to level up in game design, and refferals are just a variation of the model.

What if internet marketers took a look at how games foster word-of-mouth? Could be interesting.



Related:

Smart Gamification: Designing the Player Journey Points. Levels. Unlocks. Game mechanics ...and loyalty programs. Hmmm....

Edited by DCrx, 12 September 2011 - 10:45 AM.


#14 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 04:09 PM

Gamification is one of those really hot, over-hyped terms right now, but there are indeed great lessons to learn from games.

However, it is also really important to note that not every game is a success either. Despite what the gamification pundits seem to say, just apply game theories, mechanics, and techniques may not help at all. Even games themselves, built by experts in making games, built to the same rules and principles as leading game titles, sometimes completely flop.

What made World of Warcraft a huge hit, yet left thousands of exceptionally similar games high and dry to founder? What made the original Civillization by Sid Meirs a huge hit whose popularity is still fondly recalled, yet his later versions, with more advanced gaming ideology never came close?

Games themselves are no sure-fire hits, and they too struggle in marketing. More games fail than succeed, even when they come from the same manufacturers as the hits, even if they are part of the same series, etc.

#15 jonbey

jonbey

    Eyes Like Hawk Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4295 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 05:33 PM

Rebel Star Raiders was the best game ever made.

#16 A.N.Onym

A.N.Onym

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 4003 posts

Posted 12 September 2011 - 10:05 PM

It depends on whether you see lifetime as the lifetime of the customer regardless, of where he buys, or only the period, before the last time he bought from you. A customer may not be committed to you forever and maximizing profit, while he's with you, doesn't make him a repeat customer. It seems to me that more effort is spent on maximizing short-term profit, rather than trying to increase customer loyalty.

What's worse, I don't remember reading any tests that measured customer loyalty. Guess it's something I need to research :)

Thanks for sharing the gamification video, DCrx: it's the topic that I was interested for a bit, but didn't find adequate resources about.

Thanks for the feedback, folks. Gave me several ideas to research on :)

But feel free to note down your own thoughts on the matter, there's never enough of perfection ;)

Edited by A.N.Onym, 12 September 2011 - 10:45 PM.


#17 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 12:27 AM

Despite what the gamification pundits seem to say, just apply game theories, mechanics, and techniques may not help at all.



The very point made in the vid. There is no "story," simply gimmicks dropped onto the page.

In that it's not very much different from everything else, like Jquery gimmicks ... and every other staple of web design today. So situation normal.

Games however might actually get the focus off the technology and shift focus somebody having fun with the business ...for a change.

Heavens forfend an interruption of the constant genuflecting to Google.

Edited by DCrx, 13 September 2011 - 12:31 AM.


#18 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 03:11 AM

One more suggestion for helping to max-out the ROI on internet marketing: Landing Paths

Its an old idea, but still incredibly under-used. I posted an Article about it for Peter Da Vanzo back in 2003
http://web.archive.o...nding_paths.htm

The idea is basically that the entire experience is based around what you know of the customer. The site effectively adapts itself to the user, using their values and interests specifically.

In the article I specifically noted keywords showing something about the customer, plus I showed how a first link choice might tell you the customer's main focus. In either case, you use this to give them a journey that places their expressed interest foremost.

#19 A.N.Onym

A.N.Onym

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 4003 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 09:51 AM

Yeah, I rarely see it mentioned. I've only encountered a good description of the persona+landing paths architecture in posts/books by Bryan Eisenberg, the persuasive copywriting/architeture specialist.

Speaking of contemporary design, do you imply that most of the site elements change, maybe even dynamically, according to the visitors past experience/actions?

Thanks again :)

#20 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 10:35 AM

Doesn't this fit squarely into the difficulty discussed in the IA vs TA thread?

IA and TA should be complementary. The choice of making them adversary with "versus" speaks more to the issue.

Just for context: Back in the bad old days, there was a trend of putting absolutely irrelevant java games onto sites to make them "sticky." So yes, there is an able and conscientious effort to take every idea and implement it in the most disasterous way imaginable.

When I questioned this people looked at me as if I were questioning and finding fault with gravity.

And people gravitate to that worst practice as a matter of course.

Welcome to the web and the low-ROI status quo.

Edited by DCrx, 13 September 2011 - 10:39 AM.


#21 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 11:03 AM

do you imply that most of the site elements change, maybe even dynamically, according to the visitors past experience/actions?

Usually you have to somewhat limit this to a sesion, simply because cookies are an imperfect method for recognizing a return visitor. You can't rely on tracking a visitor beyond a single session.

But in as much as you can, most certainly. There has long been known to be a preference in being recognized (for most shopping, not all) and feeling you are important to a business, enough to remember and treat as an individual and 'preferred' customer.

Certainly at the very least you should learn lessons from Amazon in making recommendations (maybe the sidebar offers) based on past purchases or other known interests. If they bought something from you that uses consumables (batteries, printer inks, and such) why not have a sidebar that asks nicely if they need a refill yet?

Usually this requires a login to be effective. As we know all too well, the shopping cycle online often uses a multitude of 'touchpoints', with the process beginning during a lunchbreak on their office PC, then they hopefully return later on the home machine to have a more serious look, show their spouse, etc. The only way to track the user across multiple machines/devices is to have a login, and some good encouraging reasons for using it.

I don't think the elements should change too dramatically or notably though. You don't want them one day coming in on a new PC and not quite recognising the site, wondering if its under new management because it looks all different. :)

The elements that change should be the text, of course, including that personal recognition if they have created a login, and the particular items shown in the sidebar or footer etc. Tailored offers to them. Rather than the default offers.

#22 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 4457 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 03:23 PM

Is that majority interested in SEO outside of Runet (Ru-Net -> the Russian language Internet) or is English language SEO sufficiently similar?

Is that majority interested in the broader (beyond search) aspects of optimisation? Of marketing?

Webdev is such an intertwining of 'specialty' strands that it is easy to speak either too broadly or too narrowly to an audience's expectation. :( :)

Indeed every business/site is sufficiently different in customers, competitors, business model, competence and capability, requirements, corporate culture... there is no one fits all practicable ROI solution... so I guess you need to speak more to best practices, general principles, possible frameworks and processes, etc.

When looking to increase business/site ROI you need to start with some simple questions:
* what specifically do you want to improve?
* why?
* what do you need and need to do to get it done?
* how will you know when you get there?
* how can you measure where you are, where you want to finish, and points between?
Note: if it can not be identified, it can not be quantified; if it can not be quantified it can not be measured; if it can not be measured success/failure can not be proven.
* what collateral impact(s) might occur?
* what should/can be done about such secondary effects?

I've enjoyed the discussion so far and have little to add except on the matter of Customer Lifetime Value (CLV), which has been important to me from long before the web. Why have I never remarked on it? I don't really know...perhaps because it focusses on the long term and many/most webdevs have difficulty with short term metrics.

Most are fixated on Visits, Bounces, Click Throughs...
Many calculate gross conversions...
Some track micro-conversions...
Notice the fall off?
And those are all gross averages; they are traffic statistics, measuring the crowd en masse.

CLF is magnitudes different, in mindset as well as technical requirements.

It is most commonly utilised in ecommerce where customer order attribution is fairly straightforward. However, it can also be used to varying degrees of granularity by non-ecommerce sites.

At the broadest one can consider refering channels as 'customers' and calculate the LV of search, of direct, of social, etc.
Next position in one can consider the LV of sites within each channel, i.e. for search: Bing, Google, Yahoo...
Perhaps the most difficult step outside of ecommerce is to differentiate individual visitors; the methods used range from fairly innocuous (less accurate) to extremely intrusive (quite exact).
Note: with the advent of apps for (primarily) mobile and HTML5 client-side storage the possibilities are an embarrassment of riches.

Over the years I have read things such as direct traffic converts n-times better than search but it is easier to get search traffic...
or Bing converts better than Google by n-times but Google sends so much more traffic that Bing isn't worth pursuing...
When such are common responses to the broadest of conversion segmentation why bother suggesting more granular calculations...

Perhaps the greatest barrier to improved ROI is that most web businesses/sites are so constrained by the cost and time required to simply operate as to be unable or unwilling to undertake the data collection, analysis, and testing required to improve. In other words, they are typical small business. Unfortunately, those with the means, larger enterprises, are as constrained by corporate structure, culture, and inertia.

Edited by iamlost, 13 September 2011 - 03:24 PM.


#23 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 05:36 PM

In other words, they are typical small business. Unfortunately, those with the means, larger enterprises, are as constrained by corporate structure, culture, and inertia.



That would be true, right up until the gulf oil disaster. Market for keeping your employees from accidentally blowing up your billion dollar facilities and causing another few billion in cleanup and lawsuits formed almost overnight.

I didn't discover this. They came and got me.

It's all in the pitch. Don't sell to small business. Do not sell to lumbering corporate behemoths. Sell to growing businesses.

Try killing off small business by taking every customer they've got. Try killing off small business thinking by growing the business. Try taking away business from people who don't deserve it and don't know what to do with a customer.

Small business -- and I mean a certain state of mind here -- means staying small. Never trying too hard to make money. And a white knuckle fear of growth. Nothing to do with employee head count. Nothing to do with facility square footage.

Lots of excuses. Lots of denial. But strip off the words, and what people do reveals small business is not the target market it is often made out to be.

Just like the tortured logic of web design for Amish people is not a market because "everybody needs a web site." Yet a thousand or so would-be web designer/developers will start targeting people who have no web site.

And their marketing will assume, in two ought eleven, there is some kind of untapped demand just waiting for their naivete to fill.

Frankly I don't understand why they don't go after the homeless person market. They could sell them a whole house. And then throw in a web presence for free. That is the logic folks.

An intriguing alternative is doing business with people who have the money to buy what you're selling.

A Bridgestone spinoff wanted a web presence and POP display design just about one year ago. Who got that call?

If you're not getting that kind of call, maybe going out of your way to explain will not take that kind of call with every syllable on your web site is not in your best interest. Just sayin.

Edited by DCrx, 13 September 2011 - 06:31 PM.


#24 bwelford

bwelford

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 8995 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 07:40 PM

Small business -- and I mean a certain state of mind here -- means staying small. Never trying too hard to make money. And a white knuckle fear of growth. Nothing to do with employee head count. Nothing to do with facility square footage.

It's important to hear that word 'growing' and think 'growing better' rather than 'growing bigger'. It all depends on your personal and business goals. If your strategy involves ongoing and continuous improvement of your products and services, then unless you have some very smart competitors, you're unlikely to die.

That does not rule out that you may have bigger competitors who will use the power of their financial assets to crush you by offering low-priced alternatives. If their cost-base can support these prices, then it probably is they who should survive. However if they indulge in 'predatory pricing', where the sole aim is to eliminate competition then up prices when the competition is dead, then that is illegal. Competition law in many countries would swing into play to eliminate these practices.

#25 DCrx

DCrx

    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1270 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 08:09 PM

you're unlikely to die.



I would look to the mortality rates for business for context. Unlikely is not the word to use -- even when you're looking at some of the more positive data.

Yet growth can mean a variety of things, yes. Adaptive and resilient in the face of information which does not support key assumptions would be a good place to start.

For instance a bar offering sandwiches upending their business to become a sandwich shop that just happens to have a bar.

Often what survives bears scant resemblance to what the founders originally thought would work. One reason venture capitalists back people, not plans.

The high ROI ways of doing business is the thread topic. Maybe someone can offer a vivid reimagining and radical redefinition of what that means.

Feel free to use words like fulfilment and deep feeling of accomplishment. I hear grocery stores are taking that in payment now.

For purely pro-survival reasons, chuck the mythology of the small business.

Edited by DCrx, 13 September 2011 - 08:31 PM.


#26 A.N.Onym

A.N.Onym

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 4003 posts

Posted 13 September 2011 - 11:42 PM

Ammon, thank you, just as I thought. I, too, don't remember seeing examples of websites changing so vastly, to "wonder, if its under new management, because it looks all different" :)

iamlost, the majority of the Runet professionals are interested in Runet SEO, which is noticeably different for the same reasons the US/UK SEO is different from Runet:
- Internet use - 70% vs 30%
- Google/Yandex ranking factors (almost the same factors, different weights, though)
- experience in business/marketing (or lack of, in Russia)

The difference is that Runet SEOs have been buying temporary links, charged by the day or a month, as long as I can remember (maybe since 2002-2003, but most likely earlier) - and it's always been the main and only way to get traffic - and still is, for some. The relatively recent development is that they can now... buy permanent links in blogs, article sections, etc. And a good number of them still buys temporary/permanent links from sites that sell links.

The approach to SEO is that of optimizing for Yandex and following the algo changes relentlessly. Of course, some people prefer to build websites for the people, but they are marginalized outside the SEO community and are rarely visible (though their projects do stand out, like lone oaks amidst the fields). I do know one local SEO company that thinks of conversions, but in a talk with their marketing head I learned that the clients aren't ready to be offered web usability for conversion optimization (though I'm inclined to think now, the agency wasn't ready to offer the service, because it sells itself, IMHO).

This mirrors the situation with web usability/conversion optimization services in Runet: the former are rarely offered and the latter doesn't even exist in the offers. Though one Ukranian company does offer web usability services to US/UK clients, while doesn't offer them to the local, Ukranian and ex-USSR, market.

iamlost, this paragraph

Perhaps the greatest barrier to improved ROI is that most web businesses/sites are so constrained by the cost and time required to simply operate as to be unable or unwilling to undertake the data collection, analysis, and testing required to improve. In other words, they are typical small business. Unfortunately, those with the means, larger enterprises, are as constrained by corporate structure, culture, and inertia.

is worthy of a separate point in the presentation. I've already included the long-term approach of US/UK Internet marketers (compared to risking a penalty or a ban), but I guess I do need to dwell on this point a lot more. Thank you for reminding me of this.

Which would be the most reasonable way out of this, in your opinion? Do you think it is to hire professionals, who can provide the services, rather than do everything themselves or just let the business grow until it's too late it gets enough budget? ;)

DCrx, you are correct: how to change elements on the website to match visitor history is the matter of IA and TA. And no, there's no vs here :(

Edited by A.N.Onym, 14 September 2011 - 12:03 AM.


#27 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 4457 posts

Posted 14 September 2011 - 12:19 PM

Thank you, Yura, for the Rusnet SEO explanation. A world of links for sale, without need for rel=nofollow, aff link obfuscation or... sounds intreguing, quite different challenges.

Which would be the most reasonable way out of this [ROI constraints], in your opinion? Do you think it is to hire professionals, who can provide the services, rather than do everything themselves or just let the business grow until it's too late it gets enough budget?

Reasonable? When talking about people? :D

I do believe that the best way in almost all circumstances is to hire a competent professional who can bring necessary technical knowledge plus an outside observer's perspective to discuss/examine existing business model, business history, current state, and preferred/projected future projections, and create an Operational Requirements document (that could double as or act as foundation for RFP-RFQ) detailing recommended strategies and associated tactics complete with timeline, projected costs, etc.

I've seen what happens when well meaning individuals or companies miss this step and go direct to specialty service professionals, i.e. SEOes, SMM: they flounder, waste precious resources, see minimal results (poor ROI), etc. often deciding to give up while complaining about the service providers. Even the best meaning of whom can't deliver because they are working without defined contexts and constraints, scope and boundaries.

Such specialists are the equivalent of battlefield tactical commanders. To work effectively and efficiently they require strategic direction. In our webdev war stategies derived from a synthesis of user/customer needs and behaviour with the business model requirements. Too many webdevs and business people either forget to create actionable strategies first so rush tactically in every direction at once or they confuse the two and work within a conflict of muddles.

Let me tell you that the very very hardest sells I've ever had (and frequently failed at) in my business (especially web) life is that of the Operational Requirements document. There seems to be a fly by the seat of the pants attitude endemic in the world. With the failures and crashes to prove it.

The biggest problem with small business is not so much cost (although that is the leading excuse followed by lack of time) but a lack of vision, of undervaluation. When one can sell the value of webdev (or any other) activity ROI, provide the vision, in appropriate sized and costed steps small business will invest in webdev. But it is often difficult and never easy.

The solution with an enterprise sized entity is either to get solid committed buy-in at the C-level or to work incrementally proving value with each and every tiny step. But it is never easy and often difficult.

In both one needs to target the fastest producing results so as to create an initial wave of goodwill that can carry one through the longer wait times for medium and long term gains.

#28 A.N.Onym

A.N.Onym

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 4003 posts

Posted 15 September 2011 - 02:58 AM

iamlost, it seems that you've described a problem, similar to the one that Ammon mentioned: an attitude towards a website that's an efficient sales person, if you make it such ;)

Why do you think it's "often difficult and never easy" to sell businesses with something like the offer below?

Right now, you get 10k/mo visitors with a conversion rate of 1% and revenue of $1mil/mo. After our web usability analysis and improvement, done in a month, for $10k, according to our experience, you'll be getting a conversion rate of 2% and the revenue of $2mil/mo. That means that you will receive the return on your investment within the first week(s) after we improve your site and will then continue to receive double revenue/profit from every investment in a successful marketing campaign, including the search traffic that you already get.

Shouldn't any doubts be removed by the promise of extremely high ROI and an explanation how it's done to negate possible arguments?

Ammon, I'm relieved to report that your recommendation to use landing paths for clickpaths (albeit, apparently, only for PPC, rather than search) and dynamic loading of personalized offers has been described in Search Engine Land, although not as precisely and not that close to persuasion :D

Edited by A.N.Onym, 16 September 2011 - 03:48 AM.




RSS Feed

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users