Candour

Episode 78: The PPC bumper episode of updates

Play this episode:

Or get it on:

What's in this episode?

In this episode, you will hear Mark Williams-Cook and Rob Lewis talking about:

Shopping ads showing in any country: A Google Shopping update that can show products in any country, depending on language.

Update in location reporting: Google removing actual physical location data

Search terms report data: Rob's approach to dealing with missing search term data

Microsoft Ads updates: The raft of new features coming to Microsoft Advertising

Transcription

MC: Welcome to episode 78 of the Search with Candour podcast. Recorded on Friday the 11th of September 2020. My name is Mark Williams-Cook and today we're going to be joined by Rob Lewis again, our PPC specialist who's going to take us through the raft of fairly significant changes that have been happening in the world of PPC. We're going to be looking at the Google shopping changes that mean your products will be shown in any country based on language, an update to location reporting Google ads. Rob's views on the search term report data loss and some interesting updates on Microsoft advertising.

As usual I want to kick off to tell you this episode is sponsored by the brilliant Sitebulb. If you haven't heard of it and you're working in SEO or Search Marketing, you definitely should have; it's a fantastic desktop based, auditing tool for Windows and Mac. It's one of the tools I use, we use it at Candour in basically every single technical audit that we do. I've been through and talked before about some of the features that make it a particularly nice tool. The one I want to tell you about today is the virtual robots.txt rules you can use with Sitebulb - so this is something that I've had to use on a client site. So as we know, robots.txt allows us to control where robots are allowed to crawl and it can get complicated when you are doing some of the more detailed rules. We've got a tool, as you know, within Google Search Console to test separate URLs, but it doesn't really scale very well. One of the really cool things about Sitebulb is you have a virtual robots.txt, so you can copy your current robots.txt, edit the robots.txt in Sitebulb and it will use that virtual one. It's really handy because you can then write your new rules and test how they will impact your whole site, without having to do the dangerous thing of updating your live site, and without having to bother developers for staging changes, things like that, so you can just simulate the new rules. Absolutely fantastic.

Sitebulb have very kindly given us a special offer for listeners to Search with Candour; if you go to sitebulb.com/swc - so for Search with Candour. It's sitebulb.com/swc, you can get a 60-day trial of Sitebulb, which is longer than their normal trial and it doesn't require a credit card, so nothing to lose. Go and check it out.

Hey Rob.

RL: Hello.

MC: Welcome back,

RL: It's been a while.

MC: It has been a while. So Rob and I are finally together again in the studio, at a very responsibly socially distanced distance, so I can just see his head over a monitor, far away. Really glad, it's really cool to be back in with you firstly Rob.

I'm really pleased you are joining us to talk about all the PPC stuff that's been going on. So last episode, I was thinking about you when I was talking about search term report changes and knowing that you definitely would have something to say about this.

RL: I was on holiday at the time and I get these updates through my personal email and I saw the 2% tax update, and I saw the search query update and I was on holiday at the time; I was livid.

MC: Google ruined your holiday, brilliant. So there's actually a lot of other changes that have been going on outside of Google dumping tax on to their users, and removing data for us. One of the ones I raised and I sent you a link to before that I really wanted you to explain to us was around this Google shopping change where, as I understand it, they're going to be able to show your products globally now, based on the language of the search, is that right? And if not, can you politely correct me without making me sound silly.

RL: Yes, you're correct, but it's not something that's going to be automatic, you have to opt into it. so this is a really handy update for e-commerce clients that already have a shopping feed set up and setting up a shopping feed can sometimes be a bit of a pain. It's not always straightforward for every advertiser, and if you want to ship globally, historically you needed to have a separate shopping feed created for each country that you wanted to target, because each country has its own individual policies that you have to adhere to; whether it be the language you're targeting, and the currency and those sorts of things. However, what Google has now introduced, they've accepted that countries where they speak the same language as your main target audience, they may wish to see your products in the shopping results. So in order to do this, you just need to log into the merchant centre and there's a setting under your feed settings where you can add on additional countries and there's a whole list that's available in your specific feed. So for example, if you're targeting a UK audience, you could target English speakers in Germany, Spain, France etc.

MC: So that actually sounds like quite a helpful update as opposed to some of the other things that we've been seeing.

RL: Yes, but actually it's interesting because it does tie in nicely to the next update, which is the update to the location reporting. And a part of me feels that maybe this update is a precursor to Google opting to broaden up the location targeting in shopping ads.

Historically you've been quite safe, running a shopping ad in your target location, there's been no chance of Google deciding to show your advert in other countries. But it's possible that this is a precursor to them automatically opting you in to expanded reach, across different territories that you're not wanting to target. So this goes back to a previous podcast a while back, where we spoke about a hidden update to the location settings, where you used to be able to show ads only to people in your targeted locations, but Google broadened it up slightly to show people who are regularly in your targeted locations.

MC: I remember that, that was sneaky and that was one where they were regularly there, but then they didn't define what regularly was.

RL: It's interesting because I've targeted some really small, geographic postcodes and the amount of people that go to Iran, India, France, Germany, all these locations is pretty massive in some really small postcode areas. Just saying, the cynic in me makes me question how accurate it is. But anyway, that's that's how it is, so if you're a small barber shop in Hackney, and you only want to target people in Hackney, sometimes your ads are going to get shown to people in Beverly Hills, that's just something that you have to accept. But there are ways that you can mitigate this, you can exclude every other location where you don't want your ads to show. So basically, it's possible that people may have to start doing this to shopping campaigns soon, I don't know.

But yes, it brings me nicely to the latest update, which is a change to the location reporting. Now in Google Ads, when you run adverts you acknowledge that sometimes people are going to be based in different locations and and sometimes you want people who are based outside your geographic range to see your adverts, because they may be expressing an interest to visit that premises. So in the location report, there's always been the option to look at user locations, which is the actual physical location of the person that generated an impression or a click on your advert. Now I logged in the other day and I noticed that actually Google had removed that ability, and they've lumped it into a new thing now called matched location. Now what matched location is, going back to the barber and Hackney, who's having their advert shown in Beverly Hills; even though the user may be physically based in Beverly Hills, the matched location will show as Hackney in London. So actually now we can't see, physically, where the user is based because we just have to trust Google that they're showing it to the right person.

MC: Oh wow, that's pretty big then.

RL: So it's massive.

MC: So you can't actually validate it, because I mean the one of the examples that I used for about two years, in our PPC courses was there was an advertiser in the United States that were running an ad for flowers, and there is a Norfolk in the US and there is a Norfolk in the UK and I noticed because they'd been trusting Google in terms of the location targeting, it would get the word Norfolk commonly confused, thinking it meant the UK or it was just getting confused with the UK. So I was seeing ads for flowers, in the UK, in dollars - obviously for this American company because they weren't specifying the location, they wanted to do it and obviously they could have seen then if people were clicking on the ads, they were coming from the UK. So we're saying this ability now, to actually see the physical location of that click is gone?

RL: Absolutely. Now I've noticed that you can still have a look at analytics and look at the actual geographic location of people that are interacting with your ads. There's something else that's crossed my mind recently which is that you can create a custom report still. So you can go into Google Ads, create a custom report and add user location as a dimension to examine. So you could do city user location, rather than the interest. However, I need time to verify that they haven't just updated that dimension to now lump in the matched location. So I need time to assess historic data before I can say that that's a safe thing to do or not. I suspect, because interestingly they've removed the ready-made report from the dimensions tab now, so you can't look at the ready-made user locations report so they've removed that temporarily, but yeah they still haven't removed the ability to be able to look at this physical user location as a custom report. But as I say, I don't know how much that dimension can be trusted anymore.

MC: That's interesting because there have been things quietly removed from analytics before. So the technology report when we were looking at ISP data, that just vanished, didn't it? Because we spoke about that, didn't we, on the podcast and that, as far as I've seen, there was never any official announcement about that, they just took it out.

RL: There's another thing that they sneakily removed towards the end of last year, which was the ability to look at smart shopping campaign search queries in Google Analytics. Now, one of the reasons I've always been a bit funny with smart shopping campaigns and Google Ads is because you can't look at the search queries in Google Ads, so you don't know what the search terms are. So when I started looking at the search queries and analytics, it became clear that Google was chasing the easy wins which were the brand searches and you can't add your brand search as a negative in a smart shopping campaign; so I often use this as a good reason for clients not to run a smart shopping campaign. And then they removed the ability to look at all the historic smart shopping search term data in Google Analytics.

MC: So you can't see what we're doing, no? It's just the numbers look good.

RL: The numbers look good, so you know from an agency perspective, sure, we'll run a smart shopping campaign and we can drive some easy conversions, but are they actual acquisition or are they merely brand protections, easy win shopping? Anyway, all of these things hint at removing transparency and removing data led decision making and again, I guess that moves us towards the other update that you covered last week, regarding the removal of search term data where there isn't a significant amount of search volume.

MC: It makes me sad.

RL: It makes me sad, it makes me livid.

MC: So I mean, yeah we covered some of the implications of that, I did it while you weren't here. But what I really wanted to get into with you, what is your view on things we can be doing in-house, people can be doing, digital marketers, PPC managers, agencies can be doing to work around this? Because you know, Google lays down the law, they say these are the rules, and obviously we have to just play that game as best we can. So what are your thoughts, apart from being livid, and furious, and annoyed, and upset, what are your thoughts on this search term report data removal?

RL: The top thing that I always have been saying to clients for a number of years now is that the days of the core traffic, heavy keyword long disappeared on pay-per-click, like years ago. Whereas it used to be an easy time for pay-per-click managers, having a set of core keywords that were traffic heavy and constantly converted, this shifted very quickly, a number of years ago, where people's search behavior was much more conversational. Whereas I would use to see years ago, like 90% of all conversions comprised the same regular search queries, now I'm seeing it's the flip side and I'm seeing at least 70% of conversions and all of my clients accounts are unique searches that generate one or two impressions per month and that mix of random conversions comprises the vast majority of leads or sales. Very few of those searches are the traffic heavy keywords that Google were suggesting that they're only going to start showing. Now the detail within those minor incidental searches is immense, because I've always been a proponent, not of the actual search term itself to bid on, but the individual words, which in my mind, I refer to them as anchor words and it's those individual words within a massive subset of searches that I focus on and it's also those minor those anchor words, as individual words that generate a load of wasted spend.

So people that have managed accounts will know that searches such as, job, jobs salary, vacancies, second-hand, cheap, all of those incidental words can sometimes generate huge amounts of wasted spend, but they appear through thousands and thousands, sometimes millions of searches, but through unique longer tail searches. And it's possible that those searches, I say it's possible it's inevitable, that those types of incidental searches we're not going to see so readily anymore.

So the thing I can say really is that when you're planning a new campaign, or even if you've suddenly found yourself in a position where you've lost access to all of this data, use the keyword planner tool and have a look and see what Google seems to think are the most important traffic heavy searches. Look through them, and add them as exact match negatives, if you don't think they're relevant.

MC: So this is really then, maybe rather than going fishing for keywords with broader matches, it's actually doing this more detailed keyword research ahead of time.

RL: Yes absolutely, and looking back at your historic traffic I don't believe they're going to remove the historic data. I'll be very surprised if they do. Well actually, no, at the moment nothing surprises me. Maybe make an export of all of your historic search data, that's a really good idea, do that now.

MC: We just came up with that one.

RL: We did, yeah. On my to do list, after this podcast.

Have a look through your Bing search term search query data, although I have to say, in my experience, Bing have been very quick at jumping on the bandwagon; anything that Google has done, Bing seems to do very soon after because they know they can get away with it.

MC: Well, this could be Bing's chance.

RL: There's a chance for redemption, because they have been redeeming themselves recently.

MC: I have to say, I've seen some people saying where they hadn't been even bidding on Bing before, that they're going to move their campaigns, not move them away from Google but run them on Bing to try and get some of that extra long tail data. So I've only ever seen, since this, people talking about increasing spend on Bing, so although yeah they have seemed to just follow in line with everything Google have done, it does seem to be a very unpopular update because it's making people's jobs harder, and it doesn’t feel very much in Google's favour. So I hope Bing continues as it is, and can maybe provide us with some extra data.

RL: Well actually, we're going to be talking about Bing a little while later in this podcast, but one of the things I would say is that some of my clients actually perform a lot better on Bing than they do on Google. It's got a lower cost per click, sometimes it has a higher conversion rate, and for B2B advertising, it's fantastic, because a lot of companies, a lot of corporations are tied into using Bing as the search engine. but we'll talk about Bing in a little while because there's been some updates on there that that I'm keen to go over.

MC: There's a very positive mention of Bing there, if anyone at Microsoft, at Bing, you feel like sponsoring this podcast, just drop me a line.

RL: So to answer your question about the match search query, or should I say the reduction of search query data, yes do some keyword research. Don't make the assumption that the search term data that's outside what's being reported to you is meaningless, it's not, it's immense the amount of traffic, all of the important stuff in your account is from the longer tail, broader segment of traffic, all of that data is really valuable and brings me nicely onto close variant search terms that you often see because for the last few years Google has been introducing more and more close variant search query data into your campaigns. Just to give you an example, if you're a training course for example and you're running an seo training course, all of your keywords are going to be around course training, learning lessons, e-learning, because that qualifies what it is that you're selling. So your main keywords would be SEO training course, SEO e-learning, SEO courses. Now there are cases where Google will decide to remove the qualifier in that, and the qualifier is obviously courses, training. Now even if you're running a phrase or exact match keyword, sometimes Google will refer to that as a close variant and say actually no, I don't need to, we can show your advert just for searches like SEO hints, or SEO tips or even SEO blog, you know it can go really broad on that and it's those closed variants sometimes where Google may decide not to show it in the data.

So again, you have to really forward plan and decide what it is you don't want to search for. A lot of pay-per-click at the moment is thinking about what you don't want to spend money on because Google doesn't factor that in, or at least it does; it just doesn't guide you.

MC: They say you're missing opportunities.

RL: Yes, missing out.

MC: That's always something that's actually surprised me when I've run Google Ads and PPC accounts, is you get so into thinking about a client and what they do, their service, and you set up these key phrases to target and then you look through, well, did look through the search term data and you would see just intent that you'd completely not thought of because you were so focused on the product and, oh yeah, there's that totally different thing that has the same search term and yeah, like you say trying a big part of the the initial job is actually just trying to cut that wastage out isn't it?

RL: Absolutely, and I know a lot of people write scripts to exclude close variants, yeah but actually despite what I've just said, most of the time when I look through my search query data and I only look through close variants, the vast majority of the time it actually does convert better. Historically, close variant meant misspellings, it meant including searches for when the query wasn't including like a preposition such as, in, out, or to, or it would include plural versions of the search query, all of that's fine and I want to capture that because it's still relevant, but when they remove entire chunks of your keyword phrase out, that's actually really important to describe your business and qualify as the user, that's where it's really dangerous and all of this is going to become a lot harder to manage. It's interesting because I think there's going to be a whole new generation of pay-per-click managers that come into using Google Ads, not knowing that any of this happened in the past, not knowing what happens behind the scenes.

So it's going to be interesting to see how things move, I mean that's assuming they're still going to be pay-per-click managers in a couple of years time, I don't know. The way Google's going, it looks like they want everything to be automated anyway, but I guess that's another chat, for another another day.

MC: Trust in the black box. You've got something down here about ad rank threshold that you would like to talk about, tell us about ad rank threshold.

RL: The reason I was thinking about this today was because Google's made a lot of changes that the cynic in me says is to help with their ad revenue, and Google obviously got hit quite hard during the pandemic, a lot of advertisers paused which is understandable, and one of the things I kept seeing on LinkedIn and on other forums was, oh great cost per click is going to get lower because advertisers have pulled out of Google Ads, but that never happened to me. None of my clients saw a decrease, at least not a notable one in cost per click, and the more I thought about this, the more I thought well that's not a surprise at all because there is such a thing called ad rank threshold. Have you heard of ad rank threshold before?

MC: I have not.

RL: The reason you have not is because Google very quietly, a few years ago, posted about ad rank threshold. Essentially, ad rank threshold is the reserve price for an ad and historically, it used to be thought that you would only pay the maximum you need to pay to rank above your competitor, but actually that's not the case. Google has now said that there is a minimum reserve price, and even if you're the only advertiser bidding on a keyword, you still have to bid the minimum amount to show, which is its reserve price for the bid.

MC: So, like on Ebay, when I set a reserve price for, everyone can bid for this but nobody's getting it for less than 11 pounds.

RL: Exactly and I first noticed this years ago, when I used to run Google Ads campaigns and I used to enjoy cost per clicks of like 2p and 3p, or when I was doing a brand protection campaign and I knew that no one else was bidding on it, so I used to set the max cost per click to 1p and I would enjoy 1p cost per clicks. Then all of a sudden, the adverts would stop showing, and I'd have to start bidding 50p and then £1, and I thought, why am I doing that if there's no other advertiser on it, that just makes no sense whatsoever. Similar to that, I also noticed that there are certain niche industries that would automatically generate a really low quality score on the keyword, and I'd look at the landing page and I think, well the landing page is relevant, the speed of the site is fast - this was before mobile first so that wasn't an issue, but quite often these websites were mobile responsive anyway - and the ad text was relevant, so I think, well why is the quality score two and three, and why is it making me have to do like a £6 cost per click on a niche sector where there's barely any competitors. and over time I just thought this is just Google's algorithm, or it's just not working properly but then one day I came across Google's announcement about ad rank threshold, and I thought oh that just makes sense, so I was right all of this time, but they've now openly acknowledged that there is a minimum cost per click. It's like when you use LinkedIn, and you're targeting a niche industry and then it's saying the minimum amount you can bid is £8, and you think, oh imagine if Google did that. Well actually, Google lets you bid 1p, but they're telling you, well you can bid 1p if you want, but actually we still have a minimum reserve price for your advert to show, even if no one else is bidding on your term.

MC: And as well, they have changed with the accelerated bidding as well, so it's harder to fill in, take that strategy of bidding low and like filling in the cracks where they don't have the inventory.

RL: That was my favorite strategy for years and it worked so well for advertisers, but no, you just you can't do that now. You have to have a higher budget and a higher bid, which is why cost per clicks have increased over the years, not just because more people are using Google, but because Google, at any point, can change its ad rank threshold, it won't tell you when it's done it. The only thing they say is that it varies from sector to sector, so some sectors will add a high reserve price, others a low one and I'm presuming it's constantly refining that.

So if at any point they're thinking actually, our ad revenue is a bit low, maybe we just up the reserve price by 20p, and then you know that'll increase our ad revenue and cover this. Now, I'd love to see this have a knock-on effect on them though, on the number of people that advertise with them but I just don't think it will happen because Google's such a mammoth beast and everyone uses Google, so it's the place to advertise. But basically, all of these changes that we've discussed today just make me think that it's time for other advertisers to try out to dip their toes into other advertising platforms, whereas before I always used to say, yes use Google for search because search has the highest intent. The one thing I would say is that, I would much rather pay less money for lower quality lower intent traffic, if it's generating a profit, than I would for investing in a lot of money and high intent traffic when it's not generating a profit. Which is why it's important to try things like Bing and even Facebook; I've been having some fantastic results on Facebook simply because the cost per click is so much lower than Google, which I guess leads us very nicely onto Bing.

MC: Yeah, we can say some nice things. So Microsoft advertising recently announced the release of three audience targeting features, dynamic remarketing lists, and in-market audiences in France and Germany for search campaigns, and LinkedIn profile targeting for both search and audience campaigns. So good timing for them, what have you got to say about these?

RL: The one that really excites me the most, and it has done for a while, is the LinkedIn profile targeting. Essentially because linkedin is owned by Microsoft, and they've managed to integrate the platform with Bng, it allows you to show adverts effectively to people who match certain job titles, job functions, industries, or even specific companies. Now that's a really powerful thing. Unfortunately, although it's a really cool thing, it's not as outstanding as you may think it is. It's not like you can only show, for example, your adverts to CEOs who work in the finance sector, instead it's a bid only change. So you can add a bid modifier to CEOs, you can add a bid modifier to people that work at walmart, for example. So it's still quite cool and actually from a data collection perspective, it's going to be really good to be able to see what the job functions are that are activating your Bing ads. So I'm really excited about that, and I actually think even though it's just a bid modifier at the moment and you can't exclude certain job functions or sectors, I think that they're going to go down that route because Google can't do that. Google doesn't allow you to target by job function, or by sector, or even by the industry that you work in, so this is such a powerful update. I think that it just warrants closer monitoring and I’m really looking forward to it when it finally comes out in the UK and I can just play around with it, and share all sorts of fascinating insights with my clients.

MC: It's really helpful as well in terms of how we can use it with search. So obviously the premise, the basis, of search is that we can understand the intent because we know roughly what we're talking about and what people type in, but what we don't know is the type of person that's doing that search, which is going to have an impact perhaps on their intent, as to if they're a CEO of a company or whether they're a junior admin person, they may have different intent for the same thing. So I think it's a really good way to open up that discovery type of advertising by having those bid modifiers for things like job titles, or companies. Then once you get those clicks maybe being able to be a bit more sure, we can put them in an audience list in analytics and we're a bit more sure about who these people are and then we can feed that into our remarketing list for search and everything just gets better. And again, that's more money going Microsoft's way, because they've got that structured data, everyone's gone to LinkedIn and typed in their job titles, and their companies and Google don't really have that.

RL: No, I think it's really exciting. It wouldn't surprise me if Google tried to come up with a similar thing, I don't know how they would know, I'm sure they know lots of things, but I don't know how they would accurately be able to say what your job function is and where you work. I'm sure they can get that information.

MC: Just read my emails. So, dynamic remarketing and in market audiences.

RL: Sure, so this is something that Google has offered for years, which is a display remarketing campaign, but the adverts that you show to your users reflect the products that they viewed on your website. So essentially, it uses your shopping feed data; it looks at the products that that person has viewed on your website, and it will show an image of that product and the price that you charge for that product. What you often find with ecommerce remarketing is that, if you're running a dynamic shopping campaign, the click-through rates are higher and the conversion rates are higher because you're showing the product that they actually showed an interest in, you're not just sending them to a generic page, like the home page or a category page, you're sending them exactly to the product they were viewing when they abandoned your website.

So yeah, I think it's a good thing. I mean, not many of my clients generate huge amounts of shopping campaign traffic on Bing because it doesn't tend to convert as well, because it tends to have a broader search query criteria than Google, which is quite interesting, but I'm quite keen to see how this fleshes out over time and I'll certainly be trying it out. Sounds great to me.

MC: The only thing I wish people would do with these kind of remarketing campaigns is to make sure that people are removed from them when they check out. It's like the number one complaint I see from people who aren't involved in search marketing, when they get bombarded by ads for something they've looked at, and then actually bought, but then they see ads for the exact product they bought for like two weeks afterwards.

RL: I have a confession to make. I have a habit of contacting the head of marketing to every brand that does that to me. I even explain how they can fix it, and most of them just reply and go, haha thanks, and I don't hear from them again. but then sometimes the advert does stop showing to me, and I think yes, my work here is done.

MC: You could have charged for that, Rob. So, in market audiences.

RL: So in-market audiences, again, is something that Google has had available for a while, and in market audiences is essentially the search engine has decided that that person has intent to purchase that particular product. So for example, consumer electronics, event tickets, banking, clothing, shoes, if Bing thinks that the person is in the market for those things, you can add that audience.

Now all of this is great, one of the things that's worth bearing in mind is that these three new updates are all very much geared around Microsoft's audience network. Now Microsoft's audience network isn't the same as Google's display network. For one thing, at least in the UK right now, you can't create an audience only campaign on microsoft advertising.

MC: Okay

RL: You can only create a search campaign and add a bid adjustment to the audience network, and the audience network will include things like Outlook…

MC: You’ve put yourself on the spot now.

RL: I have. Outlook and Office 365 and I want to say Hotmail, it's not called Hotmail anymore, it's just Outlook, isn't it?

MC: Yeah I think so. It's been a while since I've logged into my Hotmail live, Outlook, whatever it's called now.

RL: So essentially, the audience network on Bing is quite limited compared to Google display network’s massive reach. But all of this to me hints that they're ramping up for something, and I'm really looking forward to it because the cost per click on the display network is getting increasingly high, and I'm really keen to see what can be achieved through Microsoft's audience network. As I say, you can't actually run an in-market only display campaign in Microsoft ads at the moment, it's only been released to certain advertisers that are part of the beta program. So all of this is still just as and when and we have to monitor it. We can't even use the LinkedIn audience profiling at the moment.

So if you want to create a display campaign in Microsoft ads, it's still essentially a search campaign, but sometimes your adverts will show on Outlook, Office 365 and other Microsoft platforms.

MC: Rob, we're kind of out of time now.

RL: Okay.

MC: Thank you so much for guiding me and us through that, I think I would have got a little bit lost trying to dance my way through all those updates because there's a lot of detail you've added in there. And it does always interest me, because obviously mainly on this podcast, I talk about SEO - that's kind of more my thing, and there's always something new to talk about and it just seems to be the same with PPC. Things are changing rapidly, the technology is changing rapidly, what the different - I call them vendors - are doing is changing, and it just opens new possibilities that you need to stay ahead of.

It does always make me feel bad when I speak to people who have got a marketing function within a company, and then I speak to them because they want some help with SEO or something, and then I talk to them about their job function and they're normally like, yeah I do marketing; I do the SEO and I do the PPC, and yeah now, I do some of the design bits as well, and it just blows my mind. It's not possible for one person to to keep up with everything that's going on, and when I tell them that okay well actually, just within SEO, we tend to even have people that specialise; so we have technical SEO people, we have people that do outreach and digital pr, we have people who are more focused on content, so it just makes me feel bad really for those people - so we feel you, if you're working in house marketing and that's your role, you have our sympathies.

But thank you very much Rob, I hope we get to do this again sometime soon and we're not totally locked down again.

We will be back in one week's time again, which will be Monday the 21st of September, I hope you all have a brilliant week. If you are enjoying the podcast do subscribe, leave us a review, whatever, it all helps and I hope you join in next week. Goodbye.

More from the blog

Get in touch

Please call us on
+44 (0)1603 957068

or email
hello@withcandour.co.uk

Alternatively, if you fill and send this form we will get back to you shortly:

Artboard Created with Sketch.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

send
Success!
Success!

Thank you for your enquiry, we will take at look at your request and get back to you shortly.