<?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: e-Commerce Paid Search Case Study</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cpcsearch.com/blog/2010/03/e-commerce-paid-search-case-study/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cpcsearch.com/blog/2010/03/e-commerce-paid-search-case-study/</link>
	<description>Notes from the cutting-edge of search engine marketing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 22:58:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: terry</title>
		<link>http://cpcsearch.com/blog/2010/03/e-commerce-paid-search-case-study/comment-page-1/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>terry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:04:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cpcsearch.com/blog/?p=127#comment-58</guid>
		<description>Hey Mike, I think the Content network has gotten bigger in the last 8 months or so, and Google is also beta-testing additional ways to target users within the content network - but the main reason I think Content is working well for the client in the case study is that the product is as much an impulse buy as it is something that folks search for. I think that is the big issue here.

I do think we are spending more money on Content relative to Search than we were 8-12 months ago as an agency - sometimes it works really well, sometimes not. Interestingly, we&#039;ve  found for 1 client that not only does content work well to acquire user registrations, but it actually converts to paid customer on the back end even better than search. Go figure!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Mike, I think the Content network has gotten bigger in the last 8 months or so, and Google is also beta-testing additional ways to target users within the content network &#8211; but the main reason I think Content is working well for the client in the case study is that the product is as much an impulse buy as it is something that folks search for. I think that is the big issue here.</p>
<p>I do think we are spending more money on Content relative to Search than we were 8-12 months ago as an agency &#8211; sometimes it works really well, sometimes not. Interestingly, we&#8217;ve  found for 1 client that not only does content work well to acquire user registrations, but it actually converts to paid customer on the back end even better than search. Go figure!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike D</title>
		<link>http://cpcsearch.com/blog/2010/03/e-commerce-paid-search-case-study/comment-page-1/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:43:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cpcsearch.com/blog/?p=127#comment-56</guid>
		<description>Great case study Terry!   Congrats.   I was intrigued that you wrote a lot about the content/display side.  I thought you were of the opinion there&#039;s usually not a lot of oppty there and efforts usually better spent on optimizing the paid search side of the house.   Has something changed with Google&#039;s offering, or something else new happening in the market?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great case study Terry!   Congrats.   I was intrigued that you wrote a lot about the content/display side.  I thought you were of the opinion there&#8217;s usually not a lot of oppty there and efforts usually better spent on optimizing the paid search side of the house.   Has something changed with Google&#8217;s offering, or something else new happening in the market?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

