Air france deck final
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
2 j'aime•1,512 vues
Search Engine Marketing, Meta Search Engine
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à Air france deck final
Similaire à Air france deck final (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Air france deck final
- 1. Optimizing Search Engine Marketing Kaushik , Richard, Vignesh, Prakanshu, Yueying
- 2. - Air France uses SEM as a part of their marketing strategy - They employ different strategies across different search engines Current State - Air France has an optimal search engine marketing strategy - They have minimized their spend and maximize their revenue Desired Future State - What are the metrics that we need to be looking at? - How does strategy differences impact each of these metrics? Problem Definition
- 3. Executive Summary 1. Returns on advertising differ by publisher as much as 3X 2. Similar campaigns can perform differently by a factor of as high as 10X 3. 904 identified low-performing * zero revenue generating keywords resulted in spends of $75,765 i. The top 10 of these contribute to 30% of the spending Key Findings 1. Increase investment in Kayak, Yahoo and MSN 2. Opportunities exist for extending usage of certain keywords across publishers and related campaigns 3. Revisit strategy for the low-performing keywords Next Steps *low-performing- low click through rate
- 4. Overall Publisher Performance $0.0 $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 -0.02% 0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% Cost/Click Probability of Booking MSN -US Overture (Global/US) Yahoo-US MSN - Global Kayak* Google (Global/US) *Estimated data included
- 5. Overture US/Global Recommendations • Re-consider creative • Examine offerings most commonly found via Overture An increase in Bookings per impression from 0.002% to 0.004% would increase Return on Advertising from about 357% to over 830%. $0.0 $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 -0.02% 0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% Cost/Click Probability of Booking Overture (Global/US)
- 6. Google US/Global Recommendation • Adjust bidding strategies to lower costs • Check for under-performing keywords Decreasing the average cost per click for Google by just 10 cents could reduce costs by over $13,000. $0.0 $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 -0.02% 0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% Cost/Click Probability of Booking Google (Global/US)
- 7. Yahoo and MSN US/Global Recommendations • Increase investment • Look for successful keywords to incorporate with Google and Overture Overall return on investment for these three publishers is currently over 1,000%. Increasing investment is certainly worthwhile! $0.0 $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 -0.02% 0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% Cost/Click Probability of Booking MSN -US Yahoo- US MSN - Global
- 8. Publisher-Level Insights: The Best Segments Recommendations Attributes Yahoo Google & Overture Average Position [1.2,1.3) >=1.3 <1.2 [1.2,1.3) Bid Amount - - <8.1 - Average Conversion % 9.2 7.4 7.3 9.2 Attributes Yahoo Google & Overture Average Position <1.3 [1.3,2) <1.3 Average Click- through % 8.6 8.4 18 Yahoo: Target position 1 or 2 Google & Overture: Target position 1
- 10. Net Revenue/Total Spend on advertising %6,451% Volume of Bookings/ Number of Clicks 7.3% Total Revenue generated $ 230,127 Total spend on advertising/ Number of bookings $ 17.15 Return on Advertising Transaction Conversion Rate Net Revenue Cost Per Booking KPI’s for Kayak (over one week)
- 11. Kayak…going forward • Volume: Does Kayak have the reach to support these returns at higher levels of investment? • Data: Kayak’s data is not well- integrated, so analyzing success and failure may be more difficult Concerns • Gradually increase investment: Make steady increases without over-committing • Continually monitor returns: Watch for under-performing campaigns Recommendations
- 12. KPI analyses at a campaign level Net Revenue | CTR | ROA | CPB Net Revenue | *CTR | *ROA | *CPB1 3 2 4 Net Revenue | CTR | ROA | CPB Net Revenue | | CTR | ROA | CPB Avg. Position % Exact Avg. Search Engine Bid % Branded Keywords 1 2 3 4 *CTR- Click Through Rate *ROA – Return on Advertising *CPB- Cost per Booking
- 13. Evaluating Keywords How can we evaluate existing keywords? • Primary Goals • Clicks • Conversions • Basis for Evaluation • Clicks Per Impression • Total Conversions
- 14. Evaluating Keywords High Click-Through Rate Low Click-Through Rate Keywords with 150 or more impressions (2,372 records) 1+ Conversions 0 Conversions ? ✔
- 15. Evaluating Keywords High Click-Through Rate Generally successful: Expand usage. Low Click-Through Rate Keywords with 150 or more impressions (2,372 records) 1+ Conversions 0 Conversions ? ✔
- 16. Evaluating Keywords High Click-Through Rate Low Click-Through Rate Well-targeted: Try lower bids. Keywords with 150 or more impressions (2,372 records) 1+ Conversions 0 Conversions ?
- 17. Evaluating Keywords High Click-Through Rate Re-evaluate: The ad is working, the offer is not. Low Click-Through Rate Keywords with 150 or more impressions (2,372 records) 1+ Conversions 0 Conversions ✔
- 18. Evaluating Keywords High Click-Through Rate Low Click-Through Rate Unsuccessful: Let’s take a closer look… Keywords with 150 or more impressions (2,372 records) 1+ Conversions 0 Conversions ? ✔
- 19. $0.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,500.00 $3,000.00 $3,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,500.00 Sum spent on each X Keyword (Total: 904 Keywords)
- 20. Keyword Click Charges Average Position Search Engine Bid Average Cost per Click Flight $4,247 1.9 $8.75 $3.83 travel to france $3,296 2.3 $6.25* $5.55 greece flights $2,667 2.9 $6.25 $3.41 europe flights $2,602 1.8 $6.25 $3.01 italy travel $2,566 2.5 $6.25 $4.12 romantic vacation $2,510 2.7 $6.25 $1.67 turkey travel $2,297 2.5 $6.25 $3.50 spain travel $2,027 2.2 $6.25 $3.94 athens hotel $1,545 2.1 $3.28 $2.55 travel to paris $1,459 1.9 $5.36* $1.47 AirFrance Average $2,521 1.93 $5.72 $1.89 Most Expensive Keywords in the X Group *Estimated data included
- 21. Keyword Click Charges Average Position Search Engine Bid Average Cost per Click Flight $4,247 1.9 $8.75 $3.83 travel to france $3,296 2.3 $6.25* $5.55 greece flights $2,667 2.9 $6.25 $3.41 europe flights $2,602 1.8 $6.25 $3.01 italy travel $2,566 2.5 $6.25 $4.12 romantic vacation $2,510 2.7 $6.25 $1.67 turkey travel $2,297 2.5 $6.25 $3.50 spain travel $2,027 2.2 $6.25 $3.94 athens hotel $1,545 2.1 $3.28 $2.55 travel to paris $1,459 1.9 $5.36* $1.47 AirFrance Average $2,521 1.93 $5.72 $1.89 Most Expensive Keywords in the X Group *Estimated data included
- 22. Total Keywords >150 Impressions Click Through Rate > 10% # Campaigns <=2 2,079 keywords 1,352 keywords 150 keywords 43 keywords Identifying key Keywords BrandedUnbranded 6 keywords37 keywords
- 23. Tested Campaigns Tested Publishers Opportunity Opportunity Air France Branded Air France Global Campaign French Destinations Geo Targeted Boston Geo Targeted DC Geo Targeted Detroit Geo Targeted Los Angeles Geo Targeted New York Geo Targeted Philadelphia Google Yearlong 2006 Paris & France Terms Western Europe Destinations Air France Brand & French Destinations Geo Targeted Houston Geo Targeted Chicago Geo Targeted San Francisco Geo Targeted Seattle Geo Targeted Atlanta Geo Targeted Cincinnati Google - Global Google - US Yahoo - US Overture - Global MSN - Global MSN - US Overture - US Opportunity for key Keywords
- 24. Conclusion 1. Opportunity to increase investment in Kayak, Yahoo and MSN 2. Revisit strategy for the identified low performing keywords – low click through rate, 0 bookings and high cost 3. Revisit strategy for the identified high performing keywords – high click through rate, low # campaigns
Notes de l'éditeur
- We wanted to make sure that we evaluated keywords which had had a chance to perform. This resulted in a tension between wanting to evaluate with confidence, and wanting to evaluate a significant portion of the keywords. We chose to evaluate those that had met a minimum threshold of impressions. Specifically 150, which is about where we’d expect a typical keyword to have been clicked on a few times. The dividing like for Click-Through rate is about 3.3% which is based on the average observed rate within our records.
- We wanted to make sure that we evaluated keywords which had had a chance to perform. This resulted in a tension between wanting to evaluate with confidence, and wanting to evaluate a significant portion of the keywords. We chose to evaluate those that had met a minimum threshold of impressions. Specifically 150, which is about where we’d expect a typical keyword to have been clicked on a few times. The dividing like for Click-Through rate is about 3.3% which is based on the average observed rate within our records.
- We wanted to make sure that we evaluated keywords which had had a chance to perform. This resulted in a tension between wanting to evaluate with confidence, and wanting to evaluate a significant portion of the keywords. We chose to evaluate those that had met a minimum threshold of impressions. Specifically 150, which is about where we’d expect a typical keyword to have been clicked on a few times. The dividing like for Click-Through rate is about 3.3% which is based on the average observed rate within our records.
- We wanted to make sure that we evaluated keywords which had had a chance to perform. This resulted in a tension between wanting to evaluate with confidence, and wanting to evaluate a significant portion of the keywords. We chose to evaluate those that had met a minimum threshold of impressions. Specifically 150, which is about where we’d expect a typical keyword to have been clicked on a few times. The dividing like for Click-Through rate is about 3.3% which is based on the average observed rate within our records.
- We wanted to make sure that we evaluated keywords which had had a chance to perform. This resulted in a tension between wanting to evaluate with confidence, and wanting to evaluate a significant portion of the keywords. We chose to evaluate those that had met a minimum threshold of impressions. Specifically 150, which is about where we’d expect a typical keyword to have been clicked on a few times. The dividing like for Click-Through rate is about 3.3% which is based on the average observed rate within our records.
- The important takeaway from this slide is not the money spent, but the distribution: just a few of the keywords cost us a lot in click charges, with many of rest being very inexpensive. Remember, this is the group of keywords which have not yet produced a conversion. From here, we’ll look at the top 10 most expensive keywords in this category.
- Engine representation: Google = 12, Yahoo = 10, Overture 7, MSN = 2 Overall average Bid: $5.72 (excludes missing data), overall average of avg. cost per click: $1.89 Each of these columns is a measure of the amount spent on the keywords. Click charges is the sum total. With average position, a lower number represents spending more relative to other groups bidding on the same keyword. Search engine bid represents the maximum we are willing to pay for a click on the keyword, where our overall average is $5.72. The average cost per click is a representation of how much clicks on these keywords tend to cost us, where our overall average is $1.89. These keywords are expensive: over $25,000 was spent on them alone with no revenue generated. For this group of keywords, we recommend either seriously reducing or possibly even eliminating support.
- Engine representation: Google = 12, Yahoo = 10, Overture 7, MSN = 2 Overall average Bid: $5.72 (excludes missing data), overall average of avg. cost per click: $1.89 Each of these columns is a measure of the amount spent on the keywords. Click charges is the sum total. With average position, a lower number represents spending more relative to other groups bidding on the same keyword. Search engine bid represents the maximum we are willing to pay for a click on the keyword, where our overall average is $5.72. The average cost per click is a representation of how much clicks on these keywords tend to cost us, where our overall average is $1.89. These keywords are expensive: over $25,000 was spent on them alone with no revenue generated. For this group of keywords, we recommend either seriously reducing or possibly even eliminating support.