Last year Google was rolling out their private beta of Product Listing Ads, and this year most people are eagerly anticipating the public launch. The program has been taken out of Google Affiliate Network and is being merged into the Google AdWords program. The platform switch should allow much greater control and more intelligent penetration into consumer’s retail based searches. The control will come from better management capability for bidding around both CPC and CPA based options. The search penetration is simply growing steadily.

Google Product Ad Listings: CPA vs. CPC

I was afraid CPA was going away, I admit it. CPA has always been a bit of a mythical animal, rarely spotted in the wild. So many companies have tried to do CPA based retail programs, and to date only Amazon has made it work well. With the transition of PLA to the AdWords platform, there were rumors that the CPA program would give in to CPC only. CPC is good because it potentially allows much cheaper conversions if the product actually sells. Spending $.10 on a click to sell a $100 item is a pretty good investment. However with CPC the security blanket is removed, because a retailer could easily get an avalanche of clicks with no sale at all. This is one area where Google shines because they offer a real option of using CPA or CPC, and variable rates can be set up within the same product catalog. Kudos to Google for striking a balance between merchants who prefer one method over the other.

Product Listing Ads vs. Product Extensions

As a quick note, Google is offering and pushing both programs together, however they really aren’t in the same ballpark. One program gives a retailer prime real estate on the upper right corner of a search result page, and the other gives retails a small ‘+’ icon on the AdWords paid listing which very few people click. One merchant I’ve spoken to said that about .003% of people clicked on the icon needed to expand the Product Extension Ad and clicked on a product. Not exactly great penetration.

Expanding Product Listing Ads

So in budgeting for PLA, things can be difficult to judge. The reason is that PLA is still expanding and being tested constantly. I’ve worked to put together some information to show comparisons of different searches across time, however because Google is constantly testing ads, it’s very difficult to judge what kind of reach the ads have. For example, try searching for “Huffy Bicycle” a few times. Sometimes you get a PLA section, sometimes you don’t. Additionally, since PLA is driven by product selection, the ads will only have as much exposure as the current product selection allows. For example, if no merchant selling widgets is enrolled in PLA, then no ads will show for a widget search. Most ads you find now center around Walmart, Target, Meijer, Kohls, and other large brands.

However, as more merchants are getting on board through the beta program, more ads are surfacing. Google seems to stay away from generic words, so ‘teddy bear’ and ‘toys’ don’t pull any PLA results. A search for ‘bicycle’ currently has one result from Kmart, but then “girls bmx bicycle” gets the full PLA treatment including Product Search based one-box listings.

It seems the Toys category in general is getting much more exposure in time for the holidays. I remember doing some searches about 3 months ago and not finding much. So for budgeting, the best way to see what traffic and sales will be like, is to just launch the program.

Matched Listings

One evolution happening is that more and more are ads are now showing matched listings in the results. Below is a screen shot attached for a search on “red wagon”. In both PLA results the listings are matched between 3 separate merchants on the same item. The behavior of these listings will be very similar to the Buy Box on Amazon. For comparison sake, let’s call this the Buy Link.

In this example, RidingStores.com and Cymax have the primary buy link where most consumers will click. The title and image for the product both go to the primary link to the winning merchant’s site. The competing offers from Kmart, Target, and Diapers.com can only be accessed if the merchant name is clicked on. This creates relatively small coverage where only a small percentage of the ad will lead to the non-winning offers. To make it worse, merchants with a  long store name are essentially penalized. In this example, Home-Improvement-Superstore.com has such a long name, than Google can’t fit the name in the ad. You can only see “Home…” as the merchant name, which could be almost anyone from a consumer’s perspective. As the ads develop, merchants will need to be increasingly competitive to win the primary buy link, and also hope their names are not too long to be identified.

Overall, Product Listing Ads continue to evolve in new directions and will likely grow to include more frequent exposure. The ads will likely develop to include more information including components such as product reviews. Since the market will only grow, merchants not already using this platform should work to get on the band wagon as quickly as possible.

In the beginning portions of 2009, there was seemingly little innovation on the horizon. Since around 2004, online shopping had been done in relatively the same fashion. Consumers typically used different search engines to initiate the purchasing funnel, and many times consumers would find themselves funneled into a comparison shopping engine based experience through paid and natural search listings. Now the patterns are changing, and it’s not the result of any one specific company or development.

The Rise of Amazon

In case anyone had missed it, Amazon has become a Goliath since beginning to sell books. Using a third party selling platform that is second to none, Amazon has single handedly changed the conception of a retail site. When Amazon first began to integrate third party sellers with their own platform, eBay was easily the king of the hill (or queen if you will) of partner selling. Using eBay’s auction format, individual merchants, with barely a keyboard, could easily sell their goods to millions of customers. Amazon however, pursued a slightly different format.

Amazon built a platform that allowed for typical single price transactions instead of time consuming auctions (although Amazon did try to do auctions as well). This platform was tear-jerkingly hard to integrate with, because of endless fields of product information that had to be created and kept updated in addition to orders, to ensure consumers would have a positive experience. Amazon was also keen on eBay’s empowered buyer model based on feedback. So Amazon evolved strict rules to ensure a seller was offering a quality transaction. Even today, if a merchant lowers their guard for 30 days, enough damage can build up to bring down the entire account. This adhesion to quality began to slowly retain costumers looking for a consistently good experience.

As Amazon grew, more third party sellers and greater selection came. Amazon poured resources into making sure products were understood systematically, so that product selection was accurate and comparable. Using the Amazon Unique Product Identifier (ASIN), a product listing could be monitored, controlled, and enhanced. By matching seperate sellers, Amazon could also build out robust product information by having the merchants tell Amazon, not Amazon having to find the information themselves. The overall product catalog grew not only in quantity, but also in detail. Having so much information on purchase activity, allowed Amazon to accumulate extensive merchandising information. Being able predict order volume and profitability, Amazon could now also sell products their merchants were selling and maximize profit. Amazon continues to expand their selection, and by providing lightning quick shipping and guaranteed satisfaction, Amazon has used it’s relationships to enhance the consumer experience to such an extent that Amazon is the default destination for consumers above any other retailer (meaning Amazon sells more online than anyone, end of story).

Covering All The Bases

Just in case the average Joe didn’t know about Amazon, they covered the bases by pressing hard on all fronts. Having an extensive product base, Amazon had a large selection to market, and also knew which products were the most valuable. Amazon aggressively utilized Google AdWords, among other paid inclusion systems, to place listings by related keyword searches. Rarely could you run a search for a certain product or type of product without seeing an Amazon paid listing. Of course, Amazon also had such such an extensive online presence, they also ranked highly for natural listings as well. Confronted on both fronts in paid and natural search, there was another channel of advertising available for Amazon to utilize.

Amazon looked to the shopping engines, and comparison engines running Amazon listings is one of the worst decisions they could have made. The reason is that shopping engine consumers are constantly driven back to Amazon. How many times will a consumer search for a product and hit Amazon, without actually starting at Amazon to begin with? A quick guestimate would be between 3-10 times, but the point is that consumers will just start with Amazon eventually. So using the comparison engines’ own systems, Amazon is slowly draining away market to their site. Brilliant really, except the next part is even better.

I Went To a Fight, and A Sale Broke Out

When two 800 Pound Gorillas meet in the forest, what does it look like? It looks like Amazon and Walmart sizing each other up in 2009. Walmart has been established as the preeminent retailer in the world for a number of years now. Utilizing an industry changing just-in-time inventory system, an extremely aggressive negotiating startegy to lower prices, and a flat out will to win, Walmart is the world leader in physical store sales. However, as many people are becoming aware of, online retail will dwarf physical store sales for nearly all companies, in the very near future. Walmart has it’s eyes set on being the destination for online purchases, and Amazon sees that coming.

What is truly brilliant, is how Walmart and Amazon used a dull, drained economy to fuel more growth. As consumers had their pocket books squeezed, consumers began to search for better deals. Walmart and Amazon had already become leading destinations for cost conscious shoppers, but in case anyone had missed the point, a price war developed between the 2 retail giants and played out in the media. Just the advertising from a typical sale can drum up sales, but exposure of having the press cover your sale, and essentially label both Walmart and Amazon as the destinations of price sensitive shoppers, that was priceless attention. Wonderfully orchestrated, whether completely planned or not.

Google Labs Get Cooking

2009 also saw the emergence, or perhaps reemergence of Google. The economic tail spin that was 2008 shook up a lot of people, including the folks at Google. Plans were changed, office expansions put on hold, workers moved around, etc. One other thing that happened, is the Googineers (a nod to Google’s engineer focused culture) looked at their presence in the retail area and began to pull together a new direction. Google Product Search had been in beta for a long time, but didn’t get huge amounts of traffic. That began to change within the last couple of years, especially with increased placement on the search results page. Google began to take products from Google Product Search (aka GoogleBase), and insert these offers with natural listings, as a type of search result supplement, known as the Google OneBox. The listings included picture, title, and price, store name and condition. Simple and efficient, Google began to absorb the comparison engine style listing into their results creating large amounts of traffics for retailers. Anyone see where this is going?

Google fluctuated the placement of these listings throughout 2009, but more and more consumers began to use them. It must of been such a clearly good idea, that someone decided these enhanced product listings should be part of the Google AdWords program as well. However, how do you do that?

Google had experimented in the past with the idea of a drop down box, known for a while as the Plus Box, and now known as Extension Ads. Essentially, product listings funneled from Google Product Search could be dropped down in some cases from the paid search listing, with a click of a “+” sign. It’s still a good idea, but for now the product listing choice quality is sporadic in relation to the keyword search, and a relatively small percentage of consumers click through the box currently. However, there is a more overt way to display the listings: just throw them out there like the OneBox. However, Google had gotten creative with the sauce again. Just like the auction platform of AdWords was a new step, Google went away from the PPC model. Instead, as is widely reported and seen in product search results, Google Product Listing Ads are now populating the upper right menu bar and driven by commissioned sales.

It’s pure speculation, but the sucess of Amazon, eBay, and and the rise of Microsoft’s Cashback program must have convinced Google that there was an opportunity in commission based selling that needed to be captured. With Google Checkout proving to be difficult to expand, Google went in a new direction. By leveraging the Google Affiliate Network and Google Product Listing Ads, which can be easily integrated with the Google Product Search feed and tracking code installation, Google could now be a part of the retail business without shipping a single item. PPC based ads are nice, but instead, for a merchant to simply pay a commission from each sale is a great business model. The wizardry is taken out of the accounting department, because ROI is easy to control and measure. Simply set a commission rate, and then balance that against your sales revenue and find the sweet spot. In the end, Google is served and so is the consumer, by having an easy time finding what they are looking for. Hey, finding what people are looking for is what Google specializes in, right?

What About CSEs?

All this leads up to a simple conclusion, it’s time for comparison shopping engines to change, or disappear.

That sounds drastic, but lets take a holistic view. Already through the course of 2008 and 2009, there has been tremendous pressure on the shopping engines to deliver high quality, high ROI traffic to merchants. Since the economy was contracting, and the consumer’s pie was shrinking, shopping engines became increasingly focused on delivering high quality traffic to ensure a sale, not just funneling part of the increasing avalanche of internet based revenue. This refinement process has already resulted in financial pressure on shopping engines that have not been able to keep up in the smaller, tighter pond. The stresses from other sources has made this pressure even greater.

By Amazon and Walmart increasingly becoming the default destinations for budget minded shoppers, this has begun to squeeze precious traffic away form comparison engines. The motivated shopper who is looking for the best deal is no longer starting at a shopping engine, but that motivated shopper is now going to Walmart and Amazon.

The next part of the crunch happens in finding shoppers who are in browse mode, and perhaps don’t care for Walmart or Amazon. That shopper is primarily doing searches on Google.com. When searching, the consumer is still bombarded with Amazon and Walmart listings, but they now have image enabled ads which easily catch the eye. Remember that web based shopping is all visual: you need to see the screen first before you mentally process the information. Having image enabled advertising on Google search result page is no small change. Increasingly these image based Product Ad Listings, Google Product Search Results, and Ad Extensions are pulling traffic right to the merchant without any help from comparison engines.

Remember the question from before, “do you see where this going”? There is where: Google has now begun to move beyond traditionally formatted text based results, and into more of a virtual result. Whether video, images, text, or now actual products, Google has taken shopping engine structure and begun to integrate this with their typical search results. Increasingly this provides less incentive for a consumer to bother going through another shopping engine, when they are essentially already using one in Google.com.

David vs. Goliath

Malcolm Gladwell rocks. Gladwell as an author is brilliant in his ability to draw connections and seek patterns in data which at first are not apparent, if not completely contrary to conventional wisdom. One of his articles focuses on the David vs. Goliath situation. This occurs when two parties face-off, and one party is seemingly over matched by the other’s strength. This situation occurs constantly, whether old Microsoft vs. old IBM, or new Microsoft vs. Google. Goliaths such as Walmart, Amazon, and Google are pursuing strategic goals which do not leave much room for traditional shopping engines. When considering rumors that Google is looking to limit the shopping engines’ ability to advertise using AdWords, the urgency level picks up a couple of notches. The key for the seemingly weaker David figure, is to change the battle ground and change the way of engagement. In this sense, the shopping engines need to change they way they do things, aka, use their apparent disadvantages as strengths. Being smaller, shopping engines can more easily evolve and maneuver.

Put simply, to change the tide, shopping engines need to become innovative again. At one time they were cutting edge in their ability to deliver multiple offers, additional merchant information and consumer feedback. Literally the CSE worked as a complete resource, aggregating purchasing data which helped merchants target consumers, and in turn which helped the consumer’s purchasing decision. Shopping engines need to find some of that creativity again. Whether this is done through dynamic social engagement, iPhone enabled scanning devices, or many other options is irrelevant. The point is that another large e-commerce shift is occurring, and if the shopping engines don’t get out in front of that change, then shopping engines face the prospect of becoming e-commerce relics of a by-gone area. That, would be too bad.

http://google.com/insights

Google’s new keyword search tool gives a great view into regional and time based patterns related to search. Using several features (that I am still exploring), you can drill down to see how search popularity has changed by region, worldwide. For those enterprising ecommerce cowboys who are looking to integration worldwide online sales, this should help. For those local business looking to tap into the newly profitable local markets based on rising gas and shipping costs, then you need to take a look too. I encourage anyone who wants to relate trends over time and region to take a look here:

(Click for a larger view)

I see the two giants coming together because of a recent war of words between Carl Icahn and Yahoo. Icahn, a large share holder in Yahoo has begun pushing for the ousting of Yahoo’s board of directors and Microsoft has essentially backed the effort saying they won’t further negotiate with the current Yahoo powers that be and can kiss their $33 per share offer good-bye. Because of Yahoo not being very transparent or well understood in the handling of the company, I see the current management loosing the PR battle, being ousted in a shareholders’ meeting, and Yahoo moving toward an awkward merger with Microsoft. (Guess I am going all-in on this one)

What this means to advertising

First and most telling, a slow combination will take place where Microsoft’s ad network will merge with Yahoo’s. While being a software heavyweight, Microsoft has never been successful in the online sphere. Yahoo’s impact has been much greater, and putting the two together would seemingly create actual competition for Google (if not a strange marriage of ideology and methods).

For many, competition is a good thing. It creates lower prices and innovations which help consumers and the rest of the world who need a certain product or commodity. Many feel the same way about Google.

I agree that usually having options does help, but marketers do have options now, with Yahoo many times giving a better ROI, but less revenue, than Google. Prices are also less expensive to jump into the online marketing pool when compared to the CPC rates on Google Adwords. Finally, competition is best between several players, not two. If you need proof, see the Cold War, aka United States vs. Soviet Union. This type of stare down didn’t produce many good results. You need multiple players to create real innovation and competition (see NBC-ABC-CBS, Ford-GM-Chrysler, Honda-Toyota-Nissan, etc.)

It’s difficult to scope out the next 1 to 2 years after this deal is consummated, but it sure makes 2009 into a crucial year for Google and Microsoft’s long term advertising prospects.

Encouraging Innovation

A lesser immediate result, but perhaps more impactful long-term consequence will be trickle down effect within the internal ranks at Yahoo. For a long time, Microsoft has been seen as an evil entity by Silicone Valley. With Microsoft spreading it’s blue grasp over Yahoo, many idealist and innovative personnel will leave the company (including Jerry Yang of course) and move on to other ventures simply because they disagree with Microsoft’s culture and past ways of doing business.

This exact scenario unfolded when Microsoft took over Netscape. With Netscape essentially being brought to a halt, some talented people took the remnants and began building…Firefox. Over the past few years, Firefox has been steadily eating into Internet Explorer’s dominance so now there is a legitimate rival browser available. Working with a relatively small workforce, Mozilla’s Firefox is one of the great success stories of bringing together a lot of ideas from inside and outside a company to build what is becoming a superior program (at least when you look at the add-ons available).

So the net result will be change. I would expect massive innovation, but surprisingly the bulk of long term creation may come from the spin-offs and not the mega players involved. Online advertising will prosper, but the path will most definitely change. (Hey Facebook, you listening?)

…Not so fast!

Before assuming some companies are pushing less traffic and less profit to merchants there are some considerations which need to be made.

First the obvious information that can be taken from the graph is that some engines do appear to be seeing a decline in traffic to their main domain. This could be a result of decreased exposure and a declining costumer base. However, there are other points to consider before assuming that is the case.

Quality Traffic

Companies are focusing increasingly on the quality of traffic brought by each click. Online marketing is reaching a point of maturity where even the industry leader, Google, has seen a decline in ad generating clicks. One issue could be seen as a slow down in the market as many companies are seeing a slow down in sales from the economy’s condition and also a maturing marketplace where online purchasing is becoming more commonplace. Put simply, many people are buying online now, bought online before, and we don’t see as many new costumers.

Another point is the increasingly emphasis on the quality of traffic. Ad vendors are looking to focus on quality more than in the past. So networks like Google have recently decreased the available click space in text advertisements to avoid accidental clicks. Similarly, many CSE’s are focusing on weeding out poor quality clicks to merchants. This focus could mean not only decreased clicks being sent to the engines by their own internal marketing staff, but also more highly focused clicks sent to merchants.

Affiliate Networks

Another consideration is the use of affiliate networks by the CSE. As the CSE affiliate network expands, more traffic being sent to the merchant’s product will not be originating at the engine itself. Instead, the CSE will send the product to their affiliates, the affiliates will in turn push clicks to the merchant, and the CSE will still bill for the clicks but the traffic will not show on a graph like this to the CSE’s domain.

The main point is that if you are not focused on using Google Adwords and organic search results on Google to build traffic, in many ways the comparison shopping engines and Amazon will do the job for you. Check out more here:

http://blog.mercent.com/posts/2008/02/marketing-using.html