John Andrews is a Competitive Webmaster and Search Engine Optimization Consultant in Seattle, Washington. This is John Andrews blog on issues of interest to the SEO community and competitive webmasters. Want to know more?  Competitive Web & SEO
September 17th, 2006 by john andrews

Where are the Public Relations Firms?

Michael Gray on Long Island notes that a Google search for “spinach” produces not one crafted public relations effort, despite almost a week of breaking news about e-coli contaminations of spinach, advisories to destroy purchased bagged spinach, and concern about the image of organic foods and farmers following this public health threat. A “spinach” query produces ads for buying spinach, ads for news on the spinach problem which don’t actually go to news about the spinach problem, and an ad from Dole for “the latest on packaged spinach” which, sadly, also doesn’t go directly to the proper landing page but the home page, where a box that promises information on “Dole bagged spinach” competes with a Flash animation (with music) or the goodness of vegetables and fruits, and a talking , animated Curious George. Michael does a good job of explaining his findings on ThreadWatch, the search marketing blog.

Nasty Spinach

I would add that there is not one competitor ad either. I would like to see “Afraid of Spinach? Try Kale” from the Kale Marketers Cooperative, or perhaps “Thought Organic was Clean? Think Again.” from the GMO industry. Why not? With all those searches for “spinach” following the news, why not utilize the opportunity for public education?

As of today, the one organic farm most damaged by the early press coverage, states on it’s web site that not only has nothing from their farm been identified as contaminated, but that every instance of contamination checked by the FDA so far has been non-organic spinach:

At this point in the investigation, all of the manufacturing codes taken from spinach packaging retained by patients are from packages of conventional (non-organic) spinach.

Wow. You’d think they’d spend a few bucks on ads like “Contaminated spinach not organic” or something.

Maybe the California Raisin people could buy ads for “Raisin’s have more iron than Spinach“, because some portion of spinach lovers erroneously attribute iron to spinach (it has some, but not really all that much). Or how about “Dirty Spinach? It’s probably from Mexico” from the Minute Men Civil Defense Corps. They would all work.

But no, nobody is minding the business. Except Google, of course. Correct landing page or not, erroneous message or not, mis-placed advertising message or simply sloppy keyword selection, it doesn’t matter. The advertiser gets charged, and Google gets paid. Per click.
★★ Click to Share!    Digg this     Create a Bookmark     Add to Newsvine
September 17th, 2006 by john andrews

Zappos, the SEO/SEM Business

It is rare these days that I encounter an acknowledgement that SEO (or more broadly, Search Engine Marketing SEM) is a fundamental in online commerce. In my business, that’s a given – most of us who practice what we preach choose to do so in markets where SEO makes optimal sense. We actually pick markets for their SEO potential. But for most business ventures, SEO is not a defining attribute of the business model.

Almost daily the SEO forums someone says “why would any SEO worth his fee work for anyone else when he can optimize his own sites?” or something along those lines. It’s a good question, answered by stepping away from the keyboard and recognizing that sometimes there is more to work than profits. Things like sunlight and other people can actually be desired more than yet another day in the dark optimizing web pages. Not always, but sometimes.

But outside the field of SEO, businesses usually refer to SEO as a necessary ingredient but not a driving factor of the business model. Entrepreneurs see oportunity in design, and product, and consumer demand, but why don’t they see the opportunity in SEO? They recognize it later when they see they need search marketing, and they put SEO/SEM into their trategic plans, but they don’t usually follow targets identified by SEO analysis. Later they find themselves spending exhorbitant amounts of money on pay per click advertising…to “generate” traffic.

Not so for Zappos. Zappos is a very successful online company. The review that Nisan Gabbay wrote of Zappos states that Zappos moved $370 million in shoes last year. That’s a decent business. I bought shoes from Zappos when they first started, and my family still buys from Zappos when price isn’t an issue. I followed Zappos as SEO case study way back then, and watched their moves with interest. Nisan’s review looks back at Zappos as an online business venture, funded by his company among others, but actually Zappos is more of an SEO company to me. An SEO company working on it’s own site: And even Nisan sees the SEM opportunity that Zappos recognized back then:

However, it seems to me that a successful formula for starting a retail e-commerce site is to sell a product that is great for SEM and have a sound strategy as to how to garner repeat business. For it was great customer service, but for other sites it might be community features or other enticements to keep people coming back.

It seems Zappos was started by some people who recognized that online shoes was an SEO opportunity. The combination of unique brand names, consumer asssociation of shoe buying with those brand names, and the fact that 2 of the $4 BILLION in annual shoe commerce was conducted by mail order played a role. The target was identified as BIG MARKET, already conducted via MAIL ORDER, with a strong SEO/SEM potential, and a consumer market that had proven itself as an appreciator of good customer service (a la Nordstrom’s.. the Shoe Store in Seattle).

Of course that was not luck. Those guys were aware. Having built LinkExchange (sold to Microsoft) they understood search marketing at the start. And they have done a great job executing on customer service and business operations. Free return shipping, no questions asked returns policy, free upgrades of shipping, and a focus on having-what-you-want if you like the brands they carry. For me Zappos was always an excellent experience, even when all of a shipment got returned. In fact, each order got bigger and bigger… it is just silly to not order the possible sizes and colors to try them out at home. Order 2 pair, choose one and return the rest became order 6 pairs, and two more for the kids, and return 6 pairs (keeping 2)… Zappos doubled it’s revenue with a few dollars increase in the costs of handling the shipments and returns.

But it is the SEO that interested me. The opportunity was there, and they went for it. Even today, when I have little expectation for Zappos to be cutting edge at SEO themselves anymore, Zappos is #2 behind the shoe maker’s own site for most of the big brands I searched in Google. Try mephisto shoes… Zappos is right there, with a big noticeable “free shipping & free return shipping” defining the snippet. Ditto for Ecco Shoes. How about Echo Shoes? Oops. Well, nobody’s perfect ;-) How about Mephisto alone? Sure… just below And Ecco alone? Geesh… Ecco has crowded out the page 1 SERP with dubdomain spam, but Zappos is top of page 2.

When I meet a client I have to wade through the business story to find the SEO opportunity. There are many facets to that, and we can usually find pure SEO opportunities if the client is willing to extend content sideways to achieve that goal, or partner to cross into a related theme, or get creative and innovate in the marketing arena. But when I work my own sites, it’s all about the SEO opportunity first, business second. SEO drives the business adoption process. If the SEO pure play isn’t strong, their is no business.

Thinking as I wrote this, I just identified another opportunity which I now believe will work well. High-profit, low overhead, niche market, almost optimal for today’s brand of SEO and in an area I enjoy pursuing and can see myself spending a good deal of time working. No, it’s not shoes. What defined it as opportunity? Of the many facets of the potential business, including raw material procurement, distribution channels, market growth potential, barriers to entry, etc… the defining attribute is the SEO opportunity. I can get to the top of the SERPs, and in those SERPs as they exist now, my page at the top will convert.

That’s all that matters. Ready, set, go. With low overhead, I have minimal exposure to risk. With non-competitive SERPs, I can be there under a hundred days with some staying power. With a high-profit item in a growing market, I can expect additional marketing opportunities to appear in that market over time, as more players recognize the market opportunity. Hell if it gets wholesale or retail competitive, I can sell my customer lists and start selling traffic instead of goods, as the price wars thin profits for the players who are my new SEO customers. In short, because I started with the opportunity that exists within my core competancy (SEO), my business will adapt naturally, and evolve over time to what it already is: a marketing company. I suppose I could go approach a few established retailers in that market for a partnering opportunity…. but why should I?

★★ Click to Share!    Digg this     Create a Bookmark     Add to Newsvine
September 14th, 2006 by john andrews

Microsoft Mouse: A Symptom?

This week Microsoft unveiled a new ergonomic mouse. It was a long time ago that microsoft unveiled their first mouse, and that coincided with the promotion of Windows, the new graphical operating system that moved users away from their keyboards and into repetitive finger clicking. Selling that mouse was clearly in the best interests of Microsoft. Making mice better was clearly helpful to Microsoft Windows sales.

Scroller? Multiple buttons? Laser mouse to eliminate mechnical parts and dirt collection? All good. Ergonomic mouse? Clever marketing, and good for Windows sales (and at that time, Microsoft Office sales). More clicking, better mice, fewer lawsuits for repetitive strain injuries. Good good good.

Fast forward to this week. A new ergo-ergonomic mouse. Tied directly to exciting new features of Vist…. nope, sorry. No new bells and whistles on the mouse which work only with the new “Vista”. So why did Microsoft develop this new mouse? And why are they promoting it?

Mice are practically a commodity item. Sure you can get $80 for the newest, most serious mouse but does that pay for real, scientific ergonomic research carried out in laboratories staffed with real kinesiologists, scientists, biomedical engineers and or ergonomicists? Maybe. I don’t really know the production numbers or the costs. But it seems “off” to me that Microsoft, a software company struggling to keep up on the software/internet front, is also trying to be a hardware company for computer mice of all things.

Also this week we see an announcement of a new display screen, and web camera. And I see how it all fits together in their eyes:

Microsoft Hardware is evolving and transforming the desktop computing experience with the industry’s first wireless rechargeable and backlit desktop, the Wireless Entertainment Desktop 8000, dubbed the “ultimate keyboard” when it was unveiled in June. Today the company is shedding light on this groundbreaking desktop in addition to launching two other new sleek desktops — the Microsoft® Wireless Entertainment Desktop 7000 and the Microsoft Wireless Laser Desktop 6000 — along with its first rechargeable mouse, the Microsoft Wireless Laser Mouse 8000. Whether users are finishing a report at the office or sitting back to watch a movie in comfort at home, the innovative technologies these products harness offer the flexibility to move between work and fun with comfort and ease, and in ultimate style.

So it’s the entire user experience; the tactile experience. Handle the mouse, touch the screen, feel like you are at work when you are relaxing at home at home when you are in your office at work.

I thought software sells hardware. Has that changed again?

★★ Click to Share!    Digg this     Create a Bookmark     Add to Newsvine

Competitive Webmaster

Wonder how to be more competitive at some aspect of the web? Submit your thoughts.

SEO Secret

Not Post Secret

Click HERE


John Andrews is a mobile web professional and competitive search engine optimzer (SEO). He's been quietly earning top rank for websites since 1997. About John




comments policy



Recent Posts: ★ SEO Industry Growth, Widespread Failure, and SEO Industry Challenge ★ Do you want to WIN, or just “Be the Winner”? ★ 503: GONE ★ Cloud Storage ★ Identity Poetry for Marketers ★ PR is where the Money Is ★ Google is an Addict ★ When there are no Jobs ★ Google Stifles Innovation, starts Strangling Itself ★ Flying the SEO Helicopter ★ Penguin 2.0 Forewarning Propaganda? ★ Dedicated Class “C” IP addresses for SEO ★ New Domain Extensions (gTLDs) Could Change Everything ★ Kapost Review ★ Aaron Von Frankenstein ★ 2013 is The Year of the Proxy ★ Preparing for the Google Apocalypse ★ Rank #1 in Google for Your Name (for a fee) ★ Pseudo-Random Thoughts on Search ★ Twitter, Facebook, Google Plus, or a Blog ★ The BlueGlass Conference Opportunity ★ Google Execs Take a Break from Marissa Mayer, Lend Her to Yahoo! ★ Google SEO Guidelines ★ Reasons your Post-Penguin Link Building Sucks ★ Painful Example of Google’s Capricious Do Not Care Attitude 


☆ about

John Andrews is a mobile web professional and competitive search engine optimzer (SEO). He's been quietly earning top rank for websites since 1997. About John

☆ navigation

  • John Andrews and Competitive Webmastering
  • E-mail Contact Form
  • What does Creativity have to do with SEO?
  • How to Kill Someone Else’s AdSense Account: 10 Steps
  • Invitation to Twitter Followers
  • …unrelated: another good movie “Clean” with Maggie Cheung
  • …unrelated: My Hundred Dollar Mouse
  • Competitive Thinking
  • Free SEO for NYPHP PHP Talk Members
  • Smart People
  • Disclosure Statement
  • Google Sponsored SPAM
  • Blog Post ideas
  • X-Cart SEO: How to SEO the X Cart Shopping Cart
  • the nastiest bloke in seo
  • Seattle Domainers Conference
  • Import large file into MySQL : use SOURCE command
  • Vanetine’s Day Gift Ideas: Chocolate Fragrance!
  • SEM Rush Keyword Research
  • ☆ blogroll

  • Bellingham SEO
  • Domain Name Consultant
  • Hans Cave Diving in Mexico
  • Healthcare Search Marketing
  • John Andrews
  • John Andrews SEO
  • SEMPDX Interview
  • SEO Quiz
  • SEO Trophy Phrases
  • SMX Search Marketing Expo
  • T.R.A.F.F.I.C. East 2007
  • TOR
  • ☆ categories

    Competition (39)
    Competitive Intelligence (15)
    Competitive Webmastering (547)
    Webmasters to Watch (4)
    domainers (63)
    Oprah (1)
    photography (3)
    Privacy (16)
    Public Relations (187)
    SEO (398)
    Client vs. SEO (2)
    Link Building (3)
    Search Engines vs. SEO (1)
    SEO SECRETS (11)
    SEO vs. SEO (1)
    ThreadWatch Watching (5)
    Silliness (24)
    Social Media (7)
    society (31)
    Uncategorized (23)

    ☆ archives

  • November 2014
  • September 2014
  • December 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • July 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006