<?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: Google: 80% of clicks are on natural listings</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/</link>
	<description>David Rosam&#039;s Blog. If I can&#039;t fit it in a Tweet, it goes in here!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:58:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-399</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Sep 2011 23:25:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-399</guid>
		<description>I have come across one client for whom AdWords didn&#039;t work. They had a very specialised and expensive range of products that didn&#039;t fit with any audiences that could defined easily in AdWords.

Otherwise, I have to say that you needed to invest in the services of a professional, who would have saved you more than the &#039;lot of money&#039; you spent over a year. If you&#039;re one of the rarities that AdWords is not suitable for, then the professional should be able to tell you that AdWords isn&#039;t right for you within a couple of months.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have come across one client for whom AdWords didn&#8217;t work. They had a very specialised and expensive range of products that didn&#8217;t fit with any audiences that could defined easily in AdWords.</p>
<p>Otherwise, I have to say that you needed to invest in the services of a professional, who would have saved you more than the &#8216;lot of money&#8217; you spent over a year. If you&#8217;re one of the rarities that AdWords is not suitable for, then the professional should be able to tell you that AdWords isn&#8217;t right for you within a couple of months.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bentalos</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-384</link>
		<dc:creator>bentalos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:20:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-384</guid>
		<description>20 Percent is extremley generous, the truth is most people see this adds as spam are reluctant to click on them. Our business used Adwords for 12 months, spent alot of money and generated zero calls.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>20 Percent is extremley generous, the truth is most people see this adds as spam are reluctant to click on them. Our business used Adwords for 12 months, spent alot of money and generated zero calls.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Rosam</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-383</link>
		<dc:creator>David Rosam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:30:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-383</guid>
		<description>@Jaamit

Of course it would vary between specific instances. And I very much doubt if the averaged figure is exactly 80%.

Maybe I&#039;m easily satisfied, but I think that the 80% figure is hugely valuable to all of us involved in the Web world. And I&#039;m surprised that Google even let the top-line number slip. 

I&#039;d say don&#039;t hold your breath on getting anything more detailed from Google :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jaamit</p>
<p>Of course it would vary between specific instances. And I very much doubt if the averaged figure is exactly 80%.</p>
<p>Maybe I&#8217;m easily satisfied, but I think that the 80% figure is hugely valuable to all of us involved in the Web world. And I&#8217;m surprised that Google even let the top-line number slip. </p>
<p>I&#8217;d say don&#8217;t hold your breath on getting anything more detailed from Google <img src='http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jaamit</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-382</link>
		<dc:creator>Jaamit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:00:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-382</guid>
		<description>I would say the proportion probably varies depending on the keyword/intention of the searcher.  

If I think of my behaviour while searching, if I&#039;m looking specifically for a product or service I&#039;m much more likely to click on a paid link (they are often more relevant than the organic results, especially with the millions of price comparison sites in organic results), but generally if I&#039;m looking for information I won&#039;t even glance at the sponsored results.

It would be great to get some stats broken down according to something like products/information searches, but I doubt it would be easy to get hold of that!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would say the proportion probably varies depending on the keyword/intention of the searcher.  </p>
<p>If I think of my behaviour while searching, if I&#8217;m looking specifically for a product or service I&#8217;m much more likely to click on a paid link (they are often more relevant than the organic results, especially with the millions of price comparison sites in organic results), but generally if I&#8217;m looking for information I won&#8217;t even glance at the sponsored results.</p>
<p>It would be great to get some stats broken down according to something like products/information searches, but I doubt it would be easy to get hold of that!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Rosam</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-381</link>
		<dc:creator>David Rosam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 10:50:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-381</guid>
		<description>@Tom Coady

But 80% is four times as massive!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Tom Coady</p>
<p>But 80% is four times as massive!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Coady</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-380</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Coady</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 10:29:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-380</guid>
		<description>20% paid results is massive! When you consider the number of searches and that there will likely be more clicks than searches if the results deliver the right links - I often open 2 or 3 results in tabs so I don&#039;t have to keep going back to SERPS if I don&#039;t get satisfaction. I don&#039;t use adwords but I wonder if this suggest the only benefit of adwords is a 20% increase in click throughs unless I am paying google $5 a click!

I think this information might be useful for companies who create adwords for what will inevitably be the top of the organic searches.  Sometimes I feel guilty for never clicking adwords, but I make a exception if I don&#039;t like the advertiser.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>20% paid results is massive! When you consider the number of searches and that there will likely be more clicks than searches if the results deliver the right links &#8211; I often open 2 or 3 results in tabs so I don&#8217;t have to keep going back to SERPS if I don&#8217;t get satisfaction. I don&#8217;t use adwords but I wonder if this suggest the only benefit of adwords is a 20% increase in click throughs unless I am paying google $5 a click!</p>
<p>I think this information might be useful for companies who create adwords for what will inevitably be the top of the organic searches.  Sometimes I feel guilty for never clicking adwords, but I make a exception if I don&#8217;t like the advertiser.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lewis</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-379</link>
		<dc:creator>Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 12:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-379</guid>
		<description>I didn&#039;t get to hear that elsewhere. Thanks. Definitely a good case for doing the best to improve organic search which will mean there&#039;s a need to test all the variables on the site, including even the domain name.

I&#039;ve been reading the blog of James Brausch where he talks about multivariate testing to get to the top of the search positions. He&#039;s even got a software for testing the effectiveness of the domain name, called http://www.Nemeas.com

It would be useful to find out the nature of the larger portion of the 80% natural search clicks to know how much was product/service related.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I didn&#8217;t get to hear that elsewhere. Thanks. Definitely a good case for doing the best to improve organic search which will mean there&#8217;s a need to test all the variables on the site, including even the domain name.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been reading the blog of James Brausch where he talks about multivariate testing to get to the top of the search positions. He&#8217;s even got a software for testing the effectiveness of the domain name, called http://www.Nemeas.com</p>
<p>It would be useful to find out the nature of the larger portion of the 80% natural search clicks to know how much was product/service related.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Rosam</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-378</link>
		<dc:creator>David Rosam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:37:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-378</guid>
		<description>@MJB

That&#039;s very interesting.

We would tend to agree with Google on this one, but maybe the high value of your keywords is causing things to behave differently from the norm.

I&#039;m interested to understand why you think the 80 Organic/20 Paid division serves Google&#039;s needs. The other way round, I can see.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@MJB</p>
<p>That&#8217;s very interesting.</p>
<p>We would tend to agree with Google on this one, but maybe the high value of your keywords is causing things to behave differently from the norm.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m interested to understand why you think the 80 Organic/20 Paid division serves Google&#8217;s needs. The other way round, I can see.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MJB</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-377</link>
		<dc:creator>MJB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 21:37:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/#comment-377</guid>
		<description>My Google numbers say the opposite is true...  Even when I have the top 2 organic spots... and one paid spot high on the list - The paid listing gets hit 60%-80% and the organic 20%-40%. This is true with a variety of my keyword combos... not just one. These are high value keywords ranging from $4-$7 per click.

The 80/20 must be overall organic clicks to paid clicks and the announcement is probably one to serve Google&#039;s needs. 

Now on Yahoo.. that statement is more the case. My organic results get hit much more than paid clicks. 

Must be why someone once said... there are Liars... Damn Liars and then there are statisticians - The numbers I question probably came from the latter.

MJB</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My Google numbers say the opposite is true&#8230;  Even when I have the top 2 organic spots&#8230; and one paid spot high on the list &#8211; The paid listing gets hit 60%-80% and the organic 20%-40%. This is true with a variety of my keyword combos&#8230; not just one. These are high value keywords ranging from $4-$7 per click.</p>
<p>The 80/20 must be overall organic clicks to paid clicks and the announcement is probably one to serve Google&#8217;s needs. </p>
<p>Now on Yahoo.. that statement is more the case. My organic results get hit much more than paid clicks. </p>
<p>Must be why someone once said&#8230; there are Liars&#8230; Damn Liars and then there are statisticians &#8211; The numbers I question probably came from the latter.</p>
<p>MJB</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  www.dangerous-thinking.com/2007/12/20/google-80-of-clicks-are-on-natural-listings/feed/ ) in 0.83368 seconds, on Feb 10th, 2012 at 10:24 am UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on Feb 10th, 2012 at 11:24 am UTC -->
