By Llew Claasen, a web technologist who runs his own consultancy, KeyJam.net.
It's nice being the industry leader. People start to forget that economic principles apply to you as much as anyone else. Say, you're an executive at Google and you have a conference call with analysts to announce lower-than-expected Q4 2007 results.
Why did no one ask whether the bulk of this drop was not attributable to lower-than-normal click-through rates (CTR) in a softening market?
Analysts and reporters will believe anything that you say, if you're the industry leader:
Aggregate clicks were only up 30% from fourth-quarter 2006 to fourth-quarter 2007, in contrast to the 45% growth in the third quarter. Reyes said that the growth deceleration was likely due to the "impact of quality improvements" that Google made its ad platforms, like changing the clickable area of AdSense ads and standard algorithmic tweaks. The changes "reduced the number of accidental clicks," (Google CFO George) Reyes said.
There isn't a consensus view, but I think it's fairly safe to say that while analysts and commentators disagree on the impact of a recession on display advertising, they believe that paid search advertising will weather a recession fairly well. A recent piece in Wired magazine said that "Google Looks Recession Proof" and an analyst's note on Seeking Alpha suggested the same view. Broadly, the views shared by the biggest camps are:
While it's true that Google's revenue is derived from its advertisers (not its searchers) and sophisticated advertisers will be loathe to reduce PPC budgets during a recession, to believe that this means that Google is recession-proof is to ignore the cross-side network effects that occur on the Google advertising platform between advertisers and searchers. The mechanism by which I suggest that Google's revenue from PPC ads reduces during an economic downturn is not through the reduction in advertiser budgets (which may or may not happen), but rather a highly likely reduction in its ability to monetise its ad inventory. As consumers tighten their belts, at least two things happen simultaneously online.
The impact of a reduction in the Adwords CTR on Google's revenue is clear: less revenue per impression served. The impact on Google of a reduction in site conversion rates is less clear. With the exception of small unsophisticated long-tail advertisers, merchants running PPC campaigns have cost per action or acquisition (CPA) targets. A decline in the conversion rate, means that in order for a merchant to achieve the same CPA he must pay a lower price per click for the search inventory. His alternatives are unlikely in a recession: increase price to regain sales margins or reduce sales margins by paying a higher CPA. Even though an advertiser may increase or maintain his PPC ad budget during a recession, for a given CPA, the rate at which the advertiser spends his budget, is lower than in more robust economic conditions. The long-tail advertisers may reduce their PPC ad spend, simply because they don't allocate budget to the media on the basis of its trackability, so its fair game.
It's fairly common knowledge in the online marketing industry that the biggest problem with search engine inventory is that there is not enough of it. Google cannot create new impressions in an existing developed marketplace in response to advertiser demand for more impressions, so the argument about the migration of ad dollars from traditional media to search during a recession is a moot point, except in market segments where there is currently little PPC competition (if you can find it, let me know!). Google can only grow its impressions by increasing:
Declining Paid Search ad click-through rates and site conversion rates during an economic downturn, together reduce the revenue per impression that Google earns (and consequently reduces its overall revenue) and there is precious little that Google can do about it.
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
PANIC!!
ok maybe not.
Posted by: Jason | February 7, 2008 7:03 AM
Excellent analysis, best I have seen on Google, thanks. Must admit you had me looking up Ceteris Paribus - my Latin lessons failed me!
Posted by: bernard lunn | February 7, 2008 7:26 AM
Good point on declining conversion rate. Landing experiences become as competitive of a battleground as advertising to win the click. Also, even if search budgets don't shrink, they might not expand either -- all the more reason to make the most of the clicks you are getting. Time for the emphasis to shift to post-click marketing?
Posted by: Scott Brinker | February 7, 2008 7:30 AM
European advertisers who are paid in dollars are loosing out. Google may not be recession proof, but I don't expect job cuts to occur.
Posted by: JohnofScribbleSheet | February 7, 2008 7:49 AM
If CTRs decline, so will the corresponding QS (Quality Score) for keywords. If that happens, some advertisers will be forced to raise bids to stay in the auction. Maybe Google really is building a recession-proof mousetrap. ;-)
Posted by: Richard Ball | February 7, 2008 5:00 PM
The reason why Google is loosing money is because they are loosing the "Fat Tail" many small websites who thought it was cool to try to promote their rinky dink little websites with their big dreams of making it ritch biyatch.
Well when they realized there was no chance in hell they were going to be the next Google they took their money out. Just look at cangooglehearme.com Less customers means less competition in the ad auction. Less competition means lower cost per click.
I hope this was enlightening.
Posted by: Marissa Meyer | February 7, 2008 8:17 PM
Excellent post. You hit the nail on the head.
Posted by: Shadoz | February 8, 2008 12:10 AM
I'm not sure that I agree with you on this. The underlying thesis for your analysis is that people will change their surf behaviour in a recession, spending more time comparing prices and doing product research. This is a bit speculative.
However, it is naive to think that Google is recession proof. As recession comes people and companies will shop less, but that goes for shopping both online and offline. Shopping and sales is of course the driving factor behind online marketing.
But at the same time, the usage of Internet as a tool for (and before) buying products and services is still not a 100% mature market. Given that online shopping is a growing industry, online marketing might not drop. And as you also write, Internet marketing is still pretty cheap, and hence should the conversion from traditional marketing to online marketing increase even more. [This last statement I doubt even more. Marketing levels are always highest in the end of a bull market, and lowest in mid-recession, so I'd say that the money spent on marketing overall will decrease faster than the growth of Internet marketing).
Posted by: Mattias | February 8, 2008 12:41 AM