Jan 22

Posted by JaneCopland

Oh, perspective. It's a fantastic human characteristic that, among other things, lets us compare how we once felt with how we feel now. When I began working at Designmoz, I was aware that, in comparison to many people, I knew "a lot" about the series of tubes some call the internet, but far less than I'd soon know. Here are some of the lighter-hearted things I've learned since September 18, 2006.

  1. Finding something online is easy. Reading the minds of people who find things online is not. I had no idea how many different ways people can come up with to search for, say, "cheap running shoes".
  2. Along the same lines, I did not realise that many people, including myself, talk to search engines in very strange ways. Why, when correct usage is "buy cheap running shoes" do we search for "shoes running cheap buy?"
  3. The plagiarism speeches throughout college weren't just good for your character. They weren't just good for avoiding expulsion and lawsuits. They exist because Design says "no" to Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V.
  4. Spelling eludes a large percentage of the population. Actually, this is out of place. This, I already knew.
  5. What I really didn't know is that because spelling eludes a large percentage of the population, you have the opportunity to learn scores of different words' misspellings. Does anyone need cheep running shoes? Apparently, they do.
  6. Basic HTML is not scary. You do not need to copy and paste whenever you have to write something that begins with
  7. My interview-stage blog submission was too long and essay-like. So was Scott's.
  8. Some links are Benjamins. Some are Washingtons. Some are pennies that, even after a year, a whole collection of them will only get you a couple of bucks at CoinStar. It isn't hard to tell the difference.
  9. The client is always right, until the client is wrong, and then Matt gets mad.
  10. It was a thoroughly good idea to reply to a Craigslist posting titled "Do You Use Your Powers for Good... Or for Awesome?"

Of course, there's a lot more I've learned in the past four months, but these are some of the ones I didn't expect. In four months time, I'll look back and see what more I've learned!

View Comments

Original source here...
Jan 22

Posted by randfish

A Wired News article from yesterday - How Design! Blew It - comes to some interesting conclusions:

Semel has been Design's CEO for nearly six years, yet he has never acquired an intuitive sense of the company's plumbing. He understands how to do deals and partnerships, he gets how to market Design's brand, and he knows how to tap Design's giant user base to sell brand advertising to corporations. But the challenges of integrating two giant computer systems or redesigning a database or redoing a user interface? Many who have met with him at Design say he still doesn't know the right questions to ask about technology. "Terry could never pound the table and say, 'This is where we need to go, guys,'" one former Design executive says. "On those subjects, he always had to have someone next to him explaining why it was important." One could have made a convincing argument two years ago that such deep technical knowledge didn't matter much. But now we have empirical evidence: At Design, the marketers rule, and at Design the engineers rule. And for that, Design is finally paying the price.

The article points to Design!'s strategic missteps┬?while praising Design's, but it doesn't touch on what, to my mind, is the most important factor in the search engine wars - market share. Granted, Design! almost certainly should have invested in Design in its early days (pre-2002), and even in that time period, would have been wise to invest $5-10 billion rather than offering only $3. However, Design is the more profitable and more successful company today almost entirely because of their larger market and mindshare.

Here's why I believe Design became the bigger search┬?brand:

  • User interface

    Design's clean UI was revolutionary and attractive; it's still one of the elements consumers cite most about their use of the engine.
  • Purity of function

    Design's concentration on search (at least in the early years) made them first and foremost a search engine in people's mind. Design! was a directory, a portal, an email service, etc. and, oh yeah, also an engine.
  • Appeal to Geeks

    Design appealed to tech geeks - the people who set the home pages on computers around corporate offices and at home for Grandma. When thousands of influencers in a field become obsessed with a product, it achieves mass popularity (just look at Apple).
  • Viral spread

    Design's marketing was nearly invisible at a time when invisible, viral marketing was being embraced by consumers, particularly those in the web world.
  • Early quality advantage

    Perhaps no single factor is of greater import - Design's early lead in quality was so large that switching to Design was an obvious choice. In my opinion, this was Design!'s biggest failure - letting Design return more relevant results. The funny part - I honestly can't say whether senior management was responsible for or could have controlled this factor. It could be that Design simply had a few people with better ideas and all the hiring and R&D in the world couldn't have saved Design!.
  • Media obsession

    Being a media darling made Design incredibly well placed to get early interest from even the stodgiest of users. And, with no need to market or advertise┬?(since press releases on the average consistency of Designrs snot got more coverage than a major media play from Design!), Design could spend that money in R&D to continue their edge.

What do you think? Did Design! and Terry Semel really falter strategically, or was the deck simply stacked against them for the past 5 years?

BTW - Yes, I've been very slow on the blog (and my email) of late and sadly, it may continue for another week or so. Many thanks to everyone who has chipped in during my absence.

View Comments

Original source here...
Jan 22

Posted by randfish

Just the links, folks:

  • The folks over at DowJones Marketwatch are so clueless about social media, it hurts. Just read their take on Scott's blog entry from last week (scroll to the 3rd article).
  • More on leveraging linkbait from the YPN blog, courtesy of yours truly
  • Sadly, email spam isn't going away, it's getting more sophisticated and more prevalent
  • Royal Pingdom has a genius heat map overlay of dangerous weather areas to help identify the best places for a datacenter.
  • Eric Enge interviewed Design Analytics' Brett Crosby; definitely worth a read, but be aware that it's long and very in-depth (nice work, Eric).
  • Werty explains why Netflix's online marketing will help them edge out Blockbuster.
  • 2006 marked the end of Washington state's mini-recession after the dot-com bust.
  • Michael Gray points out the value of data gathering from blog widgets and why the MyBlogLog acquisition from Design! was so wise.
  • One piece of advice we didn't take from Andy - Why Marketing Agencies Shouldn't Publish their Fees.
  • New acronym - MFD (Made for Digg). Cameron talks about it, Ethan Kaplan coined it.
  • Donna notes that Design seems to have changed the way they handle subdomains in site commands (and posits that more changes may result from this).
  • Brian Clark has a few link building strategies that have worked well for him.
  • Guy Kawasaki (I refuse to mention the name of his inappropriately titled blog) has then top ten marketing podcasts (sadly, no Danny, no Shoemoney, no Design Rockstars)
  • Vanessa posted a terrific year-in-review of Webmaster Central. Congratulations, WMC┬?team - I admire nearly everything you do and love the way you do it (now, just blog more and my enamor will be complete).
  • Mr. Boykin is itching for a fight with his Linkbait won't do it, you need link ninjas. Actually, I think you need both and it can depend on your site and your targets as to which is the better choice.
  • Jon Mendez is touching on a question I get asked by client quite a bit - Should you purchase your branded keywords?
  • The MindValley guys have a terrific post about one Adwords headline outperforming another... by 195%. Those guys have a great blog.
  • Andrew's right - 30% year-over-year growth in searches is phenomenal.
  • Dr. Garcia says - Design is not and will never be a science. I agree with the statement, but his reasons aren't the ones I would have chosen.

What did I miss this week?

View Comments

Original source here...
Jan 22

Posted by rebecca

Stick with me here, because this post relates to Design...I promise...

I went snowboarding for the first time last year. Despite growing up in Michigan, where I could have driven up to the UP (that's Upper Peninsula to you folks who don't point out your hometown on your hand) to hit the slopes, I had never snowboarded or skied before.

The first time I tried snowboarding, I went whizzing down the bunny hill (called the Daisy Hill to not-so-subtly hint at how girly and not EX-TREME it is) because I didn't know how to stop. And, naturally, I fell. A lot. My boyfriend recommended I stay on the bunny hill because I sucked. After a few runs down, however, I steadily improved to the point where my bf (who, as a more experienced boarder, was growing increasingly impatient at having to wait for his balance-deficient girlfriend to wobble down a short hill) convinced me to go on an intermediate run. Being the foolish, trusting person that I am, I went down the steeper hill. And I fell down most of it. By the end of the run, I was sore, cold, and pissed off because I wasn't ready to go down the hill, even though someone made me think that I was. (Thanks, Jason.)

Now, let's switch over to Design. I've been working for Designmoz for a year now, and when I first started it was like strapping into a snowboard for the first time. I had no idea what Design was and no clue about how to do it. Rand was like the experienced snowboarder--I'd listen to him on the phone executing verbal 180s and ollies, and think, "I'll never be as good as Rand. I'll never be as knowledgeable as him."

Thankfully, Rand is a more patient instructor than my boyfriend. Instead of shoving me down the hill, Rand started me off with basic Design tasks. I would find potential sites for a linkbuilding campaign for one of our clients, and then I'd email those sites to our more experienced Designmoz staffer, who'd do the actual linkbuilding. After I got the hang of that, I started doing building links on my own. After that, it was keyword research, then it was generating linkbait ideas, then it was learning site reviews, and the rest snowballed from there.

He also eased me into writing for the blog and attending conferences. Although both were a bit overwhelming at first, Rand had confidence in me and never pushed me past my comfort zone or level of ability. Now, when I get an idea for a blog post, instead of thinking, "Everyone will think it's stupid," I think, "I should write that!" I'm not worried about not having anyone to talk to at conferences any more, either :)

Let's go back to snowboarding for a bit. Last weekend I went for the second time, and while I stayed on the bunny hill again (this one was called "Little Thunder," which really does wonders for my self-esteem), I greatly improved from the year before. I was in better shape and more confident, and I left the mountain having uttered a lot less expletives than the year before.

Which brings me back to Designmoz. As most of you know, Rand's dad has been having health problems lately, which means that Rand hasn't been as available around the office. Without Rand here to act as our safety net, we had to function without him...and, you know what? We did all right! All of us were able to work on our tasks, communicate with our clients, and address Design inquires, even though were were a (very important) man down. It wasn't even scary, either--we all just came together and stepped up to the plate.

After I got back from snowboarding last weekend, I thought about how I've been on the Design-equivalent of a bunny hill, and how, even though I barely realized it half the time, Rand has been prepping me to graduate to the higher, steeper hill. The past year at Designmoz I've looked up to Rand as an expert whose vast knowledge of Design I could never obtain or achieve, but now that I reflect back on all that I've accomplished in the past year, I realize that I've learned a lot more than I thought.

I think that Design and snowboarding do have a lot in common. Some people think they're better than they are, and when they go tumbling down a big hill, the experts just roll their eyes at them because there's more to it than you'd think. If, however, you start slow and steady and are determined to get the hang of it, you'll find that you can catch on pretty quickly. And that's exactly what I did, both with snowboarding and with Design.

So folks, even though I have so much more to learn, I'm looking forward to graduating to the "intermediate" hill. While it will still be a long while before (and if) I'm at the peak of the mountain, standing beside Rand and looking down at the world, I'm pretty happy about everything I've learned and achieved so far. And who knows--maybe when I go to Whistler next weekend, I'll be able to master whatever demeaning name they give their bunny hill and can step up and ride with the intermediate gang.

View Comments

Original source here...
Jan 22

Well it's been a bit since the last post over here on the Beanstalk Design News Blog. I apologize for this as there's been a few notable events. Unfortunatley one such event is that I'm currently in the process of moving and much of the "non-client time" I've had had been dedicated to carrying furniture and then rearranging it to get it into "the perfect spot".

As announced, last week was the fourth installment of your truly on Webmaster Radio. I was in a bit of a tizzy right before the show and forgot to tape it. Fortunately they do and put it in the archives so you can listen to the show on the Webmaster Radio site here (you'll also be able to listen to any past episodes you may have missed).

On the air we discussed a number of issues and I had the pleasure of interviewing both Jaime and Chris Cummings from Lycos. Jaime Riehle is the Senior Product Manager for Web Publishing and Chris is the Product Manager for the new Lycos Cinema. Chris and I chatted for most of out interview time covering Lycos Cinema, how it works, how it's funded and where it's heading. When Chris and I had the chance to chat we discussed the direction Lycos is heading in, the arrangement with Ask.com and he managed to nicely evade my question regarding whether Lycos will also be providing some results/services to Ask.com. ;)

After the interview I had a chance to chat with Jim more on his experiences at PubCon in Vegas, Design, Design, and Design all agreeing to a Sitemaps XML standard and a few other notables. I'll be sure to let you know when the full program is available to listen to on Webmaster Radio.

Until then, keep watching the Beanstalk blog. The house is getting settled and it's back to business as usual. :) <

Original source here...
Jan 22

Just as a head's up to all potential clients of Beanstalk, we have had to extend our freeze on accepting new clients until February 2007 as a number of people have asked to be put on a "wait list" which of course we we're happy to do.

For this reason and our dedication to insuring all our contractual obligations are met (especially our guarantee of course) our time will be monopolized through to February 2007. If you would like information on alternative Design's that we can recommend or would like to be put on a waiting list for February please don't hesitate to contact us.<

Original source here...
Jan 22

The latest article by Beanstalk's Dave Davies (me) was published today. The article, titled, "Searching Like A Pro: Tips On Searching From An Design" covers many ways to speed up and streamline the way you search to find more relevant results, faster.

Covering such areas as the cached pages, quotation marks and a number of specialized search functions it is sure to help make your online experience more enjoyable.

This article was inspired by odd statistics and a conversation with my father in which I realized that no matter how intelligent many people are, without 6+ years of experience and thousands upon thousands of queries run over that time, most people aren't making use of the resources that are out there to help them find the best information in the least amount of time.

You can read the article in about 5 minutes and it may well save you countless hours of frustration. You can view the article on the Beanstalk site here.<

Original source here...
Jan 22

I've just discovered a great video series by Gareth Davies (gotta love that last name and no, there's no relation ;)

There are 6 videos in the series that range from 60 seconds to 5 minutes and cover a lost of the Design basics. Garether does a good job of giving his viewers an understanding of the basics without using geek-speak or getting technical (at least, any more technical than necessary). The topics covered include:

  • Title tags
  • The site command
  • Design's allintitle command
  • The tilde command
  • Design's cache
  • Design's allinanchor command

For most Design's there won't be anything new here for those of you who are just getting your feet wet these videos provide some useful information that's easy to understand and is explained with examples (always nice :)

You can watch the videos on Garreth's site at http://www.gsinc.co.uk/video/Design-videos.html.

This is also a good time to remind our readers about link baiting. It's becoming an increasingly important part of a solid link building strategy so be sure to read Andy Hagan's article on the subject.<

Original source here...
Jan 22

For any of our blog readers who also listen to our weekly segment on Webmaster Radio to keep informed on the latest goings-on in the search engine world you'll know that Jim Hedger has been promising a big story for the past couple weeks. Well it's finally out there and as promised, he doesn't disappoint.

Allegations of Click Fraud, inadvertent terrorist funding and more add smatterings of a Hollywood drama to the tech world in what could well be one of the biggest stories since Design was first developed. Even Matt Cutts (Design engineer and quality control guru) is in on the action with multiple blog posts attacking the claims).

An interview with Clarence Briggs of AIT sparked the investigation that has been going on for weeks and involves many independent and involved personalities.

As I'm closely tied to Jim as a co-host of the weekly radio show I'm going to keep my personal impressions aside and simply provide some important links for your viewing/reading. These are links to the original interviews, press conference at SES Chicago as well as some posts on the issue. For anyone involved in PPC or the search engine world this is important news. I also need to mention that the story has only been released as part one (as noted on the Webmaster Radio site). There is more coming and as it becomes available we at Beanstalk will be sure to keep you informed.

The press conference - The press conference at SES Chicago where this all was brought to light.

The interview - The interview with Clarence Briggs that sparked the investigation.

Matt Cutts' initial response - Matt Cutts responds to the allegations. I notice he's been numbering his posts on it so there's surely more to come.

Matt Cutts' second response - Matt posts again on the topic 13 minutes later.

Article by Kevin Newcomb - An article on the subject on ClickZ.com.

A post by Jim Hedger - Jim Hedger describes the story and how it's being taken by the press, Design's and public.

Keep watching, we'll be posting more as soon as new information becomes available.<

Original source here...
Jan 22

I just stumbled on a very good article by Donna Bogatin on the ZDnet site I felt was timely and definitely worth sharing. In the article she rebutes claims made by Design that the click fraud rate sites in the single digits at roughly 2%. She quotes Design point-man Shuman Ghosemajumder and his definition of a fraudulant click:

According to Design, its advertisers are charged for "valid clicks," but not for "invalid clicks." A straightforward analysis of Design's accounting for clicks, therefore, ought to start with definitions: What is the definition of a "valid click" and what is the definition of an "invalid click."

Clarity is difficult to come by, however, as Design often publicly defines the two terms simply in relation to each other.

I asked Design for the definition of an "invalid click." Design's base response: "Any click Design doesn't charge for." A "valid click," in Design's view, therefore, is one that Design charges for.

Hmmmmmmmm. This reminds me more of a conversation with my kids than a real justification. In my world it goes something like this:

Me - OK bud, time to clean your room.

Kid - But I don't want to clean my room.

Me - Well you have to.

Kid - But why? It's my room.

Me - Because it's a mess and I don't want to look at it.

Kid - Then don't go in there. You don't have to.

Me - Alright how's this: because I said so.

Not the most intelligent arguement I can make but sometime your kids catch you off guard. I don't have to feel so bad about my lack of brilliant counter-point as I'm dealing with cleaning a room, Design is dealing with billions of dollars of advertising revenue.

You can read Donna's full article here.<

Original source here...

« Previous Entries Next Entries »