Often, in SEO forums, we have SEO's who talk about conversion ratios. SEO has nothing to do with conversion ratios. SEO is "search engine optimization" - that is, it deals with ranking. Rankings on search engines. Rankings for specific search terms.
Marketing deals with conversion ratios. Marketing - not SEO. Conversion ratios are increaded by presenting a more professional, confidence-instilling image. Conversion ratios are increased by good marketing copy. Conversion ratios are increased by adding customer testimonials. Conversion ratios are increased by use of colors, words, etc that make an emotional connection with the consumer.
None of these activities are SEO related.
Yet SEO's continue to throw out the words "conversion ratios". Why? They usually do so when they are unable to achieve competitive rankings. "Well, I'm totally incompetent as an SEO, but I think I increased the conversion ratio..."
Exactly, SEO has nothing to do with conversion ratios. You may get gerat rankings, but the copywrite could be really bad, and you could end up with a smaller conversion ratio
It would be interesting if you could point to examples, to see the context being used in.
In a pure SEO environment it would obviously make no sense. But wider Internet Marketing itselfm using SEO as a particular tool, can seek to ensure traffic is properly targeted to maximise conversion rations. Do any of these companies speak in those terms?
To better understand why SEO's would run to "conversion ratios", it's best to look at the context in which this is done.
It usually comes up when SEO's are asked about rankings. For example, Jill Whalen.
Quote:
I freely admit that I don't optimize for highly competitive keywords....... I don't optimize for one-word keywords, and many two-word phrases that might be extremely competitive.
&
Quote:
If a phrase seems awfully competitive, it can be "scary" to optimize for, in that the optimization might not work. I don't like to fail, and I might not shoot for a phrase because I'd be afraid to fail.
She readily admit thats she cannot get competitive rankings. To most SEO's, this would appear to be an admission of incompetence as an SEO. But these type of SEO's invoke "conversion ratios" as some sort of excuse.
The argument goes like this:
Sure, the search term "web hosting" may drive more traffic than the search term "web hosting Seattle". But if the web hosting company is based in Seattle, then a higher percentage of visitors to the site may sign up. (More specifically targeted.)
But the truth of the matter is, top ranking on "web hosting" would drive much, much more traffic. And if the web hosting company had any sort of good marketing strategy in play, that traffic would convert beautifully.
And here's the clincher: Top ranking for "Web Hosting Seattle" and "Web Hosting" is not mutually exclusive.
If a web hosting company is paying damn good money, the SEO ought to be able to produce better results than just a plethora of non-competitive keywords.
I don't like the term "SEM". It's ambiguous. Search engines have nothing to do with marketing other than traffic they deliver, which is covered by the term "SEO".
Marketing has to do with writing copy that sells, and implementing other items that help to market the product/services.
It's semantics, but I've never seen a useful definition of "SEM".
Its all just sematics wheh you say that this or that undefinded term covers something but not something else.
If I choose to define my practice of SEO to include services that insure that my clients actually benefit from increased rankings, who is to say that this is not SEO?
Its all just sematics wheh you say that this or that undefinded term covers something but not something else.
It is semantics, but unfortunately semantics - language, that is - is the basis of all communication.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel
If I choose to define my practice of SEO to include services that insure that my clients actually benefit from increased rankings, who is to say that this is not SEO?
I could define "web design" as inclusive of SEO, PPC management, and hosting. But then I would encounter or incur many miscommunications because it is not a commonly accepted definition of "web design".
For the purpose of communicating with more clarity, I define SEO activities as activities which are aimed at improving search engine rankings. It may be a narrow definition, but it's the only one I know.
Is there a more accurate term for activities which are aimed at improving search engine ranking? If you have one in mind, let me know. I'm more than willing to incorporate another word or phrase into my vocabulary for the sake of community harmony.
By my reckoning, if somebody practices SEO and writes marketing/ad copy, and designs/promotes affiliate programs for his clients, a more descriptive term would be "Internet marketer". Those activities deal with a much larger scope than straight SEO.
It is all just semantics, but we do need to agree on a set of definitions if dialogue is to be meaningful.
Hi John
SEO is an acronym for Search Engine Optimization, which is understood to mean optimization of web site pages.
Optimization can be defined in many ways, but one of the definitions I like best is
The act or process of making something as fully functional or effective as possible.
But in order for something to be as effective as possbible we need to know what objective is desired. An effective a race car might be about speed and handling, but an effective saloon car might be more about looks and comfort.
So a good definition of search engine optimization to me would be:
Making a site as effective as possible, with due regard to the sites objective.
If the objective of the site is just to rank well then SEO should be about making the pages of a site rank as high as possible
If the objective of the site is to increase branding, then SEO should be about insuring that the most potential customers see the site.
If the objective of the site is to sell something then SEO should be about maximizing sales from that site
My own experience of running a e commerce site and doing all the SEO for it is highly targetted phrases produce a better conversion ratio. Problem is with this is what's the point say having a 5% conversion if the traffic is only 2 visitors a day.
On the otherhand the phrases that bring in the big traffic (the one worders) tend to be where a potetial customer is at the start of their buying cycle and so less likely to order. They may start a search with Boat, look at the top sites, not find what they are looking for and narrow the search down i.e. House Boat. This results in a very low conversion (below 0.1%).
My approach is go after every relevant keyword out there, whether it's a single highly compettive word that will bring in 1000 visitors a day or a four word search that will bring single figure visitor numbers a day (these can add up to be a lot!).
This way you get a lot of visitors some of whom are looking to purchase now and others who are just starting to look. The former is obviously what you want, but the latter may bookmark the site for later use and so shouldn't be over looked.
In practice this means I aim for the highly competive phrases, but always keep the smaller ones in mind that doesn't need that much SEO to get them. A single mention of keyword3 on a page optimised for keyword1 keyword2 may be enough to get a top ten for the SERP keyword 1 keyword2 keyword3 and other combinations.
I've recently made an over the top page like this for my site in the sig (the last link) which is primarily after the one word SEO, but also targets Keyword SEO and SEO Keyword and just days after updating I'm seeing excellent results.
SEO - fluctuating between 15th and 25th and lots of the related searches are in the top 10.
Linear Mode
