Bing Brings More Conversions at Lower Costs

http://www.thesearchagents.com/2009/06/bing-performance/

by DanielBMarkham • 17 years ago

17 8 17 years ago

peregrine• 17 years ago

I believe that was always the case with Microsoft Live. You'd make more conversions but it would always be hard to get the higher volume of Google.

If you could get a good ROI it was worth it but Google always seemed to bring the most in.

pierrefar• 17 years ago

He's comparing Bing with pre-Bing and you're comparing Bing with Google.

axod3• 17 years ago

>> "As a result, we saw a 22% drop in total impressions."

So instead of providing negligible traffic compared to google, it now provides 22% less traffic - but it's better traffic than it was!

Way to spin it into a positive story. Come back when you have useful volume.

fcr2• 17 years ago

So instead of providing negligible traffic compared to google, it now provides 22% less traffic

The 22% drop is not for traffic but for impressions.

Cost per Acquisition (CPA) down 3%

It seems however that it is positive for publishers since CPA is going down.

I don't know much about SEM but to me it seems that their advertising network is qualitatively better than before. At least on this matter and if figures are correct.

axod3• 17 years ago

The article didn't saw how traffic was affected, but if impressions are down, it follows traffic would be.

My point is that a lower CPA is largely useless if the volume is also lower.

If you have the volume, you can tweak ad copy, keywords, etc to bring the CPA down to what you're willing to pay. If you don't have the volume to start with, there's nothing you can do.

patio11• 17 years ago

I don't have a convenient way of segregating my paid and non-paid Bing traffic, but I thought it might be interesting to try comparing to paid and non-paid Google traffic for giggles. The conversion of interest for me is a trial download. I'm analyzing the data only from the date Bing was publicly released.

Google (free): 10.4k visits, 12.76% conversion

Google (paid): 5.2k visits, 21.61% conversion

Yahoo (free): 1.2k visits, 18.64% conversion

Bing (both): 945 visits, 17.69% conversion

I'm not exactly seeing the sort of results that it would take to make me mentally retool my SEO thought processes away from "give Google what it wants". For instance, that volume problem you're talking about is an absolute killer for me -- there is no way I can justify rewriting my ad text to match the habits of Bing searchers when at best I'm going to be getting a couple hundred clicks a month on ads.

(The lower conversion on Google searches is because, in the course of giving Google what it wants, I have ended up ranking for a high-volume term or three whose searchers are not looking for what I have to offer. The biggest offender is [bingo cards].)

Bing Brings More Conversions at Lower Costs

Related Stories