Do you know how many hits YouTube gets per month? [find out]. YouTube
is a GIANT search engine. Plus, it’s owned by Google, the GIANT of all
giant search engines.
So marketing your stuff on YouTube is a no-brainer.
Make product videos – reviews, demonstrations, anything. Give them
keyword optimized titles, write a good keyword optimized description, and
link to your website(and specifically that product page) from the description.
You can even see which keywords related to your market are being searched
for a lot, and create videos that tailor to those specific ones.
For example, one specific type of product that I sell gets a decent amount of
searches per month. I created a review video, called it “Product Name
36
Review – Is It Any Good?” and put it up on YouTube.
I then forgot about it, only to see 2 months later that it had received over
3500 views! That’s crazy! Not all of those people came to my site, but my
brand still got that much exposure.
You can even market your video by sharing it on social media – the more
views a video gets and the more likes it gets, the higher up it will rank in
YouTube.
Quick Tip: If you drop-ship, you don’t need to have the physical product to
make a video – you can even do a presentation with PowerPoint and record
the screen along with your voice.
Resources:
An Excellent Post By Brian Dean On Great YouTube SEO
How LuxyHair Built A 7 Figure Ecommerce Business Using YouTube
A Post by HubSpot On Using YouTube For Ecommerce
Further, the protocol overhead (headers) requires certain amount of the channel capacity, as in any network. Therefore, the available nominal transfer capacity of a channel is used rather inefficiently. E.g. GSM network offers typically 9.6 or 14.4 kbits/s transfer capacity for both downlink and uplink directions for the application data over CSD, although the nominal capacity of a logical channel used is ca 30 kbits/s.
·
Bandwidth restrictions and network topology: In the case of many
wireless networks, such as in cellular or satellite networks, communication
channels have much less transfer capacity than wireline network. This is caused
by the fact that the used modulation and channel allocation schemes designed
for voice traffic have rather modest upper bounds. Further, the wireless
communications are much more error prone than the wireline communications and
require much redundancy in the channel coding of the payload. In spite of the
redundancy in the channel coding that makes correcting bit errors in large
scale possible at the receiving end,
retransmission of the data is required more often than in the wireline
network.
Further, the protocol overhead (headers) requires certain amount of the channel capacity, as in any network. Therefore, the available nominal transfer capacity of a channel is used rather inefficiently. E.g. GSM network offers typically 9.6 or 14.4 kbits/s transfer capacity for both downlink and uplink directions for the application data over CSD, although the nominal capacity of a logical channel used is ca 30 kbits/s.
The wireless IP network over
GSM infrastructure, GPRS[1] will
offer basically a variable capacity up to 172 kbits/s. In practice, it is expected that the transfer
capacity remains around 100 kbits/s. UMTS[2] has the promise to provide 2 Mbits/s for
both uplink and downlink in a
connection. Wireless LANs offer then 1- 10 Mbits/s. The fact is and seems to
persist in the foreseeable future that the transfer capacity of the wireline
networks is several orders of magnitude higher than that of the wireless
network are of interest in this context.
Some wireless networks offer
asymmetric transfer capacity for up- and downlink. Especially GPRS can in
principle offer this, but in practice only when there is not too much voice
traffic. The reason is that voice traffic needs the same number of uplink and
downlink logical channels allocated. Thus, allocating e.g. two downlink logical
channels for a data connection and one uplink channel for it prohibits one
voice call to be set up, even if there is one uplink logical channel free. The
asymmetry in channel allocation gives only then the full benefit, when there
are both such applications that need more uplink capacity than downlink
capacity and vice versa and the need of the applications for channels is in
balance (within a cell).
