• Guest

    Assuming market share numbers will be indicative of portfolio makeup will likely set wrong expectations. Google will command the lion’s share of most portfolios simply because they monetize their SERPs better. (Bing is dipping their toes in PLA, but their ad inventory does not come near the breadth of Google’s and the products displayed show they have some work to do on their algo.)

    I think a better way for many advertisers will be to look at what Bing comprises as a percent of your branded search, as those campaigns are often parallel between engines and bid to gain the most possible traffic. This should be a purer indicator of what your results should/could be in nonbranded search.

  • Guest

    Assuming market share numbers will be indicative of portfolio makeup will likely set wrong expectations. Google will command the lion’s share of most portfolios simply because they monetize their SERPs better. (Bing is dipping their toes in PLA, but their ad inventory does not come near the breadth of Google’s and the products displayed show they have some work to do on their algo.)

    I think a better way for many advertisers will be to look at what Bing comprises as a percent of your branded search, as those campaigns are often parallel between engines and bid to gain the most possible traffic. This should be a purer indicator of what your results should/could be in nonbranded search.

  • http://www.kinseystreet.com Robert Coats

    I have yet to see real world analytics data that was anywhere close to comscore’s “search share” reports. Ever. In real world results, Google’s search share is around 90% (even higher in some niches). That is why PPC budgets are focused on AdWords.

    The lowest search share I have ever seen for Google was with a client based in Redmond, WA, the heart of Microsoft, and even his site had a search share of 74% for Google. The bulk of his clientele? Micosofties.