<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Understanding Search Volume</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/</link>
	<description>Domain Name Investing &#38; Web Development</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 09:36:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: tandblekninng med laser</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-2276</link>
		<dc:creator>tandblekninng med laser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 09:36:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-2276</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;tandblekninng med laser...&lt;/strong&gt;

[...]e It is in reality a great and useful piece of info. I am satisfied that you 2l[...]...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>tandblekninng med laser&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>[...]e It is in reality a great and useful piece of info. I am satisfied that you 2l[...]&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marcel</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-2131</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:59:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-2131</guid>
		<description>Hi, I am located in The Netherlands and I have been experimenting with exact domains and found out that it&#039;s really easy to get on page one in Google for an exact domain. I am not an SEO Guru but just apply basic SEO rules on my websites. It is a 2 word domain and I think it will be harder with just one word domain because of the competition. It also is not a very competitive word but it shows 100.000 EXACT searches per month on global. I am currently on position 6 but the website above tells my I am on #5 but what I see is what I think it is on so #6 for me. From Google this gives me about 12 to 16 visitors per day and about 5 to 10 from Yahoo and others.

I reached this spot in exact 3 months after Google indexed my website. It started on page 4 then to page 5 and after a wile it just started climbing every few weeks and days. After I updated everything and replaced the copied text with original content it went down from position 19 to position 52 and after a week it jumped back to the top of page 3 and after another week it was on page one #9 and started climbing every few days to position 6 were it is now for 1 week. And the search term has 6,660,00 search results in Google. So #6 for me is a good result.

I did expect more traffic and found other lists like the one in this topic telling me the percentage of the traffic I would get. There are no advertisements from Google on this search but I expect that the 4 Youtube results on top of my website take away most of the traffic. So I hope that I can top them to get the #1 spot and then just see what the results are. We are currently updating it again to see what that does.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, I am located in The Netherlands and I have been experimenting with exact domains and found out that it&#8217;s really easy to get on page one in Google for an exact domain. I am not an SEO Guru but just apply basic SEO rules on my websites. It is a 2 word domain and I think it will be harder with just one word domain because of the competition. It also is not a very competitive word but it shows 100.000 EXACT searches per month on global. I am currently on position 6 but the website above tells my I am on #5 but what I see is what I think it is on so #6 for me. From Google this gives me about 12 to 16 visitors per day and about 5 to 10 from Yahoo and others.</p>
<p>I reached this spot in exact 3 months after Google indexed my website. It started on page 4 then to page 5 and after a wile it just started climbing every few weeks and days. After I updated everything and replaced the copied text with original content it went down from position 19 to position 52 and after a week it jumped back to the top of page 3 and after another week it was on page one #9 and started climbing every few days to position 6 were it is now for 1 week. And the search term has 6,660,00 search results in Google. So #6 for me is a good result.</p>
<p>I did expect more traffic and found other lists like the one in this topic telling me the percentage of the traffic I would get. There are no advertisements from Google on this search but I expect that the 4 Youtube results on top of my website take away most of the traffic. So I hope that I can top them to get the #1 spot and then just see what the results are. We are currently updating it again to see what that does.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan K</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-1424</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:59:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-1424</guid>
		<description>This is an amazing analysis of not only figuring out what to expect an existing site to bring in when referring to visitors, but also when researching niches and where to concentrate your focus.

I&#039;m going to be whipping up a spreadsheet based on these values you put out there to quickly plug in the search competition and the # of searches to quickly return a ballpark value.  If nothing else you could use these values relative to one another to help you decide between what site to market next, etc... but my guess is this is a lot more accurate than many would believe.

Thanks for the excellent post!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an amazing analysis of not only figuring out what to expect an existing site to bring in when referring to visitors, but also when researching niches and where to concentrate your focus.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to be whipping up a spreadsheet based on these values you put out there to quickly plug in the search competition and the # of searches to quickly return a ballpark value.  If nothing else you could use these values relative to one another to help you decide between what site to market next, etc&#8230; but my guess is this is a lot more accurate than many would believe.</p>
<p>Thanks for the excellent post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: terek</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-1372</link>
		<dc:creator>terek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:39:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-1372</guid>
		<description>@michael - Thank you, seems I was doing a broad search. pretty accurate formula.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@michael &#8211; Thank you, seems I was doing a broad search. pretty accurate formula.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-1369</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:21:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-1369</guid>
		<description>Interesting post. There is definitely a scale and diminishing results factor when you get into 2.2M search terms.

Also, local results along with Google&#039;s News and other items affect things. A lot of that wasn&#039;t a factor when the AOL data leaked.

--David</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting post. There is definitely a scale and diminishing results factor when you get into 2.2M search terms.</p>
<p>Also, local results along with Google&#8217;s News and other items affect things. A lot of that wasn&#8217;t a factor when the AOL data leaked.</p>
<p>&#8211;David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-1367</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:49:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-1367</guid>
		<description>Great post.  I like quantitative analysis like this.  This just provides another measure to apply to the level of a sites success other than simple pagerank, SERP&#039;s etc.  

Great stuff!

Michael</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post.  I like quantitative analysis like this.  This just provides another measure to apply to the level of a sites success other than simple pagerank, SERP&#8217;s etc.  </p>
<p>Great stuff!</p>
<p>Michael</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-1366</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:10:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-1366</guid>
		<description>Great link and I respect anyone who can develop a double hyphen to get 40k visitors a month :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great link and I respect anyone who can develop a double hyphen to get 40k visitors a month <img src='http://dnmedia.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Sumner</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-1365</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Sumner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-1365</guid>
		<description>Nice tip Alan, thanks.  Another option is to search in a different browser where you aren&#039;t logged in, that way you don&#039;t have to keep logging in and out.  Also, a great tool which lets you check your rankings across multiple search engines really quickly is below:

http://www.mikes-marketing-tools.com/ranking-reports/ (not mine)

If anyone knows of any other good tools feel free to post below.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice tip Alan, thanks.  Another option is to search in a different browser where you aren&#8217;t logged in, that way you don&#8217;t have to keep logging in and out.  Also, a great tool which lets you check your rankings across multiple search engines really quickly is below:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.mikes-marketing-tools.com/ranking-reports/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mikes-marketing-tools.com/ranking-reports/</a> (not mine)</p>
<p>If anyone knows of any other good tools feel free to post below.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-1364</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:58:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-1364</guid>
		<description>As a FYI  -  its imperative to log out of your Google account if manually searching to see your site rankings by doing a keyword search. Google collects data based on your user experience and is known to show search results which are reflective of your past searching history if you are logged in.

Log out - then search to see how good your SEO skills really are.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a FYI  &#8211;  its imperative to log out of your Google account if manually searching to see your site rankings by doing a keyword search. Google collects data based on your user experience and is known to show search results which are reflective of your past searching history if you are logged in.</p>
<p>Log out &#8211; then search to see how good your SEO skills really are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Sumner</title>
		<link>http://dnmedia.com/understanding-search-volume/comment-page-1/#comment-1363</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Sumner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:58:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dnmedia.com/?p=355#comment-1363</guid>
		<description>Ty, great points, thanks for your contribution.  I wasn&#039;t aware that the global search volume can change based on country.  I was playing around with GAKT a bit tonight and noticed something interesting.  If you select all languages and all countries, the local doesn&#039;t always match the global, which surprised me.

@terek - the Google Adwords Keyword Tool is reporting 18,100 local (English &gt;&gt; United States) and 40,500 global exact monthly search volume for me, not 200k.  Also, I&#039;m seeing you as #5 in G.  If you take (40,500 * 0.545) * 0.0492 you get 1,086 expected clicks.  If you do the local you get (18,100 * 0.545) * 0.0492 you get 485 expected clicks.

I&#039;m thinking it&#039;s probably better to go off of English, United States local volume since global seems to be a bit inflated and flaky.  I&#039;ve tried quite a few after Ty&#039;s comments, and doing it that way seems to produce more accurate results.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ty, great points, thanks for your contribution.  I wasn&#8217;t aware that the global search volume can change based on country.  I was playing around with GAKT a bit tonight and noticed something interesting.  If you select all languages and all countries, the local doesn&#8217;t always match the global, which surprised me.</p>
<p>@terek &#8211; the Google Adwords Keyword Tool is reporting 18,100 local (English >> United States) and 40,500 global exact monthly search volume for me, not 200k.  Also, I&#8217;m seeing you as #5 in G.  If you take (40,500 * 0.545) * 0.0492 you get 1,086 expected clicks.  If you do the local you get (18,100 * 0.545) * 0.0492 you get 485 expected clicks.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m thinking it&#8217;s probably better to go off of English, United States local volume since global seems to be a bit inflated and flaky.  I&#8217;ve tried quite a few after Ty&#8217;s comments, and doing it that way seems to produce more accurate results.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

