KEI Formula & Results v Competition Ratio

Hi

So I use a KEI formula when I do keyword research.
I use my own spread sheet and manually entered data rather than using word tracker or any other program.

I have my own formula and I use a damping factor based on the competetiveness of the term. This is derived fromt he PPC value for position #1.

I also want to take into account the ratio between the number of pages returned and the number of competing pages.

KEI uses the number of direct competitors v number of searches. But surely if there are lots and lots of results pages but very little competitors this large ratio makes a difference.

Does anyone consider this when doing keyword research?
What are your thoughts on this?

Thanks

Honestly, I don't do any keyword research in general and at least upfront.

My rational: a website is what is, and you really can't easily make it something it is not.

Since I track visitation - and a small amount of people actually deep search when these phrases appear in tracking software - it's added to the list - with the assumption that a single person finding the website at #105... likely "if" brought to #1 there are many more.

The problem I have always had with KEI it does not factor is "intended use" e.g.

1. targeted searches for information, products, or services, or

2. WHERE AM I TODAY IN RANKS?

3. WHERE ARE MY CLIENTS IN RANKS FOR MY REPORTS?

4. CHECKING TO SEE IF THIS POTENTIAL CONTRACT IS WORTH DOING?

5. EXAMPLE: SEOCHAT - WHY DID GOOGLE RANK THESE GUYS FOR THIS ON MY TERM?

6. EXAMPLE: SEOCHAT - TAKE A LOOK AT THIS SPAM

7. PPC - HEEHEE ALL MY COMPETITORS JUST PAID FOR NOTHING

Also:

I was amazed to find a client RANKED #1 for Gift Baskets for 6 months - produce "ZERO" sales?????

How many people with gift baskets waste alot of effort on that???

Thus I rethinked how and what I determine are "MONEY PHRASES"

This solution also works well to determine content development directions where the guessaments of KEI are bias and often in favor of wasting productivity time.

Oh yes, very true.

Althoguh I use the data from KEI you have to put a common sense factor on it aswell.

Some of the data I get is also quite questionable, which is why I try several sources to corelate it. I do find using these metrics very useful. Its one of my most profitable services as well so I don't want to discount it!

I like having metrics and numbers I can use to make sense of things.

Thats an interesting thought on if someone deep searches then its worht targeting. The thing is though, if you don't have keyword targeted content then even deep searches won't find you.

I guess its 6 of one half a dozen of the other. I like doing keyword research though!

BTW - I've only played around with Google Trends on some terms I absolutely know the outcome... it isn't TOO bad - well beats wordtracker for google anyway.

Well ya agree - no matter what you do or use have disadvantages and biases.

I tend to stick to websites that are "sure bets" that I can help.

Any owner that has a 1-10 pager website isn't worthy of any research IMHO - since the likelihood that you can help is remote for all but the most obscure phrases without an enormous budget... and the latter is "most often" out of the question.

That said: a website owner must have insight into their industries and markets - while they may not be experts in phrase diversity - a "sellable product or service" must clearly be in their literature [whether on or offline] you don't have web info and brochures on golf balls if your selling lobster!

In these instances if the website is diverse - you throw it out and see what sticks, analyse that, adjust, and see what sticks, analyse that, adjust, and see what sticks, analyse that, adjust, and see what sticks, analyse that, adjust, and see what sticks... etc.

SEO MUST BE ongoing refinement - doing it once isn't overly helpful and wastes alot of time.

With practice it generally take 2-3 weeks to accuractely gauge... and more often than not - you are correct.