By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch,  Oct 22, 2010

Recently I posted some tips for paid search newbies. This time, I’m focusing on five ways the stakeholders employing PPC experts can help (or hinder) their efforts.

Communicate!

I still hear of situations where agencies or in-house teams are told days (or even hours) beforehand of a site change — whether it’s a page moving, new product launch or worse, lots of changes. Sometimes they find out only when performance drops.

This never ceases to surprise — search has been around long enough for many marketers to know that on-site changes have an impact on campaigns and sales figures often suffer as a result.

Let everybody know about a likely change, even if it’s not signed off, so they can plan resources, assess any impact on performance, and provide feedback that might improve performance even further (especially in terms of SEO and AdWords quality score optimization). A “mundane” change might be the opportunity to use technical resource already secured to make additional changes that will have a positive impact.

Go Beyond The Click

Many brands give their experts the scope to significantly boost their traffic and achieve their KPIs — but don’t involve them formally in what happens post-click.

Optimizing landing pages can significantly improve quality score and aid SEO — that’s a given. Perhaps more significantly for the bottom line and senior management, combining this with optimizing all the steps to sale can create a further step-change across all traffic sources, not just search.

Recently, I helped a client’s internal team go from a 2 percent to 9 percent conversion rate in one redesign, which helped them exceed targets and invest more budget.

Optimizing pages and the path to conversion, as well as campaigns, creates a positive feedback loop; as every dollar spent on traffic works harder because the site works harder, so keywords or placements that were previously ruled out on a performance basis can come back into reach — exposing the brand to more consumers and potentially increasing market share.

Google knows this — hence Google Optimizer being provided for free.

Automate

PPC can become extremely time consuming — especially if inventory changes on the website a lot, whether in terms of stock levels or prices.

Feeds are a perfect way to automate much of the change required, and some paid search tools can work with them to automate this work. Yet many brands don’t have adequate feeds in terms of content, quality, or frequency of update.

Educate Upwards

A scenario I’ve encountered many times:

1.Campaign starts.
2.Initial data is used to optimize, changing average positions.
3.Client’s boss phones up and angrily asks “Why aren’t we number one for keyword X?”
4.Agency receives a worried or irate phone call or e-mail.
5.Agency diverts time to answering this with a presentation for the boss, meaning they have less time to make the client money by further optimizing campaigns.
This doesn’t need to happen. Much of this time can be saved by educating upwards.

Explain to senior stakeholder that positions are based on achieving targets, not ego building. This is a fundamental step in managing expectations — and yet so often, doesn’t happen and PPC experts find themselves under largely unnecessary pressure born of misunderstanding.

Challenge

After the initial launch period, it’s easy for campaign reporting and meetings to become repetitive and even stale. Challenge the teams — asking what they would do in perfect world of unlimited budget and resource (within reason!) can kick start interesting conversations and ideas — especially if you throw the doors open to other digital channels, the website itself, and business processes.

A client recently started a meeting with several agencies by saying “There are no sacred cows — everything is up for discussion and change today.” I wholeheartedly agree.

I doubt there’s a single PPC team that doesn’t have a mental wish list of three or four things they would fix if they were in control — tap into that. Your sales figures may well thank you.

Yesterday I posted a FAQ on Google Instant and discussed if consumers will hate it.

Today I’m going to look at what this might mean for campaigns; the reality is nobody will know for sure until they have gathered data over a decent period of time, roll-out has finished to eligible computers – and consumers have got used to the feature.

US and UK Rollout – A Big Difference

Below are my thoughts from a UK point of view – Steak NYC will be posting their thoughts shortly, too. There is already an important US to UK difference – in the UK, you have to be logged in to a Google Account for Instant to work; in the US, all consumers will see it if their browser etc supports it.

Here are my (UK centric) thoughts:

Impressions on Generic Terms to Rise?

The idea is simple; as consumers start typing, they may be driven by Google’s suggestions to use generics more (either by clicking through, or by reading search results for more than the 3 seconds Google requires to count an impression). I’m not so sure this will happen – see my comments on the long tail below – and I think this would provide consumers less relevant results; a real threat to Google’s loyal user base who love it’s relevancy.

Impressions on Brand Terms to Rise?

I’ve seen a lot of brands appear in results when I start typing – for example “e” brings up eBay results, potentially increasing impressions for this brand term. The same is true of many other letters in the UK and US, and no doubt this spreads to other brands 2 or 3 letters into typing.

If a consumer is starting to type in a non-brand search, and happens to be shown a relevant brand by Instant, then there is the possibility they will go to that site straight away – robbing competitors of the opportunity to compete for them in “normal” non-brand search results.

Brand CPCs to Rise?

This may well happen because of the knock-on affect of more impressions without a click as a result of the above, affecting brands whom are shown for searches where they receive no click – but do have an impression counted against them. However, if the market as a whole experiences this, the competitive affects may be limited – everybody will have the same experience.

Long Tail to Suffer?

I’ve seen a lot of commentary stating that the long tail will suffer, and even that businesses that receive most of their traffic and sales via it will die.

If Google can show search results within a few letters that are relevant compared to the long(er) tail query the consumer was going to type in, then some long tail queries will be diverted onto generic terms of one or two words. However – so far – I’ve rarely had this experience when searching with Instant. No doubt Google will improve the algorithm – it is only day 2, after all.

The more I consider this and talk to colleagues, the less likely this seems, so…

Long Tail To Grow around Suggested Search Strings?

Consumers who are typing in a long tail search know they need to use several words to find what they are looking for – they are taking deliberate action based on past experience. Will they suddenly abandon that behaviour because Google is showing them search results as they type the first few letters? I don’t think many will – if anything, they will “type past” Google’s suggestions to the results they want (i.e. that are relevant) – and maybe add to/edit the long tail search as they see the results it generates. Something they probably would have done anyway, over several distinct searches on the “old” Google.

So long tail might grow – as more consumers notice that the search results change as they type and they think more explicitly about what they are typing, they may be driven to enter more words to refine their search or use the suggested search terms that seem relevant. This would raise long term volumes and, for suggested searches, effectively push consumers onto “predefined” search strings with all the impact increased competition on a term brings for advertisers.

More Keywords To Add?

Google Instant may mean that some consumers start to click through on “half-formed” search terms – e.g. somebody who was going to type in “home insurance” clicking through on a site shown for “home ins”. This may in affect create new keywords to add to campaigns, researched by brainstorming or reviewing analytics/tracking alongside the normal keyword tools. Match type settings will play a part in this coverage, too, for paid search campaigns, and I imagine that Google will ensure broad match covers some of these searches off.

Ranking Even More Important?

As consumers quickly scan results as they type, sites below the fold won’t get any opportunity to catch their eye and draw their click – somebody typing isn’t scrolling. So ranking above the fold will be important in this situation.

Dust-Off Abandoned Generics

A very interesting point Mark in our New York office has made is that brands may need to look at increasing exposure on generic (aka head) terms to ensure they are ranked well for the first term consumers will see results for as they type; so there could well be increased competition for generic, one-word terms. It may be worth re-considering generics previously removed from keyword lists because of high CPCs/competition across paid/ natural search…

Conclusion

I don’t think a fundamental shift to generic terms will occur; I’m increasingly thinking that consumers will start to click through from longer search strings, either by clicking on a search suggestion or typing more words in; if anything Instant will prompt them to improve the way they search.

However, the jury is still out and I know colleagues here at Steak and elsewhere in the industry have different opinions…

So I could be wrong – for all the technology, commentary and gut instinct we all collectively have, consumers can be notoriously unpredictable and the ultimate test will only be time – and data. I can see a long Excel session coming on…

UPDATE:

Our sister agency Minute Steak have also been blogging about Google Instant during it’s beta testing and also their thoughts on the launch and its implications.

Group Account Director Alastair Boyle is looking forward to presenting at Figaro Digital’s SEO & PPC event at London’s The Hospital Club this Thursday, August 4th.

His session ‘All search and no marketing?’ will cover the following:

In a world dominated by technology and algorithms, search marketing can often be all search and no marketing. In this session, Steak goes beyond the buzzword ‘integration’ and draws on real world examples to show how best to use search as part of the marketing mix. We’ll look at how search can integrate with brand campaigns as well direct response, how it can inform and assess offline strategy, and how to maximise the potential of universal search.

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch, July 30, 2010

The Yahoo-Bing search alliance is gathering momentum. Watching this coverage from the U.K., where Google has close to 90 percent market share, I can’t help asking: will the deal succeed for both parties — and what does success look like?

Focusing on the Numbers

For Yahoo, the obvious win is cost saving — no longer employing staff or maintaining systems to process billions of searches a year and monetize them. We’ve already seen several waves of layoffs from Yahoo, including search staff.

For Bing, revenue is the win. More searches to monetize means more paid search revenue (although Yahoo will receive payments from Microsoft). Alongside this, they will no doubt hope to attract new advertisers from Yahoo’s bank of accounts, raising competition between advertisers, and therefore bid prices — further adding to their bottom line.

This is the virtuous circle any paid search division wants to fuel — more advertisers, increased keyword coverage resulting in an increased average number of advertisers per keyword, increased bid completion, and a higher average revenue per click.

This is the circle that both Overture and Espotting worked hard to fuel at the start of last decade when paid search was in its pre-AdWords infancy. Working at Espotting, I experienced how keyword coverage and bid competition were major concerns — and when the company lost Yahoo Europe as a distribution partner, I saw the circle slowing, coverage shrinking, and CPCs falling. Bids that once reached a high point of £15 (“serviced offices”) fell beyond the £3 mark as volume, quality and CPCs fell.

Which brings us to the risks…

The Risks for Yahoo

The risks for Yahoo are around revenue, market share, and brand differentiation. If the average revenue per click Yahoo receives under the deal is significantly lower than from Panama, they will suffer financially. However, the operating expenses they save may outweigh this loss. Overall, they will be in a better position.

Aside from CPCs, the long-term risk for Yahoo stretches beyond search into their wider business.

Yahoo has stated they intend to continue differentiating themselves via their search interface. Fine in theory, but there’s real risk here.

Doing this without a large search team of the ability to reach inside the machine is difficult. If consumers learn over time that Yahoo is effectively Bing, and decide there’s no reason for them to stick with Yahoo, will they go directly to Bing?

Inertia often rules our behavior as consumers, but with Bing running advertising campaigns and offering cash-back schemes to attract consumers, the lack of a unique search experience on Yahoo may be enough to push some consumers to go straight to source and get cash back on their purchases into the bargain. The word “frenemy” springs to mind.

Any lack of search market share could impact their wider business. Content is undoubtedly part of Yahoo’s core strategy — even more some with their acquisition of Associated Content — and one of the main ways visitors get to this content is via search.

So any decline in the flow of traffic from Yahoo search into their own properties will hurt their revenues from display advertising — and undermine the data gathering that is at the core of the behavioral advertising, ad exchanges, and other initiatives that in turn are crucial to Yahoo’s non-search advertising revenues.

Yahoo search traffic isn’t their only source of traffic and data. They receive traffic from the other engines and other areas of their properties, and they gather data from display ads across many other sites as part of their wider network (just like Microsoft does across its network).

Yahoo will have to innovate to ensure they can offer search retargeting for their display clients. Right now, Microsoft and especially Google are innovating in this area.

So for Yahoo, the risk is a decline of overall market share — and revenues beyond search alone.

The Risks for Bing

The obvious risk: the numbers don’t add up, and the revenues from the Yahoo deal are less than the costs of the partnership to Bing, even if they have increased their market share. This could vary significantly by country; in some, Bing-powered Yahoo may prove profitable; in others, average CPCs may make the deal less attractive versus costs.

The other risk is less obvious and more damaging for Bing’s ambitions. What if Yahoo’s users don’t like Bing search results?

If Yahoo’s audience perceives a decline in the quality of results, they may shift to Google — hurting both Yahoo and Bing in the process. However, Microsoft is investing a lot of money, time, and — crucially — talent into their search division, so this seems, on the surface, unlikely.

So, Will it Succeed?

I believe it will be a success — in terms of revenue, and in terms of market share (Google won’t be seriously challenged anytime soon, though).

The real story will be what Yahoo does next, and how the frenemy relationship works out while they compete in the display and mobile spaces — and Google builds their display armory around AdWords and DoubleClick.

Very pleased that the work we’ve done for British Gas Business has been shortlisted for ‘Best Use of Search’ in this year’s B2B Marketing Awards.

Sadly we have to wait until November to see if we win, so fingers crossed until then…

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch, July 2, 2010

The iPad. Surrounded by hype, adored by some, denigrated by others.

Like the iPhone before it, the iPad is a category igniter — it won’t end up being the dominant product in its category in terms of sales volumes, but as the poster boy of tablet computing it has drawn attention and media coverage, which has promoted the device category to the public.

However, it’s first to market — and as an iPad user myself, I’m beginning to glimpse how the device will have an impact on search and digital strategies going forward. Here are my thoughts so far.

Search Engines and Tablet Devices

Obviously search engine interfaces need to be tailored to the device. The iPad doesn’t support Flash, so any video content embedded into search results will need to be available as HTML 5 video — and for any other formats that different tablet don’t support. This is important as Bing in particular looks to integrated media content directly into the page as part of it’s entertainment channel.

Google has already launched an iPad app — similar to their mobile one — which incorporates search, e-mail, and other popular Google products, as well as a built-in browser. The iPad can only run one app at a time, so this makes it easier to switch between Google products and the web. However, most consumers won’t want to install an app, so ensuring search websites work with the operating systems and browsers of different tablets is key.

There’s an opportunity here to innovate. Google already offers voice-based searching on the iPad and Android phones; so far I’ve found the accuracy variable but no doubt that will improve over time. This innovation can go further: touch screens actively encourage the use of the fingers — so there’s an opportunity to enable uses to interact with search results in this way, for example, expanding plus boxes by swiping down or drawing circles on maps to find local businesses with that radius.

So experts are predicting the days of keyboards and mice are numbered — but I think they will be around for a long time to come. Just as we’ve accepted touch screens on phones alongside keypads, so will touch screen computing be a mainstream experience alongside the keyboard and mouse. However, this could lead to an increase in typos and misspelled search queries; we’ve all got fat-finger syndrome at times!

Geo-targeting

Tablet computers are ideal for using search on the move via a phone or wireless connection. So detecting the user’s location and personalizing search results accordingly is another important aspect of the tablet computing search experience, just like it’s increasingly becoming on “normal” computers.

This doesn’t just extend to search results, though — brands need to embrace geo-targeting, too, driving consumers to landing pages that are tailored to their location — whether that is with store information, products shipped to that area, or other customization. This is getting easier for brands to execute — alongside IP lookups, there’s a W3C initiative that HTML5 supports to develop a standard way for browsers to determine the user’s location after they opt-in to providing that data — so there soon won’t be any excuses. Firefox users can try it here; Chrome and Safari support it already, too.

Landing Pages

As well as localizing page content, brands will need to look at how well their pages work on the browsers and operating systems on tablet computers — some sites simply don’t work well, or at all.

Take Google Reader for example — it relies on a lot on scrolling up and down lists of feeds and within articles; but the scroll bars simply don’t always work when using the touch screen of the iPad, resulting in the user grabbing the whole browser window by mistake. This is a Google issue not an Apple one; other sites with some (but less) scroll bars are fine. Google have assumed that everybody has a mouse; a contrast to using Gmail on iPad, which has a well-designed interface suited to touch screens.

I’ve also noticed a few brands customizing the iPad keyboard in their apps, for example moving the @ key onto the first keyboard layer if the app requires it a lot. Little touches like this make apps and websites a joy to use — as opposed to a nuisance.

Time to Plan

Table computing is, of course, in its infancy and I’m not advocating widespread website redesigns for this device category over night. Brands that offer products particularly suited to the leisure-time orientated nature of the iPad should consider developing apps; most brands should concentrate on fixing any glaring bugs with their website on tablet computers while monitoring their analytics and market research reports for the growth of tablet computing. Now’s the time to plan for the future and ensure you have the CMS infrastructure and analytics capabilities to set up device-specific paid search campaigns and landing page in future.

Brands will need to learn how to offer a rich experience on tablet devices — or risk providing consumers with a poor experience they’ll associate with the brand across all devices.

By Gareth Owen, Search Engine Watch, June 30, 2010

One of the points that will be high on the agenda at this year’s Online Marketing Show will be that the web has finally graduated from our PC monitors and now exists firmly in the air around us, waiting to be accessed at any given moment. Internet usage on mobile devices is now growing at the rate that was predicted some three or four years ago, making this year definitely, officially, the year of mobile… hooray!

It’s not all about mobile. Any number of devices during the next decade and beyond will be able to access the wonders of the Internet, and all of them will need to be able to search and quickly retrieve the information or websites that people are looking for. This is where search engines need to think about how their interfaces and results will work on any number of new devices.

Even on the biggest, prettiest smartphones, Google’s search results don’t fit on the screen, removing the majority of paid search listings that make up so much of Google’s revenue. If everyone were to use mobiles only to search for info, Google might even go bankrupt!

Google has a separate index for mobile devices, so it’s not as though they haven’t thought about this. But as the web becomes ever more accessible, two questions remain:

1.How will search engines really help users find what they’re looking for, especially on the smaller devices?
2.How will they continue to know what are the most important results for natural search?
The second question is particularly important for SEO. So much of what we do boils down to ensuring that the myriad of connections on the internet make it clear that our sites, or our clients’ sites, are viewed by the search engines as important. Not only important, but important for specific themes and keywords, and we manage this using techniques on and off the website itself.

So how does that change when people are using the Internet in different ways via different devices and potentially being given different results depending on what device they use? How will search engines know what is important, or whether something is more important for a mobile user than a tablet or laptop user?

There are still a lot of “ifs” involved here. Ultimately, the search engines might feel that what exists now is good enough to tell them which are the most important sites.

In SEO we’ve become accustomed in more recent times to viewing off-site optimization techniques as having the biggest impact on rankings. But perhaps there is an argument that for each device you will need a site specifically optimized for each different version of Google. Google for mobile, Google for smartphone, Google for tablets — each version might prefer different types of web property to display higher in the listings.

Ultimately, there isn’t a definitive answer right now. However, in the near future it’s likely that SEO will not only encompass social media (that’s if you believe it doesn’t already), but SEO teams may well need to ensure their skill-sets include a large degree of developer knowledge specifically for ensuring websites are compatible with multiple devices.

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch, June 4, 2010

In part one, we talked about factors that should drive the adoption of retargeting (also referred to by Google as “remarketing”). Now we’ll examine the limitations of Google’s offering, other tools, and some thoughts on how marketers can embrace retargeting.

Digital Getting Wiser

The growing maturity of the digital industry, and the level of knowledge within agencies and marketing departments, is an important factor here, too.

Most marketing departments have an awareness, if not in-depth knowledge, of search and display. Increasingly, campaigns are analyzed across channels as tools like MediaPlex, tag carriers, and a number of independents provide the ability to analyze the consumers full journey path during a cookie period — from first impression, to first search, to last search, and the traditional last click.

Once marketers know consumers visiting Site A are likely to search and buy their products and have planned their display and search campaigns to leverage this trend, the next obvious step is to look at where drop-offs are occurring — which consumers are searching, but then not buying — and what sites can they be reached on with retargeting?

Third-Party Tools

Google’s offering enables this sort of tactic, but only for sites with AdSense ad units on them. Using a third-party tool like MediaPlex or DoubleClick Boomerang as well, brands can run this sort of activity web-wide. Not just retargeting to “lost” prospects who didn’t convert, but targeting existing customers with cross sells.

Once you’ve dropped a cookie that tells you things about the visitor/customer, your only constraints are your budget and ideas. No doubt, other tools providers are scrambling to introduce this functionality if they don’t already have it.

Display’s New Best Friend?

Google’s announcement also included one other piece of important information: it’s not just for search. Once you’ve added a piece of code to pages on your website, you can retarget consumers who visit the site through any source:

• Sending a customer CRM e-mail out? Retarget customers who click but don’t buy with a display ad.
• Have a members-only area? Retarget recent log-ins with a new product.
• Receiving a lot of direct traffic as a result of a new TV campaign? Don’t let your competitors suck up sales from the interest you’ve generated — run a display campaign featuring the TV ad tailored to people who have visited the site but dropped out mid-shopping cart, with your order line phone number in the advertisement.

All of these options could make retargeting display advertising’s new best friend, a shot in the arm that could cause brands to fundamentally re-examine the interaction of search and display, and to remember a basic fact when planning: consumers don’t operate in silos, and neither should we as marketers.

By Gareth Owen, Search Engine Watch, June 2, 2010
The biggest obstacle with actually integrating SEO activities with other business functions is that SEO people don’t talk to other teams enough.

This isn’t as harsh a criticism as it first sounds — we’re all busy in agencies and passionate about the subject and clients. Time is at a premium. So it isn’t as easy as just saying that SEOs are antisocial hermits tucking themselves away in corners.

Good SEO doesn’t happen in a vacuum, as we all know. There are many ranking factors that are specifically aimed at ensuring SEO happens as part of a natural online marketing presence and not just a focus on the one goal of getting traffic from Google.

Happily, there is a big plus side to this for digital agencies, as a good display campaign, affiliate campaign, and social media campaign will all help your SEO progress for a range of reasons. Here’s a quick list of considerations for SEO teams.

Speak to Your Display Team

Always try and negotiate content hosting arrangements with media buys. If you’re buying banner ads on a site, then see if they will also host press releases or product reviews with backlinks.

Alternatively, ask your display/media team for their list of contacts at key industry sites and see if you can negotiate a deal separately.

Finally, see if you can put clean links within display ads so that all ad placements pass direct value back to the client’s site.

Speak to Your Affiliate Team

If you’re running a good affiliate campaign, see if you can negotiate clean links or content hosting alongside your affiliate links. Some sites already add a clean link as well as a standard affiliate link as a matter of course.

See if you can get a list of affiliate contacts and negotiate deals to put useful content on their sites — good quality product reviews, for example, can be of real interest.

Speak to Your Social Media Team

More SEO Advice
•Search Engine Optimization is Unfair
•Breaking the Single Keyword Obsession in SEO Campaigns
•Powerful SEO Content: Understanding Breadth of Coverage
It may be jumping the gun slightly, as there is no conclusive data or any confirmation from Google, but I’ll join the ranks of SEOs already going with this. A well-run social media campaign will have SEO benefits. If you can get people talking about your special offers on LCD TVs for the World Cup, then you will rank better for related keywords.

One of the benefits of a well-run social media campaign is that key influencers will be identified and directly engaged. Get your social media team to help you out by trying to get that all-important content onto the key blogger sites.

These are some simple solutions to the age-old problem of getting links from important and relevant sites. And remember, if you’re extra charming, you might even get other teams to get those links for you — double whammy!

By Duncan Parry, Search Engine Watch, May 7, 2010

Alongside all of the coverage of the iPad, Apple and Google’s growing war, and iPhones being left on bar stools, Google’s launch in March of a retargeting capability from search into the content network felt comparatively ignored.This is one of the important trends for search and display marketers of 2010. Many may not be using retargeting now (sorry, remarketing as Google calls it), but we’ll look back on 2010 as the year this became a mainstream tactic. This should be the year most paid search and ad serving tool providers rushed to support retargeting, if they didn’t offer it already.

Why? Three reasons: the recession, Google and the growing maturity of digital.

Tear Down the Digital Wall!

We all know display budgets have suffered from recessionary pressure over the last few years as brands cut budgets, looked for efficiencies, and in many cases stopped any activity that didn’t generate a return in terms of direct acquisition.

Retargeting helps close the loop between search and display and knocks down some of the walls that have developed in the industry. Consumers don’t perceive display and search silos – they go about their business on the Web, reading content, using Facebook, seeing ads, and then search when they’re ready to start their journey to a purchase. They don’t care about how we structure agency teams or brands allocate their budgets across channels or attribute sales.

Retargeting allows display and search budgets to work in a more complementary manner; not passively when post-campaign analysis is carried out and trends are spotted, but actively, with conscious decisions taken to retarget consumers based on search clicks during their research phase.

A Boost for the Google Content Network – and Paid Search Generics

Google entering this space is an obvious move for the company. Their revenues from the content network will increase if this works, and many advertisers have, despite Google’s insistence to the opposite, found that the content network just doesn’t work for them.

This could bring them back into the content fold. Once Google backs a marketing technique, agencies and many brands start questioning if it’s something they should make a pillar of their strategy (to the frustration and relief of display and search people who have been shouting into the dark that this was the way to integrate disciplines for years).

Potentially, retargeting will also further underline the need to invest in generics term in paid search or as part of a natural search strategy. While often expensive and competitive, these terms many receive a boost as brands deliberately re-engage consumers “lost” after visiting a site via a generic term.

If a retargeted ad causes them to revisit the site and buy, when previously they may have not done so, future investment in a generic term can been justified and the cash involved made to work harder. This approach drives increased volumes and becomes a positive feedback loop feeding into the bottom line if managed efficiently.

Next time, we’ll look at how digital is getting wiser, some third-party tools, and display’s new best friend.