The drop in AdWord clicks over the past two months has created a bump Google's ongoing success. But not to worry, CEO Eric Schmidt told Business Week, people will eventually pay more for the better quality clicks.

There has been a lot of press about this lately. I think "Google's Gamble" as Business Week called it may be expecting too much. If the cost of their clicks continues to increase through their minimum bid and Quality Score push people may start using Yahoo and Microsoft first.

While their popularity will continue to give them the high volume of traffic, if Yahoo and Microsoft offer lower CPA (cost per acquisition) then the strategy of starting with Google because of that could be changed to get the lower costing conversions first and then test the successful ones over at Google.

If this happens then the edge Google has could drop. It is one thing to be the popular search engine for users, but if they lose their position as the popular engine for advertisers then they are almost back to the days when they had no idea how to monetize their engine.

Obviously in some cases where there is a big enough margin in what is being marketed advertisers will buy the more expensive clicks. But in the case of companies selling small margin items such a move will make it difficult.

Apart from the Quality Score influence, this move suggests Google is using information they are getting from Google Analytics to determine if people will pay more. This is a dangerous step for a number of reasons - one, the privacy issues could be a problems and stop this and two, many people using GA may not be doing so effectively, measuring the wrong thing and thus giving Google information that they use but is not real.

We will all have to wait and see if their hopes are founded.

For the past two weeks our industry has been debating the need for standards, many of the regular blogs have weighed in as have most of the major players in our space. The discussion has been heated at times and while the idea has gotten the attention there definitely has not been any accord.

At the end of February, Chris Boggs and I started an exchange on the topic. We had suggested prior to this that there was a need for standard definitions of the various measurement terms and while this may be a peripheral part of the discussion is could have been a good starting point.

In the past week Jill Whalen of High Rankings outlined why we should not or cannot standardize search marketing, stating "Industry market forces and the search engines themselves will eventually dictate what best practices are and are not."

Jill I have to disagree with the statement - never let the fox guard the hen house. The search engines should not dictate our standards - they set their rules and we work with and around them. We work for the client not the engines. You mention that but use it to say no standards... that last point supports not letting the engines set them more than there is no need.

Lisa Barone of Bruce Clay makes the argument that there is a "need to outline what SEO is and what it means to optimize a Web site. We need to establish best practices, what the risk is for abandoning them, and what all these different terms that we throw around actually mean."

From these two articles we have seen many people weigh in with some interesting comments.

Kalena Jordan, a fellow Aussie and founder of Search Engine College, has been very vocal recently on anything about standards. Her blog Ask Kalena came out against the recently launched SEMCompare that reviews search firms - "trouble with a capital T" - but she does offer an alternative. "Creating standards is not going to get rid of shoddy SEOs or make them switch hats. Education and publicity has always been the solution".

Kalena while I agree that education is important for maturing our industry, I think your response encompasses where we are right now. We see the issue differently. There are really many parallel areas and some of the discussion has been about definitions which do need to be standardized and then behaviors which may not need a standard given the creativity of our industry.

The ever controversial Michael Martinez of SEO Theorysuggests we need to drop the term search engine optimization altogether. Come on Mike we know we are not optimizing search engines but rather the sites the engines rank and include in their databases.

But I do agree with your opinion that "skepticism is important while laying the groundwork for further study by all."

Kim Krause of Cre8asite Forum brings up an interesting question for the topic. "Just out of curiosity, who would enforce standards? How would they be enforced? Are they intended to be?"

Kim I don't think there is a need to police standards, more to outline them so customers can have an idea of what to look for as well as new people in our space have an idea of where to start.

Okay I left many comments and commentators out but hopefully this brings the major views together. Without some guidelines we leave our industry in the "Wild Web" stage that has been there from the beginning when porn and spam was the major effective marketing areas.

We have come a long way... in my opinion it is time to become more structured and accessible.

Wall Street is acting with caution when it comes to Google based on months of reporting that the search engine giant's paid search clicks are declining. But Google insists that the click reductions are due to improvement in the quality of the ads, not because Google is somehow losing its luster.

The timing for this move may be poor, however. A Business Week article points out that some advertisers may be cutting their ad spend due to a slower economy.

Still, Google is smart to perform quality assurance. As any good search engine marketer knows, the answer lies in revenues, not clicks. Everyone wants their conversion ratio to be as low as possible, and Google is smart to keep their eye on providing quality for the user (both buyers and clickers). A temporary slowdown in growth is far better than ignoring a quality issue and seeing sustained declines down the road.

Q4 2007 revenues showed growth but came in just under Wall Street's expectations. This coincided with news of a slowdown in clicks. We won't see Q1 revenues until sometime next month, but that will give some insight into whether or not Google is on the right track.

Ever since Microsoft made its initial 44 billion bid on Yahoo several weeks ago the venerable search engine has desperately tried to rebuff the software giant s advances. From behind-the-scenes bargaining with other companies to announcements that the deal vastly underrates Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang has been working to keep his company from being purchased by the monolithic monopolist. Read on for his latest move....
Win a Dell XPS Ultra-Portable Notebook Free Registration to Insight24 Directory - Access Over 5,000 B2B Webcasts, Podcasts, and Videos.

Yahoo just announced Shine, and is hopping on the bandwagon that says women are a great target. Why now?

Just like iVillage, Glam and others, Yahoo knows that getting inventory in home, garden, health and other categories can translate into higher effective CPMs. They developed nine separate content areas and 38 sub-topics that appeal to visitors and advertisers.

What's Been Launched?

Yahoo has licensed decent article content for Shine, from major publishers who already cover this desired content in print and online. Then they hired both editors and bloggers to fill in the rest. There's no focus on video content yet.

Like any respectable Web 2.0 community, Yahoo also encourages contributions by visitors. If you have Yahoo email, then you automatically have access to your own blog. Of course, Yahoo also encourages you to buzz articles shown at Shine.

You can search content across Shine only, which should equate to site search on competitor sites. Given the sparse content so far, the results are fairly limited. So Yahoo isn't trying to create a vertical or women's search engine -- or directly respond to Ask.com, which recently claimed that position.

Click to read the rest of this post...

An important factor in SEO is the existence of Meta tags in the source code of web pages.There is many factors that affect a website's performance in the search engine. One key factor in the Search En...