A dynamic new method of displaying PPC ads was recently revealed by Google, a method they believe would improve CTR and mainly (as it is a Google tool) will continue to improve the user experience. I am ofcourse talking about site links.
Site links were well documented on their general release in mid November. There was quite a ‘buzz’ from the digital world about site links and the potential huge effect on sponsored links. We saw a few mentions, particularly early on, such as “will enhance your online presence”, “you don’t want to miss this” and “the future of paid search”.
....Really?
If you haven’t seen site links before (and that could well be a few of you), here is an example below:
Let’s first look at the positives of this. By opting into site links and having them shown, your ad will automatically take up a larger proportion of the sponsored link area. It allows you to further advertise your products in more detail than in ad text and also makes the ad appear far more ‘official’. The site links themselves are also easy to change, meaning you can change products or offering as and when products change with limited effect on ad quality score. All these factors contribute to a much improved CTR. For every client we have initiated site links for, we have seen consistently, a very strong improvement in CTR. Undeniably highlighting and solidify Google’s claims that site links will improve performance.
However, the stipulations controlled by Google limit the opportunities for site links to make a considerable difference. These stipulations, which are fair for competition reasons, are quite strong and mean only certain searches and clients can initiate them.
One stipulation is you need to have a far greater CTR than other advertisers on your keyword landscape to be allowed to show site links. Does anyone really have this on any other terms bar their brand? I doubt it. In a market where the landscapes are getting busier and more competitive, can any advertiser honestly say they have a far stronger CTR than their competitors? Obviously position remains a strong indicator of CTR but P1 ad will not have FAR stronger CTR than P2.
So you use it on your brand. Perhaps because competitors, affiliates or aggregators are bidding on your brand term and it’s a way of distinguishing yourselves. Would appear perfectly reasonable! However, many strong brands have equally strong SEO. Many brands are already position 1 in organic traffic and strong brands utilise the site links provided in organic traffic. By adding site links to your PPC ad, you are making this ad more enticing. But on brand terms, where are these extra clicks coming from? Are these clicks being taken from organic traffic since you are in P1? The last thing you want to be doing is taking originally free volume and start to pay for it. Simply put, (and as one of my colleagues enjoys saying) site links can have a negative effect and cannibalise your organic traffic and raise incremental costs. Beware!
Furthermore, another stipulation is you have to have consistent P1 for a particular search term over a sustained period of time. As I discussed in a previous post, position and the cost for this position is not always the most effect method of driving spend. It will very much depend on the CPC to reach this P1 and if driving this P1 is not a drain on your budget.
In conclusion, when it comes to site links, the jury is still out on this one! Yes they do provide an increase in click volume with pushes on CTR. That is inevitable due to the nature and position of the site links within sponsored search. But where are these extra clicks coming from? There is a strong argument that as realistically you can only initiate site links on brand terms, that they cannibalise organic traffic. Not to mention that the consistent P1 required can drain budget.
But site links are very much still in their infancy. Having only been released for less than a month and still no proper method to measure them through Adwords, they could turn it around and make this tool a ‘must’ for all PPC advertisers. However, I doubt it and this is likely to fall away to a forgotten 00s phenomenon like Big Brother or T.A.T.U!