Post by account_disabled on Mar 4, 2024 23:29:20 GMT -5
The tools. Sometimes peer pressure is a good thing. If it aint broke dont fix it. Rand was unsurprisingly the first to question whether or not volume data was accurate. My response had always been that of the lazy pragmatist Its the best we got. Others then chimed in with equally valid questions how would users group by this data How much do we have Why give customers something they can already get for free Tail tucked between my knees I decided it was time to sweat the details starting with the.
Guestion Whats broke This was the impetus behind the research which lead Greece Mobile Number List to this post on Keyword Planners dirty secrets outlining the numerous problems with Google Keyword Planner data. Ill spare you the details here but if you want some context behind why Rand was right and why we did need to throw a wrench into the conventional thinking on keyword volume metrics take a look at that post. Here was just one of the concerns that Google Adwords search volume puts keywords into volume buckets without telling you the ranges.
Image showing that Google Keyword Planner averages are heavily rounded. Well its broke. Time to sweat the details Once it became clear to me that I couldnt just regurgitate Googles numbers anymore and pretend they were the canonical truth of the matter it was time to start asking the fundamental questions we want answered through a volume metric. In deliberation with the many folks working on Keyword Explorer we uncovered four distinct characteristics of a good volume metric. Specificity specific to the actual average search volume. You want the volume number to be as close as possible to reality. We want to be as close to the average annual search volume as we possibly can. Coverage Volume varies from month to month so not only do you want it to be specific to the average across all.
Guestion Whats broke This was the impetus behind the research which lead Greece Mobile Number List to this post on Keyword Planners dirty secrets outlining the numerous problems with Google Keyword Planner data. Ill spare you the details here but if you want some context behind why Rand was right and why we did need to throw a wrench into the conventional thinking on keyword volume metrics take a look at that post. Here was just one of the concerns that Google Adwords search volume puts keywords into volume buckets without telling you the ranges.
Image showing that Google Keyword Planner averages are heavily rounded. Well its broke. Time to sweat the details Once it became clear to me that I couldnt just regurgitate Googles numbers anymore and pretend they were the canonical truth of the matter it was time to start asking the fundamental questions we want answered through a volume metric. In deliberation with the many folks working on Keyword Explorer we uncovered four distinct characteristics of a good volume metric. Specificity specific to the actual average search volume. You want the volume number to be as close as possible to reality. We want to be as close to the average annual search volume as we possibly can. Coverage Volume varies from month to month so not only do you want it to be specific to the average across all.