<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google, Yahoo or Natural Search &#8211; Which Provides the Best Quality Visitors?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.mindvalleylabs.com/google-yahoo-or-natural-search-which-provides-the-best-quality-visitors/174/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.mindvalleylabs.com/google-yahoo-or-natural-search-which-provides-the-best-quality-visitors/174/</link>
	<description>We Test, Synthesize and Share the Latest Internet Marketing Tactics and Strategies to Help You Better Run Your Online Business.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 23:24:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: vishen</title>
		<link>http://blog.mindvalleylabs.com/google-yahoo-or-natural-search-which-provides-the-best-quality-visitors/174/comment-page-1/#comment-1494</link>
		<dc:creator>vishen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2006 03:37:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mindvalleylabs.com/marketing/google-yahoo-or-natural-search-which-provides-the-best-quality-visitors/#comment-1494</guid>
		<description>good point - we get such low bid rates for two reasons:

1. we started advertising early - way back in Dec 2002 and our campaigns have a history. We kept fine-tuning our performance over the years and boosting our CTR rates.

2. We use adwords.clickmuse.com - our own invention. It&#039;s free for now so try it. Adwords let&#039;s be revise and innovate on our ads much better than before. Since using it we managed to boost AVG CTRs by close to 40% and further bring down bid prices from 18 cents to 16 cents. And that&#039;s just over the last 4 months.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good point - we get such low bid rates for two reasons:</p>
<p>1. we started advertising early - way back in Dec 2002 and our campaigns have a history. We kept fine-tuning our performance over the years and boosting our CTR rates.</p>
<p>2. We use adwords.clickmuse.com - our own invention. It's free for now so try it. Adwords let's be revise and innovate on our ads much better than before. Since using it we managed to boost AVG CTRs by close to 40% and further bring down bid prices from 18 cents to 16 cents. And that's just over the last 4 months.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://blog.mindvalleylabs.com/google-yahoo-or-natural-search-which-provides-the-best-quality-visitors/174/comment-page-1/#comment-1468</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 14:45:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mindvalleylabs.com/marketing/google-yahoo-or-natural-search-which-provides-the-best-quality-visitors/#comment-1468</guid>
		<description>The thing that actually surprised me the most from this post was the cost per click on both google and yahoo.  I&#039;m curious as to how you were able to keep your cost per click so low but were still able to get almost 100,000 visitors.  Were most of your clicks from long tail search terms or were they just low default bids or not highly sought after terms?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The thing that actually surprised me the most from this post was the cost per click on both google and yahoo.  I'm curious as to how you were able to keep your cost per click so low but were still able to get almost 100,000 visitors.  Were most of your clicks from long tail search terms or were they just low default bids or not highly sought after terms?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
