Have something to share? Do you want to submit a press release, a scoop or an article? Go ahead…and write your article or your press release and submit it to us for free. Not all submissions will be posted but please give it a try. Your story must be original and to comply with the site’s content and profile. For article or news submission please click here

Marketers need more trust-building elements on their websites to help customers make that all important decision to purchase. One particular method is to pay attention to product images and enable the consumer to scrutinize the color, size and shape as though they were in a bricks and mortar store.

Early days of online retail were hampered by poor product imagery and the inability for consumers to get a good idea of the size, shape and color of a product. Nowadays there’s no excuse for poor imagery with tools such as zoom, rotate and even video and the increase in broadband penetration and online payment options means more and more consumers are willing to shop online. But just as a sloppy shop window will attract fewer eyeballs, so will sloppy product images on websites. Images are very important to consumers whether they’re buying a hockey stick or a house.

A case in point is eBay where, according to Jim Miotke, president of BetterPhoto.com, 83% of eBay shoppers ignore listings without images. Those items featured in galleries get 15% more activity and those with super-size photos show a 24% spike in sales, found the research.

So what can marketers do to maximize the impact product images have on consumers?

- Keep product sizes relative and consistent.

- Include ways in which the consumer can “handle” the goods as if they were in a store by allowing them the ability to zoom in to view details in close-up, i.e. clasp on a brooch or button on blouse and to be able to view the product from different angles.

- If possible, use “actual size” images or links.

- Where “actual size’ images aren’t feasible – clothing, large electronic items – include an image where the product is in context. Flowers, for instance, could be photographed in the arms of a recipient, allowing a consumer to judge the value and content for themselves and clothes are always better judged on models.

- If a product comes in a variety of colors consumers will want to know what the product looks like in their color choice. Enable them to view images of all color combinations or, at the very least, a color chart.

- Have you tried video? How about showing your products in use? Consumers are desperate for as much of the bricks and mortar experience as possible.

By paying attention to the details mentioned above and giving consumers the best visual experience of a product that they can, marketers can decrease returns while increasing retention and sales conversions.

Did we really need more research to tell us that intrusive ads annoy consumers? Well, it seems some marketers missed a meeting in the late 1990’s and need to be taught a lesson in subtlety. To that end, I’ve devised some top tips on how to make sure your visitors don’t stick around.

In 2007, half of Internet users left a favorite website due to “intrusive advertising”. That figure has now risen to three-quarters according to new figures released from HowTo.tv. The message? Consumers will not put up with advertising they deem to be in-their-face and annoying; they will up and leave your website.

Since commerce came to the Internet there have been cries of disdain from Internet users about bad marketing, but over a decade later it continues. So, in an attempt to get the message though, I thought marketers might listen to ways in which to guarantee only a quarter of website visitors stick around.

1. Ensure the consumer has no way to avoid seeing that pop-up ad that greets them to your website. In fact, the harder you make it for them to close the pop-up, the better.

2. What’s a pop-up without sound? Woo them with some clunky musak or keep them amused with a persistent buzzing noise.

3. Your ads will really stand out if you can make them as irrelevant as possible. To maximize this effect, pay no attention whatsoever to your target audience’s needs.

4. Consumers love big, gaudy “whack the mole and win a million” banner ads that obliterate half the screen – the bigger and gaudier the better.

5. Scripts that crash a consumer’s computer are always successful in diverting them away from your website.

6. Take up as much space as possible on each webpage with ads, leaving just enough room for some token content.

7. Make life fun for your site visitors by including ads that float across the screen, blink on and off in various different locations or that trick them into clicking on them.

8. Gambling, porn and horror movie ads are particularly favored ad topics, pepper your website liberally with them for a professional look.

Source: BizReport

Seven months after Google began testing a service called Knol, a Wikipedia competitor, the company on Wednesday finally rolled it out. Knol is described as “Like Wikipedia, With Moderation.” Articles on various topics are penned by individuals, and in many cases, experts — not collectively by the anonymous masses. Knol authors can choose to benefit from the “wisdom of the crowds” by letting others edit or supplement their articles. But those changes make it into Knol entries only with the author’s permission.

Knol, which, by the way, is short for knowledge, is making some people uneasy because it further transforms Google from a search engine that helps people find content into a site that helps people create and publish content.

Even though it will make money on many Knol pages with its AdSense program, Google promises that the objectivity of its search engine will not be compromised.

“We will treat Knol pages as we treat other Web pages,” said Cedric Dupont, a Google product manager. “If there is a Knol that is the first place in search results, it deserves that place.”

Of course, on many searches, it is Wikipedia’s ad-free pages that show up at the top of search results.

Mr. Dupont dismissed speculation that Knol was designed as a Wikipedia killer: “Google is very happy with Wikipedia being so successful. Anyone who tries to kill them would hurt us.”

There is a striking similarity between one aspect of the two sites. The text of Knol articles uses the same font as Wikipedia. Mr. Dupont said that is simply coincidence, as it is a commonly used font.

For now, Knol has only a few hundred articles, compared to the nearly 2.5 million in Wikipedia’s English language version. And for now, the best place to follow the debate on whether or not Knol is a Wikipedia killer is on the Knol entry on, where else, Wikipedia.

Source: NYTimes

Search engines are probably the single most effective way to generate traffic to your web page. Because of this, web owners will inevitably complete with each other in order to get a higher ranking. But how would then do this? Well, a lot of e-books, blogs, websites, podcasts, and other kinds of content are dedicated to this topic. But there will always be web masters who complain that they are not getting visitors from search engines. This can be due to different factors but some of the most common reasons I know of include:

New Website – when your site is new, you should expect that it will not perform that well with search engines. Take note that there are over 30 billion pages on the internet and a lot of these can be categorized as “spam”. Before search engines start to give your site a good ranking, they need to achieve a certain level of trust with you and this will grow over time as you build your content, traffic, and one way links.

Black Hat SEO Techniques – very few people want to be called a black hat marketer; or in layman’s term, a spammer. But no one can deny that being a black hat marketer does have its own appeal because of its immediate results. If you decide to take this route, you should realize that you can be hit by a penalty or in some cases, banned altogether.

Useless Content – even if you invest a lot in creating your website, it would not matter if you don’t have good content. Searchers are exactly that, they search for information that is relevant to their needs over the internet. In addition, good content will generate a lot of links which are “votes” for your website.

Duplicate Content – some people debate on the impact of using duplicate content on their websites. But as far as I’m concerned, search engines love fresh content and it will reward websites and blogs that frequently posts new and original articles.

Yes, you can destroy your blog. It’s not difficult just follow all the above hints and soon you will see your site traffic drop and visitors vanished. Of course this article is to show you what NOT to do.

Excessive Ads - Hey, there’s nothing wrong with making some money from your blog (that’s why your reading this blog right?). But, when your advertisements begin to take up more space on your blog than your content, you’ve got a problem. People visit blog to learn and discuss topics that interest them. They want to share their ideas or ask questions. They DON’T want to have to sort through a million ads, to find your content. Think of it this way, you don’t tune in to your favorite TV show to watch the commercials do you? Well neither do your readers.

Lack of Interaction - Many people view blogging as the digital version of giving a sermon. The blogger sits behind his pulpit (keyboard) and preaches to his or her loyal followers. However, if you look at the most successful blogs online, you’ll notice that the interaction is a HUGE part of the blogs success. The ability to leave comments, read other comments, and interact with the content that you’re consuming is what has made blogging what it is. If you don’t make yourself available to your readers, don’t answer any questions and don’t accept any feedback on your content, you’re dooming yourself to the digital equivalent of talking to yourself.

Over Posting - Believe it or not, posting too often can drive away readers as well. If you’re slamming your readers with a high number of posts each and every day, there will be no way for them to keep up. Also, it’s going to be tough to keep up the quality of the posts if you’re cranking them out at such a frantic pace. If you slip into the mistake of posting too often, your “signal to noise” ratio will drop considerably, meaning readers will have to sort through more information to find something worthwhile or valuable to them. That’s a quick recipe for a failed blog.

Fights - Now don’t think for one second that you’re going to agree with everyone all the time. And yes, I still stand by my statement that controversy is good. However, I’ve seen many bloggers allow themselves to get completely side-tracked by their fight with another blogger to the point that it consumes the blog. A good general rule of thumb is that when you get into name calling and personal attacks, it’s time to shut it down. If you allow a fight to go on long enough, you’ll lose readers who simply don’t want to hear the pissing and moaning anymore. Remember, your subscribers read your blog to get your thoughts and opinions on the subject matter. Unless that subject is fighting with other bloggers, chances are your fight will be interesting for a while, but in the end it will lack substance for your readers to survive on.

Playing Follow the Leader - I borrowed that phrase from Max but the premise behind it is 100% true. If you don’t bring anything unique to your blog, whether it’s a distinct style, a special way of covering the information, etc. chances are your blog will die. There are simply too many other options out there for people to read. If you’re not interesting and exceptional in some way, readers will have no reason to return to your site. Find the one thing that makes your blog exceptional, and make that your brand.

According to industry reports, in five years, more than 30% of mobile phone subscribers in China will be reading books and newspapers through their phones. The combination of greater 3G adoption and a marked increase in made-for-mobile content will drive mobile entertainment revenues to almost $48 billion by 2010.

Reports additionally forecast that 90% of Chinese newspapers would have digital editions by 2013. Perhaps it’s not an exaggeration to say that print media will move to mobile phones, especially when every other type of digital content already has.

With an estimated 600 million mobile users, according to iResearch - China has seen its mobile search users grow to 61 million at the end of 2007 and will hit 117 million by 2008 and pass 200 million by 2010.

The world of 3G connectivity is expected to change the way how interaction-technology functions, how we shop, how we share information, and in general how we use handheld devices. The how(s) remaining to get explored seem at this point, almost infinite.

Nothing represents the changing of the guard as much as how the Big Three Portals have fallen from grace. Don’t get me wrong: from an operational standpoint, Yahoo! (YHOO) is a fine property, but that company is a bit of a… how do you say, disaster.

MSN is there, trekking along, costing Microsoft (MSFT) billions in losses over the years without really making a push for #1. Sort of like all other MSFT products not named Windows or Office, basically.

Meanwhile, Time Warner’s (TWX) AOL is drifting along, buying up more and more assets - some smart, some not - but now putting itself up for sale. While the company sold a 5% stake of itself to Google (GOOG) for a $1B sum - valuing itself for a tidy $20B - word is that it might be content with a $15B offer… which means either Yahoo!, MSFT, News Corp. (NWS), or Comcast (CMCSA) would show an interest.

While some will be quick to say the portals lost to social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace, make no mistake about it, they lost to search. Revenues matter, everything else is noise. Google has the web ecosystem in the bag, and considering that Google’s YouTube is more dominating in video than Google is in search - and that video is the next high growth opportunity after search’s decade - then you have to wonder how much more hurting Google can put on the Web.

When you consider how leadership in search helped Google propel itself to King of the Web, you sort of understand why MSFT just shelled out $100M for something that basically can be summed up as Wikipedia site search.

It has long been assumed by many investors that acquiring Valueclick (VCLK) would be the first step in “plan B” for Microsoft (MSFT) if its bid to take over Yahoo (YHOO) was unsuccessful. When MSFT’s Steve Ballmer recently ruled out a slew of acquisitions of smaller internet players after pulling its bid for Yahoo, ValueClick’s stock seemed to lose some of its “takeover bait” premium over the next couple of trading sessions. Since that time, the sell off in ValueClick shares has intensified and the stock has set new 52 week lows three times over the last week as rumors swirl that it is now hunting for some strategic acquisitions of its own. As might be expected, investors appear to be pricing in 1) concerns over dilution that might accompany any acquisition 2) typical “sell the buyer, buy the seller” arbitrage or 3) that an acquisition is signaling the switch of management efforts to acquiring instead of being acquired.

Much of the chatter regarding ValueClick acquisitions has focused on the possibility of their acquiring a company that would gain them entrance to the “Pay Per Click” [PPC] advertising space, the very high margin business that the Google empire was built upon where advertisers bid for placement in search results that are offered when consumers seek information on specific keyword search terms. This business was invented by Goto.com, which became Overture.com and was acquired by Yahoo and is now Yahoo Search Marketing. This space has been dominated by Yahoo and Google (GOOG), with Microsoft making a late run to gain a foothold in this space and round out “the big three” in the PPC space. While there has always been a “second tier” of companies trying to gain traction in the pay per click space, none have been able to come close to challenging “the big three” for various reasons.

While we are not in a position to know if there is any substance to the rumors, it does seem that the recent upheaval at Yahoo might make a historic opportunity for the right company to make waves in the pay per click space. If a Yahoo/MSFT deal were to reemerge or if Yahoo moves forward with its plans to outsource much of its premium PPC business to Google, the combination of the #2 and #3 players or the #1 and #2 players in this space would leave the door open for another company to slip into the #3 position. While we don’t think there is any magic associated with being the #3 player in PPC search, we do think that there are quite a few deep pocketed advertisers out there who view both Microsoft and Google as their most feared competitors and would like to see their advertising dollars flow to someone else, particularly newspaper publishers, magazine publishers, TV, radio and other legacy media companies.

Another factor that could make for a historic opportunity to enter the PPC search fray is the current market valuations of the second tier players. Just over a year ago, all companies in the online advertising space (but particularly the owners of ad networks) were being bid up to new trading highs after the frenzied buying of many of the other players ((ie.Aquantive, Doubliclick, 24/7 Media, Linkshare, Digitas) in this space for large premiums to their trading prices. As the deal volume dried up, much of the money flowed out of these names and many are now trading at historic lows.

The two names we have seen tossed around most often as a ValueClick acquisition targets fit neatly into this category - Miva (MIVA) and Think Partnership (THK).

Miva Media Solutions, previously known as Findwhat.com, is the largest of the second tier networks. With over $100 million in annual click revenue flowing through the company’s North American and European networks, Miva stands out as the quickest option for an acquiror looking to gain heft quickly. Miva also owns a number of valuable content sites including the rapidly growing Spill.com, Screensavers.com and WeatherStudio.com in addition to a growing toolbar segment that currently boasts of over 6 million active users.

In addition to offering the possibility of instantly becoming the next largest player in PPC behind MSFT, adding highly regarded content sites and leveraging the possibilities inherent in having an installed base of over 6 million toolbars, ValueClick and others have to look at the current market valuation of MIVA as extremely attractive. With a current market cap of $32.5 million (closing price July 1), no debt and over $22 million in the bank, the same marketplace that one year ago placed a valuation on these operations of just over $225 million is currently placing a value on this same business of less than $10 million. While the $250 million+ valuation achieved during the height of the ad network buying frenzy of a year ago might be on the high side, its hard to imagine that there are not buyers out there willing to pay three or four times the current trading price to take down such a large piece of pay per click market share. ValueClick in particular does seem like a company with the complementary assets, existing clientele and market cache’ necessary to take a business like Miva’s that is struggling to be profitable and significantly expand the margins by reaching the critical mass of advertisers necessary to ramp profitability quickly. With an existing CPA (Cost Per Action) network and display advertising business that reaches 74% of US internet users, its quite likely that ValueClick’s reach and brand name would bring many more advertisers into the fold quickly and also that existing advertisers would be more likely to bid higher and spend more through a ValueClick ad network than they would through Miva owned network.

The company whose name seems to be most frequently mentioned as a takeover candidate for ValueClick is called Think Partnership, (THK). Think Partnership (hereinafter THK) is in many respects similar to ValueClick, albeit a smaller version as it is most widely known for the affiliate marketing platform (Kowabunga) within its “network” segment and the lead generation operations within its “Direct” segment.

THK’s Kowabunga is a highly regarded player in the affiliate marketing space that has long been a thorn in the side of ValueClick, whose “Commission Junction” is the largest player in the affiliate marketing space. While Kowabunga is much smaller than Commission Junction, many high profile corporate names have either chosen Kowabunga over ValueClick’s Commission Junction when they started their affiliate program (like Microsoft and Yahoo Search Marketing’s affiliate programs ) or migrated to Kowabunga after testing the Commission Junction platform (like Intuit). Taking ownership of Kowabunga would make ValueClick’s Commission Junction not only the largest affiliate program provider, but also the “go to” provider for the largest names in technology, not to mention that the removal of a competitor like Kowabunga from the playing field might allow them to raise their percentage take on affiliate transactions.

While the lead generation operations within THK’s “Direct” segment are much smaller than ValueClick’s lead generation ops from a revenue standpoint, THK has actually had more success at maintaining strong margins while steering clear of Federal Trade Commission sanctions. Additionally, the specific niche’s served by THK’s direct segment (home based business owners and life stage niche marketing) would be complementary to ValueClick’s lead generation offerings.

Despite the obvious synergies of the THK businesses above with ValueClick, it is a third aspect that makes it most attractive to ValueClick. THK’s ValidClick AdExchange offers ValueClick an entry into the Pay Per Click space with what is arguably the most differentiated offering in the PPC space and also what is likely the fastest growing ad exchange. The ValidClick AdExchange platform combines a unique patent pending technology for eliminating click fraud combined with an exclusive technology alliance with Fair Isaac Corporation (FIC) that uses analytics based on artificial intelligence and patented profiling technologies that adapt to each click and conversion, scoring publishers on their ability to drive conversions for advertisers. This new exclusive partnership with the company whose FICO score has become the standard in the lending industry makes the ValidClick Ad Exchange that much more attractive to a company wanting to differentiate themselves from the pack in the PPC space. It has also caused many of the second tier networks to run their own ads through ValidClick’s Ad Exchange to take advantage of its Click Fraud protection.

Recent comments by THK management and our own channel checks in several verticals suggest that the ValidClick exchange is experiencing exponential growth in clicks, searches and revenues generated. In the verticals we tested, we saw more than 100% growth in Q2 over the record clicks and revenue achieved by the network during Q1 2008. This Google-like growth stands in stark contrast to the declines in revenue experienced by most of the other Pay Per Click search networks (including Miva) over the last few quarters as Click Fraud concerns seem to have scared more and more advertisers away from second tier PPC networks. These concerns appear to be making the ValidClick’s click fraud prevention technology and alliance with Fair Isaac that much more appealing.

Despite the success of the ValidClick network, THK’s stock has recently traded down to a historical low, with a market cap settling in the $27 million range. With its existing business pieced together by acquisitions totaling nearly $90 million over the last three years, several business segments that appear to be flourishing and a company campaign to divest non core assets that could raise cash greater than its existing market cap, we believe that THK might look like a tremendous bargain to ValueClick and more importantly, a quick entry into the PPC space with a unique offering whose technology solves the biggest problem (Click Fraud) plaguing the second tier PPC networks.

We believe that ValueClick is uniquely positioned to make waves in the Pay Per Click space if it should make an attempt to enter the fray. We also believe that the timing is perfect for such an entry. The current Yahoo conundrum that will likely result in only two of the big three Per Per Click networks surviving combined with the capitulation among investors in the small cap online advertising names makes the “perfect storm” and possibly a historic opportunity for a well financed player with a good name to stake a claim to be the new “first tier” player in this highly profitable space. ValueClick’s sterling balance sheet (over $160 million with no debt) and scale would likely be attractive to MIVA and/or THK’s management team if they are in fact entertaining offers. We believe that they are and note that both have recently announced steps to divest of assets that would not be appealing to a ValueClick or other similarly situated suitor.

We also note that timing is of the essence as there may be some increase in the valuations accorded many of the online advertising assets when Interactive’s (IACI) spin off is complete next month and they begin shopping with their $1.5 billion cash war chest and a stock currency whose valuation will be based on the prospects of Ask.com rather than many of the slower growth businesses that plagued IACI’s valuation for so long. It will likely take just one deal by IACI, CBS’s (CBS) recently acquired CNET or one of the other media players who would benefit from owning an ad network to make the valuations move back to historical norms - much higher than where the currently reside.

Primetime and scheduled TV are losing their impact as consumers create their own entertainment lineups. Digital video recorders (DVRs) and video-on-demand (VOD) allow viewers to watch content on their own schedule and avoid traditional TV advertising.

At the same time, the slowing economy drives advertisers to demand the greatest return on their advertising investments. With interactive digital platforms allowing more measurability, the business case for traditional TV advertising is becoming increasingly weak.

VOD would seem well-positioned to capture a rising share of ad spending, but the way consumers use it may limit its potential as an ad medium.

Most cable TV operators offer free VOD content in combination with pay-per-view options, but time-shifting with DVRs is proving more popular.

According to Comcast—the leading cable operator in the US with 14.7 million subscribers—the most popular free VOD content is karaoke, music videos and programs for children.

VOD’s ad potential is somewhat limited by use. An August 2007 study by IBM indicated that only 48% of US adult Internet users had used VOD.

eMarketer estimates that VOD is available in one-third of TV households today, and will reach over 60% of households by 2012.

Content is the big driver of VOD usage. ChoiceStream data from December 2007 shows there would be greater viewership of VOD if there were “more content of interest.” Notably, however, 57% of respondents said they would not watch more VOD even if the content were better. Clearly price, awareness and usability are also factors in VOD usage.

Increasing the VOD audience (and ad revenue potential) may depend in part on advertisers and marketers: Better content, supported by ads, combined with VOD awareness and education campaigns, could be part of the solution.