<?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: Keyword List Mistakes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bostonseo.org/articles/53/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bostonseo.org/articles/53</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 18:50:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.bostonseo.org/articles/53/comment-page-1#comment-122</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2010 06:47:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bostonseo.org/?p=53#comment-122</guid>
		<description>Hi, 

You make the comment..

&#039;Google reads your keywords, ad copy and landing pages much differently than you may. By keeping your keyword lists narrowly focused, you have a much more accurate view of how Google see your Ads, Quality Score and landing pages.&#039;

And provide an example of &quot;water filtration&quot; vs &quot;water filter&quot; ad groups. However, I don&#039;t really see any data backing up this claim. Do you have data supporting this practice will increase QS? I think if we expected to take the time to separate ad groups at this level, there should be some evidence it will help!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, </p>
<p>You make the comment..</p>
<p>&#8216;Google reads your keywords, ad copy and landing pages much differently than you may. By keeping your keyword lists narrowly focused, you have a much more accurate view of how Google see your Ads, Quality Score and landing pages.&#8217;</p>
<p>And provide an example of &#8220;water filtration&#8221; vs &#8220;water filter&#8221; ad groups. However, I don&#8217;t really see any data backing up this claim. Do you have data supporting this practice will increase QS? I think if we expected to take the time to separate ad groups at this level, there should be some evidence it will help!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Hawkins</title>
		<link>http://www.bostonseo.org/articles/53/comment-page-1#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Hawkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 18:51:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bostonseo.org/?p=53#comment-14</guid>
		<description>Todd, 

I could feel the keyword bidding pain that you go through for home improvement clients for KeywordAdvisors.com 

Thanks for sharing your google adwords battle of mistakes. 

- Brian @ Pingo.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Todd, </p>
<p>I could feel the keyword bidding pain that you go through for home improvement clients for KeywordAdvisors.com </p>
<p>Thanks for sharing your google adwords battle of mistakes. </p>
<p>- Brian @ Pingo.com</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Stamoulis</title>
		<link>http://www.bostonseo.org/articles/53/comment-page-1#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Stamoulis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 12:23:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bostonseo.org/?p=53#comment-13</guid>
		<description>This is a great list and I agree with all of your points 100%!  

Next time, it would be great if you did an article on Media AD mistakes (newbies often spend way too much money much too fast)...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a great list and I agree with all of your points 100%!  </p>
<p>Next time, it would be great if you did an article on Media AD mistakes (newbies often spend way too much money much too fast)&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

