Is paid inclusion all that necessary? If you listen to the marketing hype of some search engines and directories, it’s the best form of advertising there is, but is it?
Quite frankly, I’m sold on Pay Per Click. It’s not that I’m against paid inclusion. I just don’t think it’s all that necessary. One of the benefits that are touted by paid inclusion companies is low cost advertising that doesn’t get kicked by high click fraud rates. One program, which I will not name, claims that pay per click companies like Google and Yahoo! experience 20%-35% click fraud. That’s an exaggerated number, I’m sure.
There is no evidence what that number is based on. To be sure, the search engines and Pay Per Click providers are underestimating their numbers, but I suspect any figure that is over 25%-35%. If the numbers were that high there’d be few advertisers.
But what’s that got to do with paid inclusion?
Yahoo! was one of the first companies to offer a paid inclusion program. But Yahoo! couldn’t guarantee inclusion into their directory if you paid them. You were only paying them to review your website. That just doesn’t seem right, does it?
I personally don’t think paid inclusion programs are all that necessary. You can do so much more and a lot more effective with SEO, social media marketing, an effective pay per click campaign, and some carefully placed branding display ads on like websites. Paid inclusion? Leave it for the birds.
