According to the Silicon Alley Insider, kids used to hate Twitter, but don’t anymore.

Actually, Kids Don’t Hate Twitter Anymore!

“While Twitter’s user base historically favored older users, people between ages 12-24 have been Twitter’s fastest growing age group of late. And now that age group is actually disproportionately visiting Twitter, according to comScore.”

It might just be that it’s Monday morning, but I quite enjoy the futility of people’s attempts to make sense of how a user group they don’t understand use a technology whose purpose eludes them.

The introduction to the chart is based on an article in The New York Times, Who’s Driving Twitter’s Popularity? Not Teens:

“Kristen Nagy, an 18-year-old from Sparta, N.J., sends and receives 500 text messages a day. But she never uses Twitter, even though it publishes similar snippets of conversations and observations.

Her reluctance to use Twitter, a feeling shared by others in her age group, has not doomed the microblogging service. Just 11 percent of its users are aged 12 to 17, according to comScore. Instead, Twitter’s unparalleled explosion in popularity has been driven by a decidedly older group. That success has shattered a widely held belief that young people lead the way to popularizing innovations.”

I generally like The New York Times. But this article raises my eyebrows to well above my long-since-receded hairline.

Point 1: Despite the fact that Kristen Nagy, an 18-year-old from Sparta, N.J., never uses Twitter, the microblogging service is not doomed. Hmmm.

Point 2: Young people lead the way to popularising innovations. Hmmm.

Point 3: Twitter’s unparalleled explosion in popularity. Leading to what?

On April 23rd of this year, I offered a $100 Amazon gift voucher to the first person who could provide me with a good answer to one simple question:

How do I use Twitter for my business?

“My question: How do I use Twitter for my business? I’m not interested in abstract ideas and theories, so please don’t bother with things like “generating leads”, “finding people with similar interests” or “finding people interested in your services”. I need real, concrete ideas that I can actually use. And I need evidence that your ideas could actually work.”

Twitter Flu – Win a $100 Amazon gift voucher

Despite 15 comments, the reward went unclaimed, as no-one was able to provide me with a good answer to my question.

So I’m asking the same question again, this time offering an Amazon gift voucher for $250.

No theories, no catchy phrases, just a real, actionable and useful answer.

The first person to come up with a good response gets the voucher.

If you are running an AdWords account you most likely have come across a section within the campaign settings called “Networks and devices”. Within that section you are able to select where you want your ads to be displayed.

If you are looking to setup a campaign which targets the content network, you have two available options: “Relevant pages across the entire network” or “Relevant pages only on the placements I manage”.

Each option has the potential to produce good results, however understanding the differences is vital to your campaign’s success.

If you choose “Relevant pages only on the placements I manage” you are creating a campaign which does not factor in your keywords. You tell AdWords which websites you want your ads to be displayed on and you bid in order to appear on those particular websites. If you feel visitors to a particular website will be interested in your ads, this approach might be a great fit for you.

The problem that you need to keep in mind is that depending on how you bid for a particular website, you could end up having your ad displayed across every single page of that website. Are all those pages relevant to your ads? Most likely they are not.

You can bid on specific pages for a particular website, however you will need to find each relevant page. This can be somewhat time consuming.

The alternative is to choose “Relevant pages across the entire network”. This approach will display your ads across the entire content network depending on which keywords you bid on. AdWords will review your ad group’s keywords and decided where to show your ads. This can work rather well depending on your keywords. If you went with many broad keywords or your ad groups focus on too many different things, you could potentially end up with your ads being displayed on some irrelevant websites.

Whichever approach you decided to take, you need to analyze the resulting performance. Exclude websites which are not performing well and expand into new websites which you might find through data analysis. You can do this by using the AdWords report center or you can analyze your web logs.

The data is there, you just have to look.

You’ve probably heard that Wikipedia are planning to introduce a new editing process, to reduce the visibility and impact of vandalism.

Wikipedia represents both the best and worst of online behaviour, with over three million articles in English, contributed by more than 10 million users. But there have been abuses of the open system over the years, and Wikipedia’s new system appears to be more criticised than understood.

The UK’s Telegraph, for example, states the following in Wikipedia ends unrestricted editing of articles:

“The move marks a fundamental shift in Wikipedia’s approach to the gathering and sharing of online information, and means the web encyclopedia can no longer be edited at will by other internet users.”

Not true.

A different point of view is presented by Times Online in Wikipedia to end editing free-for-all:

“Mike Peel, the UK spokesman for the Wikimedia Foundation, told The Times: “We are planning to introduce the new system on a two-month trial basis. Anyone can continue to edit these articles, but the work of inexperienced editors with less than three days’ experience will be subject to review by more experienced editors.”

Yet many of the individuals and institutions most opposed to the trial are missing the point. Wikipedia is no longer a small collection of articles, run by enthusiasts for enthusiasts.

For many it has become the standard online source of information. And the politics and ideals behind it are of no interest to the majority of the users.

How many websites have you seen whose first paragraph/s of text are all about the company’s visions and ideals:

“Welcome to MissingThePoint. As a small, dynamic and innovative company, our goals are to provide our customers and clients with the highest standards, perfect service, and the most relaxing and enjoyable online experience that may be found on the web today. We don’t believe that finding, using and buying an online product or service should be difficult, which is why we always focus on clarity, simplicity and absolute transparency.”

The people reading this type of statement couldn’t care less. They don’t care about your mission, your goals, your beliefs or aspirations. They care about what you’re selling, not why you’re selling it.

Wikipedia’s users don’t care how the information gets written. They just want it to be accurate.

Your website visitors don’t care about your goals and dreams. They just want to know that your product is the solution they need.

The BBC News website is tentatively reporting that the recession may be over:

“Confidence among business professionals has surged, suggesting the recession is at an end, a survey has said.

The Institute of Chartered Accountants’ index of business confidence rose to 4.8 at the end of June, from -28.2 in March, the biggest rise for two years.”

This follows reports Japan, Germany and France have officially left recession, and the US economy may also be recovering.

Question: What usually follows a transition from little to plenty?

Indulgence.

Nothing tastes quite as good as the first dessert to celebrate the end of a diet, the first mouthful after a fast, or the first meal out after a year of eating in.

Little is as appreciated as the first treat or luxury after many months of frugality.

Are you poised to be noticed when the money starts trickling back into the budgets?

Now is a great time to be seen.

I have always known the risks involved with using broad match terms in Google AdWords. Before there were search query reports, I would use the raw log files to see what people were actually searching for, and was often shocked at what I would find.

An example of this outrageous irrelevance would be if I were to have bid on something like remote desktop monitoring software I would sometimes get searches for just the word software. I also recall bidding on something related to shareware and getting searches for share market or market share.

Well lately, I have been really put off using broad match, as it seems as though there are a lot more irrelevant hits coming from broad matched terms. Another interesting item that I have noticed is that it seems as though Google try to make you ‘feel safe’ with broad match by way of conversion tracking. I have noticed situations where I bid on a number of very targeted phrase and exact match terms and a few broad match terms. The broad match terms sometimes receive far more conversions than the more targeted non-broad keywords.

You’re probably thinking that those phrase and exact match terms are most likely not what people are searching for, however this is not the case. When you run a search query report specifically on those broad match terms, you find that you are already bidding on the terms that are receiving the conversions.

It’s almost as if Google are saying, “Don’t worry that it is broad match and you get a few irrelevant searches mixed in. You can see that you are getting some conversions”. The problem is that if you leave this unchecked, the broadness craziness goes wild.

Note that I am not saying that you should never use broad match terms in your AdWords campaigns. My own rule is that I do not use broad match in campaigns which only target the content network. This is because you have absolutely no way to tell what Google are doing with your keywords, as there is no keyword data on the content network. I do use broad match in search campaigns but with great caution. I begin with phrase and exact match, then once I have data as to what people are searching for, I sprinkle in some broad match and closely monitor their performance.

We live in an age of instant access to an endless amount of information.

The internet means that we can find anything we want in the blink of an eye.

But finding the truth is as hard as it’s ever been.

Most of us at some point have gone looking for medical information online. It’s not a good idea. Those wondering whether their sore throat may be caused by a high pollen count are left worrying about throat cancer. Those looking for reassurance that their child’s poor sleeping habits will settle down are left with the fear of autism. And the unfortunate person seeking a natural means of alleviating their discomfort for haemorrhoids will probably become convinced that an alien is about to burst out of their abdomen. Well, nearly.

Joking aside, I don’t even want to think about the people who should seek professional medical help but don’t as a result of the misleading information they find online.

Our access to unlimited information presents us with more opinions and possibilities than we’re capable of processing. Yet all too often it doesn’t provide us with answers.

It’s fine for remembering the actor’s name in that film you saw last night. It’s good for finding how to make the perfect boiled egg. And it’s great at proving that you were right – Mozart did indeed compose over six hundred pieces of music.

But it won’t give you solid answers to the big questions.

How can I prove that god exists? 2.3 million results.

How can I repair my hearing? 3.6 millions results.

What is the meaning of life? 82.4 million results.

How can I make my car go faster? 256 million results.

I won’t dwell on what this says about our priorities in life: god, hearing, life, then cars.

When you sell a product, solution or service online, the visitors to your website are looking for reassurance. They’re not only looking for information, but also need to know that what you sell is what they need, that it will work properly, that the price is a fair one, that buying from you will be safe, and that they can get it quickly. Essentially, they want to be convinced that they’re making the right decision.

Convince them that the answer to all the above is yes, and I guarantee your sales will improve. Leave the questions unanswered and the your level of sales will depend on how desperate they are for a solution.

It’s common sense, right? So why do so many websites fail to get it right?

What ever happened to Google Knol?

Actually there’s a reasonable chance that you don’t even know what Google Knol is, and just by clicking the link won’t tell you much either.

And clicking on the help link will take you to a page that uses a video to explain what a knol is. Nice irony.

If you take a step or two back, you’ll probably find it surprisingly difficult to even find Google Knol. There are no links from Google’s main page, the top links, the more links, or the even more links.

So it’s no great surprise that Knol failed. How could it succeed without people knowing where it is or how to find it?

Wikipedia had 20,000 articles and 18 language sections by the end of 2001. Seven years before Knol was even opened to the public.

I looked up knol on Knol and got the following:

I had to go to Wikipedia to finally understand what Knol is, which also had the benefit of convincing me that Knol could never replace Wikipedia.

A good idea that came too late, was poorly implemented, badly designed and hidden away from view.

How could it ever have succeeded?

The more observant or caffeinated of you will have already noticed that the ads displayed alongside Google’s search results have moved closer to their natural counterparts.

On a lower resolution system you might not have noticed, but whereas the ads used to be on the far right side of my 1680 x 1050 screen, they are now nestled quite cosily with the regular search results.

So why the change?

Well there’s no doubt that people’s monitors are bigger than they used to be, so Google may have decided that you can have too much of a good thing; in this case white space.

And it’s certainly a lot more difficult to ignore the ads in their new position.

Alternatively, is it possible that Google are taking ideas from Bing?

In an earlier post I commented on the remarkable similarity between Bing’s layout and that of Google, but it now appears that Google may be learning a trick or two from their new rival.

It’ll be interesting to see how this impacts ad performance. Will the new layout produce more clicks? Will quality go down? Watch this space.

The SEOmoz blog has an article on the possible side-effects of using a CAPTCHA on your website:

“…with CAPTCHA on, there was an 88% reduction in SPAM but there were 159 failed conversions.  Those failed conversions could be SPAM, but they could also be people who couldn’t figure out the CAPTCHA and finally just gave up.  With CAPTCHA’s on, SPAM and failed conversions accounted for 7.3% of all the conversions for the 3 month period.  With CAPTCHA’s off, SPAM conversions accounted for 4.1% of all the conversions for the 3 month period.  That possibly means when CAPTCHA’s are on, the company could lose out on 3.2% of all their conversions!”

Killing-off 3.2% of conversions is certainly best avoided, but in my opinion the figure is misleading.

We use a CAPTCHA on all of our website forms (here for example), and I can testify that they work, at least in terms of reducing the volume of spam we receive.

Do users like them? Probably not. I know I dislike having to use them, but consider them to be a necessary part of doing business online.

In the UK we need a PIN number every time we use a debit or credit card in a store. It’s a nuisance to have to remember them all, but if I want to use my cards, I don’t have a choice.

When I fly internationally, I need to check in two hours before the flight departs. Queueing for the security checks is a nuisance and unpleasant, but if I want to fly safely, and can’t afford my own jet, that’s what has to be done.

Some people may choose to no longer use their cards in stores or fly internationally, but not a significant number. And until the stores and airlines find a better way to protect their customers and passengers, this isn’t going to change.

If a potential customer is put-off using our services by having to enter six easy to read characters, I don’t believe they were ever serious about working with our company.

CAPTCHAs’ Effect on Conversion Rates

My wife and I purchased a new car in December of last year.

Prior to our purchase, we did a lot of research into what car would best fit our needs and provide us the most value. Once we decided on a specific make & model, we then began visiting different car dealers in order to find the best price and customer service.

After visiting a number of dealers, we found several that offered basically the same price for the car we wanted.  So, the decision of where to buy came down to which dealership, and the individual salesperson we felt most comfortable.

While we were in the decision-making process, my wife and I received numerous emails and phone calls from the salespeople we had met with, all trying to win our confidence and car purchase.

My wife and I talked it over and we both felt there was one salesperson who seemed to be the most genuinely (admittedly, genuine is very relative in this case)  interested in helping us get the car that we wanted at a price we could afford.

We went in to the dealership, met with the salesperson we liked, and made a deal for the car we wanted.

That was more than seven months ago and we have not heard from the salesperson, or anyone from the dealership, since.

I wasn’t expecting lots of post-purchase follow-up, but I do think it was a major missed opportunity on the dealership’s part to create further customer good feelings and loyalty.

I recently read a statistic that existing customers are seven times more likely to buy from you.

A short call or email from the salesperson asking how we liked the car and if we had experienced any problems would have gone a long way towards cementing our loyalty.

Had the salesperson or someone from the dealer just spent 5 minutes on post purchase follow-up with us, they would have greatly increased the the possibility of turning a one-time purchase into a repeat customer.

So, the moral of this car-buying story is that customer service after the purchase must not be neglected as it can lead to future sales.  If you’re not providing your customers with post-purchase follow-up, you are likely throwing money out the window.