<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Position Matters! It isn’t enough to target page 1 on Google, top 3 is what counts!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/position-matters-it-is-not-enough-to-target-page-1-on-google-top-3-is-what-counts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/position-matters-it-is-not-enough-to-target-page-1-on-google-top-3-is-what-counts/</link>
	<description>Bloom Media are an award winning 'full service digital agency', we provide ROI focussed digital campaigns for some of the UK's biggest brands.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Aug 2010 07:23:53 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alex Craven</title>
		<link>http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/position-matters-it-is-not-enough-to-target-page-1-on-google-top-3-is-what-counts/#comment-359</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Craven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 07:44:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/?p=390#comment-359</guid>
		<description>Hi Cherryb, 

yes we pretty much do the same where we dont have impressions data from active PPC campaigns. I guess it is all about expectation management, under promise and over deliver and your cleints will be happy!

Cheers
Alex</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Cherryb, </p>
<p>yes we pretty much do the same where we dont have impressions data from active PPC campaigns. I guess it is all about expectation management, under promise and over deliver and your cleints will be happy!</p>
<p>Cheers<br />
Alex</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cherry Blossom Pi</title>
		<link>http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/position-matters-it-is-not-enough-to-target-page-1-on-google-top-3-is-what-counts/#comment-356</link>
		<dc:creator>Cherry Blossom Pi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:24:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/?p=390#comment-356</guid>
		<description>Hi Alex,

It&#039;s a very interesting post, thank you for sharing your data.  I&#039;ve really tried to get away from using predicted clicks because I just cannot find a source or reliable (even vaguely reliable) data for impressions/searches (other than Adwords impression data which we don&#039;t always have).

I currently rely mainly on the Google Keyword Tool but find actual clicks are never anywhere near those predicted using the suggested CTR&#039;s above against search volume numbers.

For what it&#039;s worth, I take Exact match as the Match Type and then I divide the figure by 50% (I&#039;m convincing myself that 50% comes from the content network).  I&#039;m scared to share these numbers with clients because if they get top 3 positions and their clicks do not match the traffic estimates they invariably complain I&#039;ve done something wrong - rarely do they question the data provided by Google Tools :-((

If I come across a more reliable source I&#039;ll be so excited I&#039;ll tell everyone!

bibi, cherryb</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Alex,</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a very interesting post, thank you for sharing your data.  I&#8217;ve really tried to get away from using predicted clicks because I just cannot find a source or reliable (even vaguely reliable) data for impressions/searches (other than Adwords impression data which we don&#8217;t always have).</p>
<p>I currently rely mainly on the Google Keyword Tool but find actual clicks are never anywhere near those predicted using the suggested CTR&#8217;s above against search volume numbers.</p>
<p>For what it&#8217;s worth, I take Exact match as the Match Type and then I divide the figure by 50% (I&#8217;m convincing myself that 50% comes from the content network).  I&#8217;m scared to share these numbers with clients because if they get top 3 positions and their clicks do not match the traffic estimates they invariably complain I&#8217;ve done something wrong &#8211; rarely do they question the data provided by Google Tools <img src='http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':-(' class='wp-smiley' /> (</p>
<p>If I come across a more reliable source I&#8217;ll be so excited I&#8217;ll tell everyone!</p>
<p>bibi, cherryb</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Craven</title>
		<link>http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/position-matters-it-is-not-enough-to-target-page-1-on-google-top-3-is-what-counts/#comment-335</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Craven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:05:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/?p=390#comment-335</guid>
		<description>Hi Tom, 

Hmm.. to be honest no i didn&#039;t I&#039;ll take a look at that and re run the figures.. interestingly assuming that on avegarge the positions were lower on google.com  that would actually increase the CTR further when those impressions were removed. 

Anyway I&#039;ll revisit and update this post!

Cheers

Alex</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Tom, </p>
<p>Hmm.. to be honest no i didn&#8217;t I&#8217;ll take a look at that and re run the figures.. interestingly assuming that on avegarge the positions were lower on google.com  that would actually increase the CTR further when those impressions were removed. </p>
<p>Anyway I&#8217;ll revisit and update this post!</p>
<p>Cheers</p>
<p>Alex</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stuartpturner</title>
		<link>http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/position-matters-it-is-not-enough-to-target-page-1-on-google-top-3-is-what-counts/#comment-334</link>
		<dc:creator>stuartpturner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/?p=390#comment-334</guid>
		<description>Tom! Whaaay!

It would be great to see some collarborative analysis of this kind to be honest - good point about the blended impressions from .com and .co.uk. Could be a nice project for you and Alex to fill the rest of today with :P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom! Whaaay!</p>
<p>It would be great to see some collarborative analysis of this kind to be honest &#8211; good point about the blended impressions from .com and .co.uk. Could be a nice project for you and Alex to fill the rest of today with <img src='http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/position-matters-it-is-not-enough-to-target-page-1-on-google-top-3-is-what-counts/#comment-333</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:59:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/?p=390#comment-333</guid>
		<description>Nice analysis Alex - one thing to control for which you may have missed, did you filter out traffic from google.com and google.co.uk? Impression data will give you those number combined but rankings can (and often are) different across the two.

I&#039;ve tried to do a little bit of analysis like this on google local CTR but never really got anything consistent, I might have to revisit that...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice analysis Alex &#8211; one thing to control for which you may have missed, did you filter out traffic from google.com and google.co.uk? Impression data will give you those number combined but rankings can (and often are) different across the two.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve tried to do a little bit of analysis like this on google local CTR but never really got anything consistent, I might have to revisit that&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stuartpturner</title>
		<link>http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/search-marketing/position-matters-it-is-not-enough-to-target-page-1-on-google-top-3-is-what-counts/#comment-332</link>
		<dc:creator>stuartpturner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:48:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bloommedia.co.uk/blog/?p=390#comment-332</guid>
		<description>Hi Alex,

This is a great post - as you point out while it&#039;s not revolatory is great to see some actual proof of the points you&#039;ve made rather than the usual hot air and &#039;it&#039;s true honest;y&#039; posts you see elsewhere. 

It will be interesting to see over the next couple of years how this is affected by more blended search results - or if engines such as Wolfram Alpha or Google Squared really take off  - will we see a more even clickthrough down the first page? Or will people still hammer that first result?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Alex,</p>
<p>This is a great post &#8211; as you point out while it&#8217;s not revolatory is great to see some actual proof of the points you&#8217;ve made rather than the usual hot air and &#8216;it&#8217;s true honest;y&#8217; posts you see elsewhere. </p>
<p>It will be interesting to see over the next couple of years how this is affected by more blended search results &#8211; or if engines such as Wolfram Alpha or Google Squared really take off  &#8211; will we see a more even clickthrough down the first page? Or will people still hammer that first result?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
