

Bing Brings More Conversions at Lower Costs - DanielBMarkham
http://www.thesearchagents.com/2009/06/bing-performance/

======
axod
>> "As a result, we saw a 22% drop in total impressions."

So instead of providing negligible traffic compared to google, it now provides
22% less traffic - but it's _better_ traffic than it was!

Way to spin it into a positive story. Come back when you have useful volume.

~~~
fcr
_So instead of providing negligible traffic compared to google, it now
provides 22% less traffic_

The 22% drop is not for traffic but for impressions.

 _Cost per Acquisition (CPA) down 3%_

It seems however that it is positive for publishers since CPA is going down.

I don't know much about SEM but to me it seems that their advertising network
is qualitatively better than before. At least on this matter and if figures
are correct.

~~~
axod
The article didn't saw how traffic was affected, but if impressions are down,
it follows traffic would be.

My point is that a lower CPA is largely useless if the volume is also lower.

If you have the volume, you can tweak ad copy, keywords, etc to bring the CPA
down to what you're willing to pay. If you don't have the volume to start
with, there's nothing you can do.

~~~
fcr
_if impressions are down, it follows traffic would be_

From what I understand it depends on the CTR.

 _My point is that a lower CPA is largely useless if the volume is also
lower._

Now I don't get this. If you want more volume, you buy more impressions, don't
you? CPA going up means you get more value for money invested.

Please correcct me if I am wrong.

~~~
axod
>> "If you want more volume, you buy more impressions, don't you?"

Most of the time bing/live don't have the volume to sell. I've tried raising
bid prices to crazy town. Still just small trickle compared with google.

------
peregrine
I believe that was always the case with Microsoft Live. You'd make more
conversions but it would always be hard to get the higher volume of Google.

If you could get a good ROI it was worth it but Google always seemed to bring
the most in.

~~~
pierrefar
He's comparing Bing with pre-Bing and you're comparing Bing with Google.

