AdWords
2K members online now
2K members online now
Dive into advanced features like Remarketing, Flexible Bid Strategies, AdWords Editor, and AdWords Scripts
Guide Me
star_border
Reply

Advertertising on short tail keywords

Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭
# 1
Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭

Hi. 

 

Im advertising for a carpenter. I have gone through all the low hanging fruits such as "carpenter + city" and im looking to expand their account with some one word keywords. I have an idea, but would like some feedback from you guys before I go through with it. 

 

I want to advertise on the word "carpenter" but I also would like some highly relevant ads. I see two options:

 

1. The lazy option:

I create a more general ad group thats targeted for all the searches in a certain region. 

 

2. The hard work option:

I create a campaign for each of the major cities in the region. The headline for the ad would be something like "Best Carpenter City xx".  The benefit would be highly relevant leads. But I fear that it will make my account very hard to navigate. Also I fear that I will never really be able to know if the people I'm targeting is really living in the city when they are searching, or if they are just searching while at work. 

 

What do you think - should I go for option 1 or 2?

 

Thanks!

1 Expert replyverified_user
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Marked as Best Answer.
Solution
Accepted by topic author Mads E
April 2016

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

Badged Google Partner
# 8
Badged Google Partner
There is always a single exact match query which generates the most conversions - Regardless of how many words are in that query. Typically it's a brand term, but if in your case the term is 'carpenter', then that is the "top of the pyramid". No other search term is going to produce as many conversions, and likely the next best converting term(s) will be variations of that term - The "long tail".

If you're getting an acceptable CPA, and achieving 100% impression share for the top performing campaign in as broad of a target area as possible, then you've maxed out that top campaign. Then, like Valarie said, you move onto the next best with whatever experimental budget you have left over. If carpenter in phrase match covers all of the hundreds of possible variations, then the entire campaign could just be that one term. Perhaps you don't bid as high, your budget is lower, and you have more restrictive targeting. At least you know that you are starting with a solid, proven foundation to build off of. Furthermore, "carpenter" may allow you to actually show an ad for the low impression terms, that when added as keywords have too low of volume to accrue impressions.

Sometimes less is more, especially when it comes to ad content. What kind of carpenter are you? How much experience do you have? Are you less expensive, or higher quality than your competitors? As Lakatos pointed out you can limit your targeting only to the areas you serve, so you can assume the end user knows you are located in or around their area. Location targeting isn't perfect, ads may show for the "wrong" adgroups, and not every click is going to lead to a conversion. What works best, most of the time, is what's most relevant to the user, and most effective for the advertiser. "I'm a good carpenter, and here's why" may be a much better ad than "I am a carpenter in your city".

AdWords is all about testing and analysis. Why think, when you can know? Smiley Happy

(Thanks Lakatos. I will certainly tell Sr. you said hello!)
Tom

View solution in original post

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

[ Edited ]
Top Contributor
# 2
Top Contributor
Hi Mads,

Option 2 is of course much more sophisticated. In addition to what you mentioned the real issue with it is that a finer geographical granularity (that includes the creation of multiple campaigns since location is a campaign level feature) usually results in less traffic. However, that's a general experience and I won't like to say that it's true in each and every case. It may of course be dependent on the region and on the keywords.

Anyway, if traffic is not your main concern I'd definitely vote for Option 2. - Remember to set Target and Exclude under your "Location options (advanced)" feature to the menu items starting with "People in my ...".

Best,
Lakatos

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭
# 3
Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭
Hi Mads,
I would actually implement both campaigns. The second option will give you the qualified leads, but the second campaign can give you some learning on new keyword to expand. I would definitely use BMM and no keywords with less that than at least two-words. If you bid on the keyword carpenter alone, you will spend more time adding negatives to your campaign than optimizing your campaign. Also keep the budget for the the "broader terms" campaign at a minimum.

Good Luck!!!

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

Badged Google Partner
# 4
Badged Google Partner
Do you have any conversion tracking in place? If so, then what does the data in the search terms reports tell you?
Do you have enough budget to achieve 100% of the potential impression share for your top converting terms?

One of the biggest mistakes I see people make is to build out a huge structure based on what they think should work, without ever optimizing the account based on the actual conversion data. Regardless of how many terms/word are in the target keyword or search query, the top of the pyramid terms are always the ones that make you the most money. Those long tail terms may seem like a good buy, but if they never convert, you're just throwing money away.
Tom

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭
# 5
Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭
Sorry, there was a typo in my previous post.

Hi Mads,
I would actually implement both campaigns. The second option will give you the qualified leads, but the first campaign can give you some insights on new keywords to expand. I would definitely use BMM and no keywords with less that than at least two-words. If you bid on the keyword carpenter alone, you will spend more time adding negatives to your campaign than optimizing your campaign. Also keep the budget for the the "broader terms" campaign at a minimum.

Good Luck!!!

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

[ Edited ]
Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭
# 6
Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭

Thanks everyone! None of you have commented on the fact that a user might see an ad for "Best Carpenter in City a" because they work in city A. But in fact they live in city Z - 50 miles away. Isnt there a risk that I achieve the exact opposite than what I'm intending - that is, showing ads to the user that is not very relevant.

@Lakatos - Less traffic is no problem, as long as its more relevant. Which one of the three options would you choose for target? And would you then choose "People in, searching for, or who show interest in my excluded location (recommended)" for the region that the specific city is i?

@valarie c - The issues is that there is a fairly low search volume for keywords like "good carpenter", so Im left with the one keyword option. My initial idea was only to use exact an phrase match, so the campaign doesn't run wild.

@tomhalejr - You might be right and I certainly have been guilty of this before. What would you suggest? I could go for option 1 and then once its gathered enough data I could take a look in the dimensions to see what cities that most people search an convert from. I do have conversion tracking and I am very close to 100 % when it comes to the keywords that has the price per conversion Im looking for. Quick questions. You say that its the keywords in the top of the pyramid that give the most money. Aren't people always saying the opposite? That when you get down to the end of the funnel then the customers are closer to making a decision and thus your conversion price wont be as high.

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

Top Contributor
# 7
Top Contributor

Hi Mads,

 

First of all I'd note that @tomhalejr pointed out the ultimate truth above. In fact, there isn't much point in wandering in advance and that you'll face the naked truth after accruing some meaningful stats when you focus on conversions at the search term level, and also the impression share metrics of the best converting search terms. (My warmest regards to your father, Tom.)

 

Now back to a lower level.

 

"...would you then choose "People in, searching for, or who show interest in my excluded location (recommended)" for the region that the specific city i?"

 

Negative, I would not. I'd select "People in my targeted location" and "People in my excluded location". Else you'd have much less control over where the clicks come from in terms of geography.

 

"None of you have commented on the fact that a user might see an ad for "Best Carpenter in City a" because they work in city A. But in fact they live in city Z - 50 miles away."

 

Yeah, none of us commented on it because there is no really good remedy for this issue. You may want to live with it if the issue is marginal in your region. However, if commuting is a real concern around where you live I'd probably apply proper time scheduling and reduce bids or pause delivery of ads for the the typical working and commuting hours in your region.

 

Best,

Lakatos

Marked as Best Answer.
Solution
Accepted by topic author Mads E
April 2016

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

Badged Google Partner
# 8
Badged Google Partner
There is always a single exact match query which generates the most conversions - Regardless of how many words are in that query. Typically it's a brand term, but if in your case the term is 'carpenter', then that is the "top of the pyramid". No other search term is going to produce as many conversions, and likely the next best converting term(s) will be variations of that term - The "long tail".

If you're getting an acceptable CPA, and achieving 100% impression share for the top performing campaign in as broad of a target area as possible, then you've maxed out that top campaign. Then, like Valarie said, you move onto the next best with whatever experimental budget you have left over. If carpenter in phrase match covers all of the hundreds of possible variations, then the entire campaign could just be that one term. Perhaps you don't bid as high, your budget is lower, and you have more restrictive targeting. At least you know that you are starting with a solid, proven foundation to build off of. Furthermore, "carpenter" may allow you to actually show an ad for the low impression terms, that when added as keywords have too low of volume to accrue impressions.

Sometimes less is more, especially when it comes to ad content. What kind of carpenter are you? How much experience do you have? Are you less expensive, or higher quality than your competitors? As Lakatos pointed out you can limit your targeting only to the areas you serve, so you can assume the end user knows you are located in or around their area. Location targeting isn't perfect, ads may show for the "wrong" adgroups, and not every click is going to lead to a conversion. What works best, most of the time, is what's most relevant to the user, and most effective for the advertiser. "I'm a good carpenter, and here's why" may be a much better ad than "I am a carpenter in your city".

AdWords is all about testing and analysis. Why think, when you can know? Smiley Happy

(Thanks Lakatos. I will certainly tell Sr. you said hello!)
Tom

Re: Advertertising on short tail keywords

Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭
# 9
Visitor ✭ ✭ ✭

@Lakatos-
Yes of course. That makes much more sense. Cities are quite small geographically speaking, so you dont need much commuting to reach a different city. Time scheduling does sound like a great idea.

@tomhalejr- Makes sense. I mean I know theres a lot of conversions to get from that term. But my client was on a limited budget and I needed to show some results pretty fast. So going for the less competitive terms seemed the best option then. However now the situation has changed and I see your point!

I may have been blindly focused on “keyword + city” as the most relevant way of creating relevance. While this would be highly relevant if the user searches for “keyword + city”, it might not be the best selling point if they are just searching for “carpenter”. Also very good point about less is more. One of the issues i see with my current campaign is that i have a ton of different ad groups which means that the maintenance is very high. That maintenance would be much lower if I had gone for a more simple solution.

Thanks all of you. It’s really great that you too your time to give feedback - its definitely something I will use to adjust my approach in the future!