One Step Forward, Two Steps Backwards for Meltwater Reach
Published: April 6, 2011
Author: David Rodnitzky
A few weeks ago I chastised Meltwater Reach – a sparklingly brand new PPC firm started last year – for trying to poach one of our clients by suggesting that they shouldn’t be showing up on the keyword “custom logo headbands.” We subsequently noted that Meltwater Reach was advertising on the equally obscure keyword “Meltwater Reach headbands” and a senior representative from Meltwater posted a comment on this blog promising to instruct his team to be more targeted with their keyword research going forward (oh, and not click on ads when doing sales research).
Today, I have some good news and some bad news for Meltwater. The good news is that it does indeed appear that their keyword selection for their sales letters to our clients has improved. We have a client in the evening wear category and this time Meltwater used the term “backless evening dress” for their client hunting. This is a real thing that a real person could really search for, so I have to give credit where credit is due – way to go Meltwater!
But alas, Meltwater still has some work to do. The contents of the pitch letter this time focuses on the ad text. Here’s what it says (in relevant part):
The real reason why I’m reaching out to you is because I came across one of your paid search ads on Google on the search for “backless evening dress” and saw that the ad copy could be a lot more targeted. Knowing that this is a competitive arena in the PPC space, a more compelling ad copy would allow you to lower your Cost Per Click and Cost Per Acquisition in the long run (see screen shot below).
So let’s take a look at the screenshoted ad, here it is (I blacked-out the client’s name, everything else is straight from Meltwater):
For starters, this ad mentions “dress” twice and has “evening” in the display URL. So other than not specifically mentioning “backless”, I would count this as a well-targeted ad to this keyword. Indeed, the only ad that mentions the exact query does so in such a lame dynamic keyword insertion (DKI) fashion that it feels a lot less targeted than this client’s ad. And then we have the Nordstrom and David’s Bridal ads that don’t even use the word “dress”, opting instead of “gown.”
And of course, let’s look at the actual data behind this query. From my clever team member Sean:
Amazing! The best part is that this query has generated an 0 impressions in the last thirty days. It’s plural counterpart “backless evening dresses” has a whopping 28 impressions and 2 clicks for a 7.14% CTR.
If Meltwater has enough time to customize ads for the 38,000+ queries we were matched to last month I doubt they’d be able to do much else. Good thing for us that we’ll focus on those that actual convert and show impression potential 🙂
Given all of this, I once again question the sales approach here, which appears to be as follows: 1) Find any medium to large advertiser on AdWords. 2) Do a keyword search (preferably for a relevant keyword – improved process!, do not click on the ad – improved process!); 3) Come up with any reason to suggest that there’s a problem with the advertiser’s SEM campaign, whether there is or not; 4) Close new client!
C’mon Meltwater, you’ve made some good progress since we last chatted, but you’ve still got plenty of room for improvement. I’m anxiously awaiting the next sales pitch iteration.