Ad and media agencies amateurs at search optimisation
Virtually all of Australia’s major media and advertising agencies are failing to do even the basics to ensure that their web sites show up on Google, research by Mumbrella has revealed.
In practices that would see their clients lose millions of dollars if they behaved in the same way, many agencies have sacrificed visibility to search engines in order to have all-singing, all-dancing animated Flash sites. In addition, most have not considered the words that Google users will see appear on the page if they do find them. And not a single one of the 20 agencies agencies that Mumbrella examined had an active paid search campaign against their names.
Meanwhile, a large proportion of agencies fall back on a global network site, which often consists of no more local content than contact details for the Australian office – and in the case of media agency PHD, even that was missing.
Mumbrella assigned scores out of 25 to each of the agencies, based on four criteria.
Most importantly, we examined PageRank. Named after founder Larry Page, this is given to a site by Google to assess its relative importance.
We also gave marks out of five depending how high up the Google results page the agency came when just its name was typed in.
If an agency had decided to sacrifice search optimisation in order to use Flash, we gave zero out of five. Those who stuck with html received five marks.
And we would have granted five points if agencies had bought key words against their name in the paid search column. But not a single one did.
We made no assessment of the quality of the sites, as the point of this exercise was purely to assess how well agencies understand search, and how easily web users would be able to find them.
In the end, Mitchells media agency scored most highly, while GPY&R was the easiest ad agency to find. Mumbrella will be examing other types of agency on a future occasion.
This exercise was in part inspired by a blog posting at the marketing blog Free Beer, in which WA marketer Bret Treasure observed:
“Either they have as much work as they want or they don’t believe that potential clients search the internet for advertising agencies. Maybe they rely on being in the Yellow Pages.”
He adds: “None of the sites have Title tags that include any reference to ‘advertising’, ‘media’ or ‘marketing’. This is part of the reason why none of their sites are found when you type ‘advertising agency’ into Google.”
“”Clearly none of the agencies understand that you can control the way Google presents your search result. Many of the sites don’t work if you omit the www; this can be fixed with a simple re-direct. And it seems none of them know how to get a full Flash site properly indexed by Google, thereby increasing web traffic.”
Media agencies
IKON
Second on Google, easy to find.
- Google PageRank: 2/10
- Positioning on Google: 4/5
- Paid: No 0/5
- Flash: Yes 0/5
- Score: 6/25 = 24%
INITIATIVE
If there’s a local site we couldn’t find it. Mind you, we couldn’t find the global site via Google either. In the end, we gave up and found them by searching for holding company Interpublic Group. From there, we were able to find the global web site which has only some basic contact details for Australia
- Score = 0
PHD
Tap in PHD, and you’re probably never going to find it. A link to PHD’s global network appears only on Google’s ninth page. No doubt they’d argue that’s because it’s a common abbreviation – but hey, they chose the name. It’s not really going to help the Australian surfer anyway – once you find your way into the page listing their international locations, they’ve forgotten to add PHD Australia, which rebadged from Total last year. It’s nearly as bad searching on the phrase “PHD media agency Australia” – the first link that comes up is rival retail shop PHD Creative. PHD Australia is back in ninth.
- Google PageRank: 2/10
- Positioning on Google: 0/5
- Flash: Yes – 0
- Paid: No – 0/5
- Total: 2/25 = 8%
MEDIACOM
Mediacom Australia comes up first on Google – the non-Flash site probably helps. No paid keyword search though.
- Google PageRank: 2/10
- Positioning on Google: 5/5
- Flash: No – 5/5
- Paid: No – 0/5
- Total: 12/25 = 48%
MEDIAEDGE CIA
While we could easily find a web site for the global network, it contains no more local info than a couple of contact names and phone numbers. If there is local site, we couldn’t find it via Google
- Score: 0
MITCHELL COMMUNICATION GROUP
Mitchells gets the basics right. Tap in Mitchells or Mitchell Communications Group and its top. Of course, it no-doubt helps your Google juice if your chairman is the most famous media buyer in the country.
- Google PageRank: 5/10
- Positioning on Google: 5/5
- Flash – No: 5/5
- Paid – No: 0/5
- Score: 15/25 = 60%
MINDSHARE
We could easily find the Mindshare global web site, but in terms of local content all we could find was an old press release.
- Score: 0
OMD
Again, just a global web site with minimal info about the Australian operation.
- Score: 0
RAZOR MEDIA
We just couldn’t find them on Google. Not even by typing in extra terms like “media agency” and Australia. In the end we got there via a link on digital boss Ryf Quail’s blog.
- Google PageRank: 4/10
- Positioning on Google: 0/5
- Paid- No: 0/5
- Flash – Yes: 0/5
- Total: 4/25 = 16%
STARCOM
While the top two listings on Google were for the Starcom and Starcom MediaVest networks (can anyone explain the difference please?), what was confusing was that the third, .com.au listing was for an entirely different company called Starcom.
As far as we could tell, there is no local site or localised content apart from basic contact details.
- Score: 0
UNIVERSAL MCCANN
They did well on Google – second item, after the international network. Not sure if it can be called a site though. It’s one page, decorated with a photo of MD Jeff Cressall. But this scoring system is only about search, not content.
- Google PR: 2/10
- Positioning on Google 4/5
- Paid – No: 0/5
- Flash – No: 5/5
- Total: 11/25 = 44%
Advertising agencies
BADJAR OGILVY
This is where our scoring system wobbles a little. The Badjar Ogilvy site currently consists of a single holding page. However, the highish Google Page Rank suggests something more substantial used to reside on the URL. When Google next upgrades the pAGErANK(it happens every three months or so), that score may well fall.
- Google Page Rank: 4/10
- Google ranking: 5/5
- Flash: No: 5/5
- Paid search -No: 0/5
- Score: 14/25 = 56%
BMF
First on the list, clear as day. Tough if you haven’t got Flash 8 though.
- Google Page Rank: 5/10
- Google ranking: 5/5
- Flash: Yes – 0/5
- Paid search: No 0/5
- Score: 10/25 = 40%
DDB
Second, after the global network. The site itself consists of a single Flash-based page, which basically acts as a scrolling billboard, not that Google will be able to see the contents
- Google PageRank: 5/10
- Google ranking: 4/5
- Flash – yes: 0/5
- Paid search: No: 0/5
- Score: 9/25 = 36%
EURO RSCG
Second, after the global network. Although there is a page architecture, it’s still mainly Flash-based so no Google magic there. No paid search from Euro, although adbrands.net has bought the key word, albeit linking to a profile of Euro RSCG France.
- Google PageRank: 5/10
- Google ranking: 4/5
- Flash – yes: 0/5
- Paid search – no: 0/5
- Score: 9/25 = 36%
GPY&R
Finally! An agency that appears to understand basic SEO. They haven’t nailed it in the info that’s displayed on Google though.
- Google PageRank: 5/10
- Google ranking: 5/5
- Flash – no: 5/5
- Paid search – no: 0/5
- Score: 15/25 = 60%
JWT
As you’d expect, the world’s most famous ad agency isn’t hard to find on Google. The network is top, the Australian site second. It’s all Flash though. Again, no paid search although others have bought the keyword.
- Google PageRank: 4/10
- Google ranking: 4/5
- Flash – yes: 0/5
- Paid search – no: 0/5
- Score: 8/25 = 32%
Leo Burnett
It seems churlish to chide Leo Burnett for being search muppets when their Flash site has won major awards. But hey, we are churlish. Less impressive is the fact that there are two, different global network sites, one with a French domain, one with .com; with the French one scoring more highly. But neither one has anything local beyond contact details, so nul points.
- Score: 0
McCann Ericksonn
Second after the global site. While this is a well executed and creative site, it’s in Flash, so invisible to search engines unless you do clever things. That perhaps explains that while the gateway page scores a PR of 3, the individual offices have a zero PR.
- Google PageRank: 0/10
- Google ranking: 4/5
- Flash – yes: 0/5
- Paid search – no: 0/5
- Score: 4/25 = 16%
M&C Saatchi
- Google PageRank: 4/10
- Google ranking: 3/5
- Flash – no: 5/5
- Paid search – no: 0/5
- Score: 12/23 = 48%
Saatchi &Saatchi
With senior level departures and the refusal of the agency to return press phone calls , it’s not surprising to see the agency’s Australian outpost having a similarly level of visibility on Google. While the global site is the top link, the Australian .com.au version isn’t to be found via Google. Indeed, rival M&C Saatchi ranks higher. Meanwhile the local content is just a page on the global site.
- Score: 0
Love the article and it highlights how badly the major ad agencies are adjusting to the digital revolution, but I don’t agree with you including Paid search as a metric.
In my experience, a good search optimized web site does not need paid search.
Keep the good work up…
User ID not verified.
This is a fair indication, although it isn’t news to those people working in proper Digital Agencies.
Traditional Media Agencies have created digital, become digital but do not really understand digital – well not yet!
Let’s hope that changes for their customers soon!
User ID not verified.
Couldn’t agree more with you regarding most agencies not having a grasp of SEO. Its the same here in Newcastle. Lots of flash sites which don’t search well, load slowly and encourage little repeat traffic.
At Sticky we pride ourselves on the fact that our sites search so well, not just for our name, but for each targeted keyword. Its one of the reasons our agency site has the highest Alexa traffic score in this market.
However, I agree with Gordon regarding Paid Search. Your study was on SEO not SEM. Why would anyone need paid if they were first organic listing for the same search term?
I noticed a big agency Twitterer(who specialises in SEO) suggested to you that WOM was the most important source of new biz. Very true, but generating enquiries online is still relevant. And shouldn’t we practice what we preach anyway??
Great story Tim.
User ID not verified.
Nice piece.
It’s pretty bad that some agencies ‘ sites didn’t show up when you searched their name, but I don’t think Pagerank should hold much weight as a measure of SEO success / failure in this case. Since a large proportion of pagerank is made up of how many other sites are referring to the webpage in question and the corresponding page rank of THOSE sites, ad agency sites are likely to have lower pagerank simply because there won’t be as many people pointing to, say, the Universal McCann site as there will be to, say, techcrunch.com (more people read techcrunch, and more people point to articles on techcrunch from their own sites = large pagerank for techcrunch).
Also, most agencies still rely heavily on their Account Management teams to develop new business – the work an ad agency does is usually B2B and high involvement, so I’d think SEO is maybe not as important as it is for, say, FMCG’s or getting a local plumber because a customer’s search for an ad agency would involve much more than simply google. Not that this is an excuse for not having optimised sites, but maybe an explanation (?)
User ID not verified.
It’s a moot point. Why would you use an ad agency for direct marketing in the digital space? It’s like trying to buy meat from a hairdresser, they’re just not relevant in this space and will continue to fade away.
User ID not verified.
Most (not all) agencies have missed Search either paid or natural in a big way. The fundamentals of site design and the economics of Search are greatly misunderstood and undervalued both for their businesses and more importantly for their clients. The greater impact is the loss of traffic and hence the high reliance on other more expensive forms of advertising to generate traffic.
http://justinhind.wordpress.co.....te-design/
User ID not verified.
cue agency bashing from motivated parties … zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Ben, no motivation in getting a site developed properly?? It should be a fundamental to get a site developed so it can at least be found in a Search engine – shouldn’t it? Why would you not get the basics right to benefit from organic traffic, basics shouldn’t cost anything extra – it is a cost of entry.
User ID not verified.
fair point justin, it’s just comments like it ‘highlights how badly the major ad agencies are adjusting to the digital revolution’ that are moronic.
In my experience big agencies are only interested in producing movies – albeit 30 second ones – so it doesn’t surprise me at all.
Having said that – great article 🙂
It astounds me that for the last 10+ years the industry media has been trumpeting digital but traditional agency types still can’t get their heads around it. How much lead time do you need? How hard is it?
Sheesh!
User ID not verified.
true – there are lots of great examples where major ad agencies have got it very right, but people tend to forget the good and only highlight the bad. I don’t buy the BS about digital agencies only understanding digital. It is a communication channel and no one understands communication better than an ad agency, I can’t remember the last time a big idea came out of a digital production house and I’ve also seen questionable site development from digital only guys????
The essence of getting it right comes from process, diligence, time and sometimes budget.
Lets face it, for an agency’s website most prospective clients will visit it via direct entry. No one runs a generic search for “ad agency” or “creative agency” when selecting a partner.
User ID not verified.
What a load of wank. Think three letters – ROI. These agencies probably don’t need to have their sites listed number one in google or yahoo because they get most of their clients using traditional (and effective) methods.
Just another classic example of how SEO is not a cure-all solution to increasing brand awareness.
User ID not verified.
one thing this illustrates pretty well is ad/media agencies lack of activity in the actual advertising/media space. Most ad/media agencies encourage their B2B clients to utilise ATL comms … yet most don’t really practice it themselves.
Hey – nothing’s changed! How is this different from traditional advertising agencies never spending dollars on advertising, but preaching to their B2B clients that they “must be always be in market and be seen”. (Translates to: spend more money with us).
Honestly, I really don’t think the Heads of Marketing (that handle million dollar advertising accounts) are going to sit at their desk and google an ad agency to handle the business! LOL.
When marketing themselves, advertising agencies have got it right – do a good job and get talked about or build a personal relationship with the correct potential client contact.
Not to say that search isn’t important, but if you were to do a comparison ROI on time and money spent on it vs picking up the telephone and calling the head of marketing at a company and showcasing your work, I think you would agree the agencies have their priorities right.
PS. I am a media rep now, ex-agency.
User ID not verified.
I have a question that (kind of) relates to this.
Why do I almost never see an ad for an advertising agency? Before everyone says oooh it’s B2B and we have direct relationships with our clients – the same could be said of IBM’s enterprise business or KPMG’s audit services. They advertise. And I assume that they are told by their respective ad agencies to advertise. Their sales models for winning clients is also quite similar. (Small pool of possible clients, long lead time, specialised sale to small number of decision makers, big dollar amount for final sale)
Just a random wondering…
User ID not verified.
I dont know what’s wrong with your computer…type razor into google australia and we rank no.3 – type razor media and we rank no.1.
You cant have tried too hard.
In my view the only people visiting agency websites are competitors (and this article kinda proves my point) so I’d never pay for a click. But it raises a VERY valid points about our branded search.
Other than the facts being wrong it’s a nice article. I give it a 3 out of 10!
User ID not verified.
Hi Simon thanks for the 3 out of 10 – that gives me something to work on for next time! There’s an interesting conversation to be had about different versions of Google. I’ve just done it again, and there’s still nothing!
But in terms of who visits the site – I’m sure clients would too. Say a new prospect is due to come in to see you and has forgotten to take your address with them.
Funnily enough, I speak from more experience than I had let on: remember when I came to visit you one morning in my B&T days? When I realised at home I’d forgotten your address I couldn’t bloody find you on Google – in the end I had to ring a colleague in the office to look in my diary for me.
Although I’m obviously a muppet who was looking in the wrong place, it’s also a genuine business example. For whatever reason you were not visible to me.
If you’d been willing to shell out the seven cents for the paid click I’d have been very grateful. If you wanted, I’d have even paid you back when I got there…
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Nice work Tim, enjoy your missives.
We observed a lack of ‘search smarts’about 18 months ago and have made every effort to maximise our google-juice largely without paid search. A combination of factors, not just our flash site, gives us 9 out of 10 listings on the first page. One of the key factors is our blog which keeps FRANk topical and google-dynamic.
As social media gathers steam it might also be interesting to note how many ad agencies, digital agencies and media companies actually have a blog.
User ID not verified.
Hi Martyn,
Excellent point. Agency blogs is a topic we’ll be returning to soon…
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Good article – as it relates to Agencies & Media providers who can provide their product via this medium. Main stream advertising agencies who can’t (and aren’t set up to) sell their full service product digitally / over the web, have no reason to spend money doing so. In my experience, the only reason for any ‘face to face’ service organisation to have a web presence, is to solidify credibility with their customers, as a company that moves with the times.
User ID not verified.
c’mon what’s our score?
User ID not verified.
lots of media agencies or agency staff have a blog.
Having a blog is one thing, it being valuable to readers and clients is another thing entirely.
i guess it comes down to the culture of the agency.
Practicing what the agency preaches. The age old debate, why don’t all advertising agencies advertise?
SMART (the creative agency) had a largish Google Adwords campaign that went on for over a year. Last i read, they pulled it because it was costing them to much.
User ID not verified.
Thanks for the trackback Tim.
Lisa says that Heads of Marketing would be unlikely to search the Internet when considering a new agency. Be interesting to ask them. As for me, I’d be typing in [“award-winning” “advertising agency” sydney] and terms like “top ranking” “acclaimed” “largest” “most creative”. Such searches find some smaller agencies but none of the ones mentioned in my article or Tim’s.
Tim’s approach here assumes that people are actually LOOKING for your agency and know its name. Amazing that even then they are MIA but really, it’s the people that DON’T think of your name that you really want to attract.
Well established agencies win awards. Why would they not try and draw attention to that by optimising for ‘award’ and ‘ad agency’?
Personally I wouldn’t rank someone zero out of five for using full Flash. You can rank in Google with these sites, it’s just that the large agencies don’t care or don’t know how.
User ID not verified.
Funny, I thought that in business you judged the people and businesses you work with on the qualiy of the work they do for you, and not how flashily and wonderfully they spruiked themselves.
This is akin to judging how good a mechanic is by the car they drive. By the way my Audi’s going just as well as it was the day it left the showroom floor – but his ’67 Falcon looks like shit (and no I won’t be going anywhere else to get my car servoiced).
User ID not verified.
Tim,
Is is possible that these agencies (or some of them at least) are just the plumber with the leaking taps at home. Any chance that some of these groups have great SEO people but the boss is making the money helping others and doesn’t see much return on fixing their own taps. I think someone said it above….who wants a new ad campaign and goes to google to find a supplier? I think you can find better ways to utilise your in-house SEO person. OK having a flash home page isn’t overly smart, but I bet you could find an OK seo person in that agency too. I think you’re drawing a long bow if you say agencies can’t do or understand seo if their corporate site fails your few tests.
User ID not verified.
This is assuming that the majority of these companies are chasing the smaller companies out there looking for PPC and SEO specialists…
I dare say that the majority of the clients of these companies are made up from the large tier 1 companies, who (only my opinion) are not going to search in Google to determine which companies are on their next pitch list…
With this in mind, I don’t think we should be writing off their ability in areas such as SEO & PPC, without see their work first. As someone mentioned before… ROI! Which by the way different to each company… including the companies above 🙂
It also seems that everyone is so focused on separating Search Marketing from the rest of the mix… it is only one channel people. And it needs to be integrated with the rest of them…
I can understand that they probably need to lift their game… but so typical for ‘digital specialists’ to us this as a platform to be self righteous.
User ID not verified.
Hi there,
Apologies for being a bit late to the discussion but I thought I’d raise a point – and please correct me if I ma misguided. I thought there was technology already out there which allows for developers to embed HTML properties into Flash Media sites in order to SEO any site…
Thoughts?
User ID not verified.
Hi Nick,
You’re right. But my understanding is that none of them deploy it.
We return to this topic next week…
Interesting…
Look forward to the discussion next week.
User ID not verified.