There are plenty of problems I can see with this post, some of which I'll leave other hubbers to explain.
Here's the short version:
1,460,000 isn't an actual amount - most searches have that, since they find every page that has the words you've typed in any order or any length apart, starting with what appears to be the most relevant.
You can rank #1 for "purple pigeon poo" but if no one is searching it, it's pointless.
Highly competitive keywords can often have thousands of backlinks to each site.
Now I'm curious about purple pigeon poo so I think I will search it.
Give it 12 hours and this thread will probably be on the first page of results for such a search.
Wrylilt, you are correct. But this is related to DNS which is a common internet keyword used by people who owns websites. So it is not some kind of keyword which you suggested.
Let me tell you again what i did. Read carefully now.
1. Keyword research.
2. Wrote a quality hub with links to popular and respected website and proper explanation using videos and charts
3. stumbled it and wrote 3 to 4 blog comments
I think this is a tried and tested method which many SEO specialist will agree.
What about the fact that google gives new content a bump and then it can fall back into mediocrity within days or weeks?
If you have not noticed Ma'm Google bumps them back if the page have good Quality article and back links.
You really have got a lot of hubs in 5 months 170 to be exact as of september 21, 2010. I appreciate it. You got a lot of time on your hands, I suppose. I'm really impressed that in the 5 months of stay at hubpages, you have also written on how to write a good hub in 45 minutes flat . I feel it has no new twist in it. it is same old topics people have written n times.
Or she just works really really hard.
Actually I'll admit that 75% of my hubs are written because I enjoy writing.
And I also work, am doing university and have a ten month old daughter.
Also, this isn't my only account.
And I usually leave the in depth guides for pro hubbers but I believe that some things need to be repeated over and over.
I agree with Susana S below - glad you did the research Susana, I was feeling too lazy.
Bed time here in Aus!
You are on page one for the phrase "best DNS service provider" unfortunately there is no one searching for that term. Your page is nowhere to be found for DNS service, DNS service provider, managed dns service etc. that have some potential traffic, so I think this one will have to be chalked up as a useless keyword victory.
I have only optimized it for best DNS service provider, managed dns service provider and few other keywords. Well, let us wait and watch whether it is a waste or Victory Susana.
Also there are very few hubs on this topic. And with Hubpages I have the opportunity to write an article with charts, videos and other bells and whistles. And without Hubpages, Google may not have picked this in 12 hours. So I have to also appreciate the hubpages team who does a lot of background job so that we can concentrate on writing.
Wrylit, its heartening to know that you do so many chores and is still able to put up such writing.Best of luck to you as a journalist and a mother. I have to appreciate your efforts as I know how hard it is to do multiple chores effectively. No hard feelings. It is cool that this post generated few interests.
If you go to googles keyword tool and check the phrase using exact match it says "not enough data" or in other words no searches.
Just a word of caution:
Google's keyword tool does not show number of searches. It shows number of IMPRESSIONS that ads targeting that keyword/phrase received.
Most people have a misunderstanding of how that tool actually works.
I have heard that mentioned before, and always refer people to this page
http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bi … swer=96571
Google seems to differ in opinion to what some people are saying about it's keyword search tool.
That's a good reference. What people need to understand is that the tool is an "AdWords" tool and that the information it presents is presented within the context of AdWords.
For example, I target many keywords that show "not enough data" and make a killing with some of them.
When all is said and done, my only point is that taking the "not enough data" as gospel can be a costly mistake.
The article clearly states that the value in the keyword tool is searches performed in a month, not number of advertisement impressions. This in itself is a very, very, important factor for anyone looking to do an adwords marketing campaign. Search volume is a much more important factor than overall ad impressions, especially since you already have a competition metric.
Yes actual results can differ from traffic estimations, but they are simply estimations. I don't know why they are estimations, since Google has the data, and I have not researched that.
I have also been in Internet Marketing for a long time, and I have never seen information contradicting Googles statement that I linked to from a reputable source. I would be happy to be proven wrong, but I would want either a direct quote from Google, or overwhelming evidence from a third party to convince me otherwise.
From my experience I have never had any real success from an article which was in the 'not enough data' range of the keyword research tool.
I hadn't heard that, but I don't think it can be correct. Aside form Oli's link where google says it is the number of searches, if it was showing ad impressions rather than searches you wouldn't be able to see keywords in the tool that have no advertisers bidding on them and I've seen lots of those.
The 2nd sentence on the page Oli linked to makes it clear that the stats are approximations.
I've been involved with AdWords and AdSense for the better part of the last 7-10 years. Trust me, it's correct.
Also, what else would explain the traffic I receive for keywords that clearly show "not enough data"?
Keep in mind that Google does NOT say these are the number of searches. Google makes it clear that those stats are ESTIMATES. They are estimates because the data is taken from impressions generated from AdWords ads.
Most seasoned (ie. GOOD) internet marketers and PPC folks will tell you the very best way to determine ACCURATE search volume for a keyword is to launch an AdWords PPC campaign and count your impressions.
When researching keywords, you should only use the tool as a rough guide.
I'm thinking a couple of things could account for it. If the monthly estimated search volumes on google are taken over a 12 month average (as google says), then new breakout terms would not have been around 12 months therefore lowering the average and the monthly estimate.
Then there are the other search engines that may be delivering traffic - maybe particular search terms are more frequently searched for on yahoo or Bing.
Yes, google says "These statistics show the approximate number of search queries matching your keywords that were performed on Google for a month (this is an approximate 12-month average)."
This maybe so, but how would that account for phrases that show search volume in the tool but have no advertising bidders? If no bidders are targeting the keyphrase how can it receive ad impressions if that's what they are?
Also since google would want bids on keyphrases that currently have no bidders in order to make money from them, it would be stupid of them to only show keywords in the tool already receiving bids and exclude all of the ones with no bids.
Out of interest what in your experience is the % difference between google's monthly search volume in the tool vs traffic estimates via PPC?
I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree. I've been involved in IM for many, many years now. Each person is entitled to their opinion. However, I will say that I have done actual testing/research that supports my stance. Many here have simply "read" what others have written.
Google Analytics tells me everything I need to know. For example, I have a product hub targeting a particular product that I published 2 days ago. It has already generated in excess of 100 views from Google.com alone and over half of those were from a specific search term that I targeted. This particular search term, according to Google Keyword Tool, attracts fewer than 10 searches PER MONTH.
What I would suggest you do is deposit $100 into an AdWords account and do some testing for yourself. You would be amazed at what you sometimes find.
To be honest, the fact that most people take the keyword tool as gospel is great for folks like me who have experience with it. It drastically cuts down competition for certain keywords.
As for the difference between the tool and PPC, that's impossible to discern. It is entirely keyword, time of day, and season- dependent.
I'm up for learning, it just doesn't make sense to me. I know the keyword tool is only a guide but it's a pretty good one.
With PPC I guess you would be using exact match to check actual searches rather than phrase or broad match as that would skew the results heavily? And you'd also have to take into account how many times your ad was appearing on a page that had several ad blocks ie: your ad could be showing in several blocks at once.
Just thinking aloud here really, but thanks for the conversation anyway.
You might do well out of it over time if you start to rank for other phrases, but getting to number for a term no one searches for is not much of an achievement.
Yeah ranking for a term nobody searches for is a waste. I rank for both #1 and #2 for "pigskin leather jacket".
I don't even get 1 click a day for that term! I was sure people searched for that, as a pigskin leather jacket is actually a nice jacket, but nope.
not enough data doesnt mean , no searches at all , but it does mean to little for it to be a smart bet to put effort into banking off it. Or it is a new term/product that has not had time to develop a statistical history.
even if you were making money/getting traffic off a page that was optimized for a "not enough data" term, you would have to also to tell us that you checked your reporting data and found that it was in fact that term that was bringing the traffic and not some other random longtail or related search.
the search data is just that - search data/search queries - it is NOT adwords impression generated
impressions generated would be an absolutely worthless metric as the amount of ad blocks used on page is so varied.
Oli provided a source (not required, common sense, experience should have been enough) cementing the intended meaning of the "estimated" traffic tool - how about a valid source that mentions impressions and how it relates to the keyword tool?
( I have plenty of experience as an Adwords user for my own promotion and local business clients)
..is the hub ever coming that will give us a better concept of what your understanding/experience level is?
How long has the product existed?
If months of "0" searches are equated into an average - the estimated traffic will be lower than current trends
Give an example term!
I feel a heated argument coming on....
I think I have seen this same argument many times here before -
i.e., I know this ... but I know that... but I have done this ... but you have to prove that... Etc., etc., etc.....
Nah, not at all. I'm not here to argue. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. My primary focus here is to write profitable hubs (which I do). I only visit the boards to break up the monotony.
Your replies in this thread reminded me a great deal of another Hubber, and I think you have posted elsewhere that you created this particular ID for the purpose of posting (maybe I deduced that from the name of this ID ). At any rate, in yet another thread today I have seen a post of yours that has altered my earlier opinion. Whatever the case, the progress of the back and forth did remind me of the way the other Hubber-in-question responded, and the responses from others here reminded me of responses from others in previous threads - and some of those did become quite heated exchanges. I'm glad that will not be the case here.
Its more of a statistical analysis issue than an internet marketing knowledge/experience issue
"These statistics show the approximate number of search queries matching your keywords that were performed on Google for a month (this is an approximate 12-month average)."
Would you be equally surprised if you wrote an article about St patricks Day parades - search history said 4000 searches a month - you ranked first yet only received 20 views a day for the term, but come st pattys week - you were receiving thousands of visitors daily?
- then translate this inconsistency as being because of "impressions" or complete failure of the tool to give an estimate of how the term performs?
"local search trends" should show an example of how terms trending effects its average - holiday/seasonal/new products are easiest to see
This is it.
The average monthly search (local) is affected by the local economy. If you compute for the average local monthly search, does it include the last twelve months not including this month? So if there is recession in Dec of 2009, does it mean that people will buy more Christmas products (and will search more about it this time, 2010). Am I correct?
and the average local monthly searches in January 2011 will increase in terms of Christmas topic and searches relating to Christmas decors gifts etc..
As I stated, the metrics presented by the keyword tool are presented in the context of the AdWords program. It was never meant to be used with unpaid results research.
I'll trust you at your word that you have experience with PPC. I suggest you perform the experiment that I mentioned for keywords you may be interested in targeting n the unpaid results.
I decided against the hub. I created a thread asking what folks wanted me to include and was told by staff that the community asked that it be closed. That's a pretty clear indicator that it probably wouldn't be a hit anyway.
As I stated very early on, I'm not here to argue with anyone nor am I here to prove anything. I'll simply provide my advice where I feel I can be helpful. The community here is free to take that advice or leave it.
"the community" didnt asked for it to be closed -
an insignificant sample of the forum must have flagged you and the nature of the post did fall into the self promo range.
Its always nice to read views of those with experience rather than the parroting we normally see
never let forum activity effect actual hub activity
i would have been interested!
and I work primarily in terms with no search data both on adsense/adwords as I prefer tech products and often begin developing content and sites when the products are first announced in industry news and press releases
sometimes it goes wrong though :(anybody want a bunch of ipadusb domains
""the community" didnt asked for it to be closed"
The mod specifically stated as such. I just took her at her word.
I'm planning to take a break from hub creation at the end of the month to do a bit of backlinking. Maybe during that time, I'll throw something together.
i saw the post in question - she incorrectly used a broad term when she should have used an exact.
"Vocal,Bored Members of the Community" asked for it to be closed and a staff member agreed.
Not representative of the entire community!
but again the thread was against forum rules, as is this one actually
I'd read the hub too. It would be beneficial though if you you're not going to write it, to answer some of the questions I've posed here in this thread. Like I said, I'm up for learning.
I would also read this hub. We are all learning here, and everything we read on this subject helps
The problem with your argument is that you are ignoring the fact that the tool is an adwords tool and that the info it provides is within the context of adwords. It is an estimate because it is based on adwords data, not search data.
But as I said earlier, we can agree to disagree. I'm not an adwords evangelist nor am I worried about being right or wrong. All I know is that most keywords that I target show "not enough data" and I get more than enough traffic to earn a significant income. To each his own I suppose
It is Search Volume. So if you're getting Not Enough Data the chances are, 0 people are actually searching for it. Given the fact that it can show as little as 30 people a month searching for a keyword (that's 1 person a day) I'd say that the tool is pretty darn accurate (enough to know when there are no searches whatsoever), with the exception of a surge in a new popular search phrase that has not yet been calculated.
The biggest problem people have in relation to it being an Adwords tool is that they think the estimated average CPC is how much they'll get for a click. When it is an average of how much an advertiser PAYS for a click.
If you're getting more than enough traffic that is earning a significant income by using words which is showing as Not Enough Data then perhaps you're wasting your time using the Adwords Keyword Tool in the first place.
Why would Google only do adwords search results when in fact wider search results would benefit Google more for people who can understand and make use of the keyword search tool?
Yes it is an Adwords tool, but.....aha...I've just noticed I should be writing more hubpages and not getting drawn into the forums too much....
your ignoring the actual facts openly provided by google if they meant impressions they would say impressions
Impressions was probably a poor choice of words. However you wish to word it, the "search data" they reference comes from their adwords program. Why do you think they call it an estimate? As oli stated, I'm sure they have actual search data they could publish if they wanted to.
I'll leave you guys to discuss as I really am not interested in being drawn into an argument about it. Its not important to me. The next time I run an adwords campaign, I'll post the results here.
I would shore up that top position with some good links and hang on till the day traffic comes.
That is what I am doing with my 1 and only hub that has been on page 1 and number 1 on the list since September 2010 when I bean to get page impressions on September 11, 2010 to the present of October 2010. you just need to write quality hub to get on page 1 on google. The impressions are flowing almost daily for my 1 and only hub.
by Ethan Green4 years ago
I've read a lot about the importance of doing keyword research, but then you also get the impression that to really do that research properly can take a long time unless you get lucky early on or really know what you...
by Audrey Selig2 years ago
I recently started using Jaaxy, and I love it. A hub is first on page 1 with my keywords, beating two medical sites. Jaaxy is so easy to use, but I no longer can use it free, so will have to pay. It does a simple...
by Majida Liaqat2 years ago
I joined hubpages one month ago and started writing hubs on weekends because I am very busy on working days. I have published 12-13 hubs right now and they are featured (12 of them while the 13th is still under review)....
by Megan Harvison4 years ago
I'm having an issue deciding what keywords to go after. Most of the lower competition words I'm not as interested in and it takes me longer to write since I'm not enjoying. But, most of the things I'm very interested in...
by David Gitachu3 years ago
If we only produce content that people are searching for, will this lead to better quality content ? Will this lead to the growth of the knowledge base? How will new knowledge enter the mainstream if content is only...
by Susannah Birch2 years ago
I think my last try was over a year ago. I honestly have never had success with it EVER, even with third party tools, bar ONE title about three years back. If you're freaked out by it, don't stress. You don't HAVE to do...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.