Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 63 posts

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#11

Post by samsolomon »

GordonS wrote: post #10
zenincognito wrote: post #3

After 10 years of spending 100k on average per month, we stopped spending in 2019 and put money into cold calling. Conversions tripled and we could only spend half our yearly budget in our call campaign. Google is expensive and returns now suck even more than they did in 2017.

I find it incredible that cold calling works for you; everywhere I've ever worked in the UK and across Europe, cold-callers get short-shrift - with no exceptions.

I'd say it depends on the product and market.

Account-based selling has a few reps focused on a few key decision makers within an organization. It works exceptionally well for mid-market and enterprise software.

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#12

Post by partiallypro »

zenincognito wrote: post #3

After 10 years of spending 100k on average per month, we stopped spending in 2019 and put money into cold calling. Conversions tripled and we could only spend half our yearly budget in our call campaign. Google is expensive and returns now suck even more than they did in 2017.

Maybe your campaigns weren't setup correctly?

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#13

Post by cameronbrown »

DevKoala wrote: post #6
DailyHN wrote: post #2

Desensitization to ads caused by perverse tracking and targeting. It's not getting better.

There is no such thing. People still buy online marketed products a magnitude times more than non-marketed products. In fact, advertisement techniques are now so advanced that consumers believe they were not "influenced" in their purchasing decisions. "Hahaha, my ad-blocker and 7 proxies make me un-trackable"

All elements of the marketing mix matter, especially word of mouth advertising. Even if adblocker users think they're protecting themselves from ads, they know plenty of people who aren't. And those people will talking about those products.

It's one-step removed and more filtered, but it's still effective advertising.

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#14

Post by reaperducer »

GordonS wrote: post #10
zenincognito wrote: post #3

After 10 years of spending 100k on average per month, we stopped spending in 2019 and put money into cold calling. Conversions tripled and we could only spend half our yearly budget in our call campaign. Google is expensive and returns now suck even more than they did in 2017.

I find it incredible that cold calling works for you; everywhere I've ever worked in the UK and across Europe, cold-callers get short-shrift - with no exceptions.

I think he means calling established leads, not telemarketing, which I believe is what you are referring to.

Like calling an existing business partner and offering them an additional service. At least that's what I hope he means, rather than telemarketing.

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#15

Post by GordonS »

samsolomon wrote: post #11
GordonS wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it incredible that cold calling works for you; everywhere I've ever worked in the UK and across Europe, cold-callers get short-shrift - with no exceptions.

I'd say it depends on the product and market. Account-based selling has a few reps focused on a few key decision makers within an organization. It works exceptionally well for mid-market and enterprise software.

I've worked almost exclusively in large enterprises - the attitude towards cold-callers has ways been the same.

I and others I know have had cold-callers using scummy tactics, such as claiming to know the decision maker from way back, claiming they lost their number etc - but these are so old nobody I know falls for them anymore.

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#16

Post by three_seagrass »

zenincognito wrote: post #3

After 10 years of spending 100k on average per month, we stopped spending in 2019 and put money into cold calling. Conversions tripled and we could only spend half our yearly budget in our call campaign. Google is expensive and returns now suck even more than they did in 2017.

Were you selling a B2C or B2B product?

B2B telemarketing will almost always be better because the purchase decision makers are few, well known, and easier to get a hold of. Non-branded keywords for B2B products are also saturated by the competition, meaning you'd need to be on top of your game to the search ads on them to work.

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#17

Post by GordonS »

reaperducer wrote: post #14
GordonS wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it incredible that cold calling works for you; everywhere I've ever worked in the UK and across Europe, cold-callers get short-shrift - with no exceptions.

I think he means calling established leads, not telemarketing, which I believe is what you are referring to. Like calling an existing business partner and offering them an additional service. At least that's what I hope he means, rather than telemarketing.

They did explicitly say "cold calling".

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#18

Post by Narkov »

busterarm wrote: post #7
zenincognito wrote: post #3

After 10 years of spending 100k on average per month, we stopped spending in 2019 and put money into cold calling. Conversions tripled and we could only spend half our yearly budget in our call campaign. Google is expensive and returns now suck even more than they did in 2017.

Not accusing, but it's still worth considering - could it just have been that your targeting was bad? I worked in a heavily regulated industry with some of the Top 10 most expensive keywords and we spent about $150 million a year on advertising with a solid 1/4 of it going to digital (almost exclusively Google) and it was worth it. Digital spend got customer acquisition costs way way down and we spent significant eff…

I get the feeling that you are both right. ROI is heavily industry specific.

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#19

Post by 6nf »

busterarm wrote: post #7
zenincognito wrote: post #3

After 10 years of spending 100k on average per month, we stopped spending in 2019 and put money into cold calling. Conversions tripled and we could only spend half our yearly budget in our call campaign. Google is expensive and returns now suck even more than they did in 2017.

Not accusing, but it's still worth considering - could it just have been that your targeting was bad? I worked in a heavily regulated industry with some of the Top 10 most expensive keywords and we spent about $150 million a year on advertising with a solid 1/4 of it going to digital (almost exclusively Google) and it was worth it. Digital spend got customer acquisition costs way way down and we spent significant eff…

Facebook is killing it. It's harder than ever to justify spending a lot of money on Google.

Re: The mysterious disappearance of Google's click metric

#20

Post by fogetti »

DevKoala wrote: post #4

I am not rejecting the author's analysis, but the industry is moving towards cost per conversion. Even marketers for small time ad agencies have gotten savvy and realized that the click is nothing but a proxy. Also, I never realized Google actually posted CPC numbers, I don't track B2C in depth, but considering the amount of synthetic traffic, CPC numbers can be meaningless.

I think you are conflating the seller and buyer side. In Google's case the CPC is actually a revenue and they do not see it as cost as the marketers you described. So from marketers' POV, yes, conversion makes more sense. From Google's POV they couldn't care less I think.

And the important thing is the trend, not the actually quarterly numbers anyway. Which I assume would be the same even if we took a look at the conversions.

Post reply on HN