News Source: http://searchlightdigital.com
Published: Aug 07, 2008 - 02:57 am
Story Found By: TCSM 1749 Days ago
Category: SEO
27 Comments
Sorry this site requires JavaScript to be enabled in your browser. See the following guide on How to enable JavaScript in Internet Explorer, Netscape, Firefox and Safari. Alternatively you may be blocking JavaScript with an advert-related or developer plugin. Please check your browser plugins.
News Source: http://searchlightdigital.com
Published: Aug 07, 2008 - 02:57 am
Story Found By: TCSM 1749 Days ago
Category: SEO
27 Comments
Upcoming Conferences
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:
- SMX Paris - June 6-7 2013
- SMX Advanced - June 11-12, 2013
- SMX East - October 1-3, 2013
- SMX Stockholm - October 14-15, 2013
- SMX Milan - November 7-8, 2013
- SMX Social Media Marketing - November 20-21, 2013
- SMX Israel - January 2014
- SMX West - March 11-13, 2014
- SMX Munich - March 25-26, 2014
- SMX Sydney - April 2014
- SMX London - May 2014
Latest News From Marketing Land
- Facebook Dominates Teen Social Networking But Enthusiasm Waning Over Drama, Stress & Oversharing
- Pew: 94% Of Teenagers Use Facebook, Have 425 Facebook Friends, But Twitter & Instagram Adoption Way Up
- Marketing Day: May 21, 2013
- Nutella Gives In, Allows Fan To Continue With “World Nutella Day”
- How To Organize Your Informational Content: A Case Study
- - See more news at Marketing Land -
Upcoming Webcasts
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Digital Marketing Depot. Upcoming online events include:
- Taking your PLA Campaigns to the Next Level - Jun 4
- Increase Shares, Tweets, Likes, and Pins to Fuel Search and Drive Engagement - May 30
- Take a Closer Look at Links – Why a Site Ranks - May 21
- The Future of Digital Marketing Services: Where Will Agencies be in 2014? - May 15
- Unlock the Key to Successful Forecasting and Conversions with Big Data - Jun 20
Research:
- B2B Marketing Automation Tools 2013: The Buyer’s Guide
- Enterprise SEO Tools 2013: A Buyer’s Guide
- Enterprise Social Media Management Software
Whitepapers:
- PPC Bid Management Guide
- The Marketer’s Guide to Driving ROI From Facebook Advertising
- Collaborative Customer Interactions Management
- How To Create a Data-Driven Dynasty
- Top 10 Ways to Improve Digital Experiences
Latest News From Search Engine Land
Comments
Good analysis, best post I’ve read today on here."The top four results put together account for over two thirds of all clicks that will happen (68.69% in total)."That shows the effect of Google pushing up these authority sites into top positions. Eventually they will just leave scraps for everyone else.
@TCSM Has someone from Ayima been telling you secrets? ;)
@evilgreenmonkey Nooooo...Actually, it’s from a whacking great file I got from AOL. I’m guessing you’re going to the bbq on the 13th?
Yarp, I’m the one organising it ;o)
Good man. I shall see you there!
Very good post indeed! This is very good information here. Agree with Nick, this is the best thing I’ve read so far today.
That’s interesting information but how does the AOL demographic affect the data? Am I wrong to assume that the average user of AOL search is less internet-savvy than most?
@philippe glad you enjoyed it!@mindy it’s almost certainly skewed sightly, and as it says in the article, mileage will vary from SERP to SERP.
How did you get this information from AOL and how can you compare AOL data to what would be true for Google. Because have you been to AOL lately they try to hide the fact that you are likely to be clicking on PPC links. That 42% who don’t click on anything I have a feeling would be a lot lower in google, because google clearly shows you what is PPC and what is organic. Most of that 42% who don’t click anything in your data is likely made up of PPC clicks since it is so easy to click on a PPC link in AOL.That fact alone causes a huge issue with this data. I think it tells me hardly anything about google, except they are liekly to have a higher percentage of people clicking on organic links, and that is just a quess.
@140local the data is from AOL log files. They’re fairly available, if you know where to go.And no, the 42% is nothing to do with PPC. As stated in the article, this data excludes PPC clicks. Not because people click on things and they’re wrong, and that’s the 42% or whatever. It’s just completely PPC free.And even if that was the case, it still gives you data on 19.4 million click throughs from SERPs. If you can’t find something useful from that...
Tell me where to go to get this data. I want a link.Also, You proved my point. When you factor out PPC you take away a huge percentage of people who likely clicked on something. So you can’t say that, because 42% of people didn’t click anything in the data you had, then that means that 42% of people who perform a search don’t click anything. The people could have clicked something on that page, and it is likely to be a PPC ad which again isn’t in the data. You can say, that according to this AOL data that 42% of people didn’t click an Organic search result. That is a good conclusion. The question then is what did those 42% of people click: a back button, did they type in another search, the images or video link, a ppc ad, what. There is more stuff on that page besides clicking a organic serp.
I am also interested in how you have this data formated. To even say that you have 42% of people didn’t click on anything, doesn’t make since according to what you are showing. If I add up the first ten results because that is typically what is on the first page of results I get that 89.29 of people clicked on atleast one of those links. Or does that data you are showing only include percent of people who clicked on that link according to the number of people who clicked on a link and not the total number of people who clicked on a search.
http://www.gregsadetsky.com/aol-data/ Oh, and I hope you’re not on a metered connection...And yes, there’s no PPC data in this. If there was, it’d make the whole thing less useful, as it’d obfuscate the data. And yes, it does mean 42% of people don’t click anything. Why’s that surprising?Once again, the 42% isn’t people that clicked PPC. They either performed another search, or hit back, or went somewhere else.
The data shown (percentages) only relates to peopel who clicked on something. So it’s the 58% left over. Sorry for the confusion.
I looked at the log files. These are the following fields that show in this data:What Appears to be a unique user IDWhat the Query wasTime the Query was doneRanking for the item clicked onWhat the user clicked on if they clicked on anythingClosed their browserAnything else I am not thinking ofFrom that it is easy to tell that 42% of people didn’t click on an organic result. But, that 42% of the people who didn’t click on anything performed on of the following actions:Clicked on a PPC linkHit their back buttonTyped in a URL or hit a book markPerformed another searchClick on one of the many other links on that search engines pageFrom that you can say that:42% of people didn’t click an organic linkThey likely performed one of the following actionsA portion of the 42% who didn’t click an organic link clicked a PPC linkWhat you cannot infer from this data:That 42% of people did not click on anything and just hit their back button or performed another search. A portion of these people performed this following action, but not everyone.TCSM: Thanks for the info, sorry I am giving you a hard time. I just want to understand this better.
This week I was looking at some data from a tool that stored the AOL dump. I’ve always felt that was the greatest source of data we have had on the web. It is the closest thing we’ll see to what the SE’s see and know. The report is invaluable. Thanks for ultimately revealing where the data set comes from. Its absolutely great information.Dave
No worries. To qualify further, I suspect that there’s no PPC data, based on what I know of click-throughs on PPC links based on several years of running campaigns. It just doesn’t fit, to my eye.And the UID is obfuscated IP address.
I know there is no PPC data. AOL says it themselves. But, just because there is no PPC data does not mean that they eliminated anyone from these results that did click on a PPC ad. Listen to me, I am not saying that 42% of people clicked on a PPC link. I am saying a portion of that 42% clicked on a PPC link. I agree overall PPC CTR is not 42%. Read above, I outlined what is likely made up of those 42% who did not click on a search result. Read this: http://www.gregsadetsky.com/aol-data/U500k_README.txtAOL is only showing data for people who clicked organic results - like you said and AOL says. I feel like I am going around and around with you.And it is not hard for me to believe that 42% of people didn’t click on an organic result. Please understand what I am saying.If you want my theory, people who are actually using Google itself, would likely have a higher percentage of people who clicked on Organic results. This is because more people are less likely to click on a PPC ad as they are clearly defined in Google unlike AOL. Also the top PPC results on Google take up less room than they do on AOL.
Ahhh, I get you. :) Sorry for the misunderstanding.
The same analysis was done about two years ago ;) in a french seo site http://www.webrankinfo.com/actualites/200608-repartition-des-clics.htm using help from here http://www.webrankinfo.com/forums/viewtopic_57017.htm#547990The difference for position #1 may be explained by the fact that the author exluded: 1) Multiple clicks for the same url by the same user2) Searches for domain names (don’t forget it is aol users :)He ended up with 15,436,869 clicks1 35,78%2 12,25%3 9,16%4 6,70%5 5,47%6 4,51%7 3,84%8 3,40%10 3,40%9 3,23%11 0,78%12 0,66%13 0,62%14 0,58%15 0,56%16 0,46%17 0,43%18 0,40%25 0,40%19 0,38%Here is the code he used for these resultscat all_aol_data.tsv | awk -F "t" ’{ if($4) print($1 "t" $2 "t t" $4 "t" $5); }’ | uniq | awk -F "t" ’{ print($2 "t" $4); }’ | egrep -v ’(.org|.net|.com|www.)’ | awk -F "t" ’{ if($2) print($2); }’ | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | awk ’{ gsub("^ *",""); gsub(" ",","); print; }’
Just wanted to add that the guy also published how many words were used by users for searches http://www.webrankinfo.com/forums/topic_page_57017_15.htm#5480242 words: 29,03%1 word: 27,49%3 words: 18,68%4 words: 11,13%5 words: 6,20%6 words: 3,32%7 words: 1,74%8 words: 0,97%9 words: 0,56%10 words: 0,32%
It’s been reported on a lot. The data isn’t particularly new. However, as stated in the post, it’s more a response to a YOUmoz post, to refresh people’s memories.
Is this the same AOL data from 2 years ago?If so, Donna’s paste from earnersforum 2 years ago makes for a useful reference:http://www.seo-scoop.com/2006/08/09/aol-data-reveals-how-top-10-position-affects-ctr/
It is indeed.
Just a little correction on the article. The organic ctr was 53.4% of total clicks, not 58%. The author made a math mistake. So of the remainder visitors didn’t click on anything or clicked on an ad. I go back to this data all the time. Its absolutely the best thing we seo’s can see. Dave
@earlpearl me too. I wish someone at AOL would hurry up & make a screw up again;)
Yea. That sounds about right. #1 getting 3-4 times the amount of traffic as #2 or #3.Just remember the stats still show 66% of people choose organic. 33% choose ppc. :)