KEI Concerns and CID Alternative
Like many folks, I have been using KEI for some time
now to determine what keywords I should target with my web site. And this has
led me to becoming concerned with the results KEI provides and the keywords
it suggests. I need to say here that my concern is very subjective as many folks
are happily using KEI and don't seem to have a problem with it.
My main concern with KEI is that, by the way it works,
it strongly favours demand numbers without, I feel, sufficiently taking into
account the corresponding supply numbers.
I need to say here that I interpret supply numbers
as a representation of how competitive a keyword is. For example, if keyword
1 has a supply of 200,000 while keyword 2 has a supply of 5,000,000, then I
would consider keyword 2 as being more competitive than keyword 1.
And all things being equal, I would prefer to target
a keyword that is less competitive and with less demand, rather than a highly
competitive keyword that has a higher demand. The reason for this is that I
feel that I have a better chance of cornering a section of a less competitive
market than I do that of a highly competitive one.
Based on my concern with KEI, I have decided to create
an alternative. I have called this alternative "Competition Indexed Demand"
(CID). Now, CID works out the marketing potential of keywords in a similar way
to KEI but it uses a different formula, one that takes more into account the
supply numbers of keywords (or their competitiveness).
For example, using "ranking" as the starting
keyword with Overture, KEI suggests the following top 3 keywords,
Keyword........................Demand.....Supply.......KEI
nfl quarterback ranking........43,474.....75,800......24,934
nfl power ranking..............43,171....122,000......15,277
college basketball ranking.....71,149....541,000.......9,357
while CID suggests the following top 3 keywords,
Keyword.................................Demand......Supply.......CID
dick vitale college basketball ranking..16,983......33,400.......640
nfl quaterback ranking..................43,474......75,800.......427
vote nba power ranking...................3,129......30,200.......394
Comparing the 2 sets of results, you can see how CID
favours lower competition compared to KEI. I have now used CID for quite a number
of keyword research projects and have found that not only it favours lower competition,
but it also suggests keywords that, I feel, have a better demand-supply balance.
Given that CID is an alternative to KEI, you now have
to make a decision when doing your keyword research in order to determine the
marketing potential of the best keywords to use. The decision is: shall I use
KEI or CID? The answer to this question is straightforward: if you want to focus
on high demand then use KEI, and if you want to focus on lower competition,
then use CID.
Furthermore, based on my obervations of KEI and CID
results, I have felt the need to come up with 2 rules to avoid both KEI and
CID generating what I feel are inappropriately high numbers. My observation
has been that these high numbers are generally generated because the demand
and/or supply numbers are too high.
These 2 rules are:
- "the 100 thousand demand rule" which states
that "any keywords whose demand numbers are above 100 thousands should
be ignored",
- "the 10 million supply rule" which states
that "any keywords whose supply numbers are above 10 million should be
ignored".
Applying these 2 rules to KEI and/or CID will help
you determine more realistically the marketing potential of keywords.
In conclusion, CID should be seen as an alternative
to KEI and not as replacement for KEI. The reason for this is that CID focusses
on the competitiveness of keywords while KEI focusses on the demand.
PS. I have not currently released the CID formula as
I am concerned about Copyright issues. However, you can download my program
Keywords Analysis to work out both the KEI and CID of keywords: Keywords Analysis
Serge M Botans
==============================
Serge M Botans is the CEO
of the SEO
Resource web site
www.cattle-ramp-seo.com
==============================
Copyright © Serge M Botans, Melbourne, Australia,
February 2005 |
