EQUTE — Advertisers are finding out that local ads are well worth the price.

New numbers from comScore show that despite the higher cost, advertisers are figuring out the fact that their money is being spent efficiently.

“Locally targeted ads are an increasingly important component of the digital ad landscape because they represent a more efficient allocation of ad dollars,” said comScore vice president Brian Jurutka. “comScore’s new capability allows us to identify and quantify these opportunities to deliver additional value to both advertisers and publishers alike.”

That efficiency does come at a price.

“Our research indicates that advertisers understand the value of locally targeted ads and are willing to pay a premium for them — anywhere from 20 to 100 percent — depending on the geography and vertical,” said Matt Booth, senior vice president and program director, Interactive Local Media, BIA/Kelsey.

comScore found that advertisers in Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Chicago and San Francisco put about 10 percent of their ad dollars into local ads.

The study found that between 9 and 11 percent of display ads in the four markets among all publisher sites were locally targeted. San Francisco (11 percent) and Washington D.C. (11 percent) had a relatively higher share of ads being locally targeted, while Atlanta (10 percent) and Chicago (9 percent) were slightly lower. Not surprisingly, in the regional/local site category — which includes sites like Yahoo! Local, Citysearch and Yelp — the share of display ads that were locally targeted was substantially higher at between 23-33 percent among the four markets.

These numbers give evidence to a growing personalization of the Internet. It’s no secret that consumers respond to personal messages, but new leaps in local advertising have made it much easier to craft those messages. Local and regional targeting takes longer, costs more and turns away from a national audience, but it simply works better. As Internet users get more and more used to online advertising, they are going to look for something that makes them feel less like one of a billion people online and look for ads and services that touch them closer to home.

Consumer still can’t see their advertiser, but it is easier to trust someone nearby — even if they aren’t.

EQUTE — John McCarthy has an interesting article over at Adotas, and it makes one think about what SEO has become — a buzzword for cheap traffic.

McCarthy provides an interesting anecdote about a client of his who sought to use SEO to drive more leads to his technology company. A few competitors said they were getting good results with organic SEO, so he thought of trying it himself. He hired McCarthy and asked him to get the SEO train going.

But instead of leading him on with false promises, McCarthy told his client that SEO was not right because of the sparse content on his site and the long road to organic rankings.

So when should marketers tell their clients (or themselves) to try something else?

Simple, when time and money is of the essence and there is nothing for the search spiders to crawl.

Unless you or a client is prepared for a long wait for results, paid search rankings are a much better way to get things moving — while getting the SEO train moving as well, McCarthy said.

Ideally, sites are created and build up SEO either naturally or by design, but many sites are simply better designed for paid search. But with SEO becoming the buzzword it is, there is a slew of people looking to capitalize with little investment in the down economy. Site owners and business owners should think about whether or not they really need SEO help. With some examination, many people will find that SEO isn’t worth the money, and paid search or other tactics could get them over the recession hump without all the mess.

EQUTE — An adviser to the European Union’s top court says Google does not infringe on trade marks by selling trademarked keywords.

Several brands have been in a legal battle with the search and advertising giant because their official ads were forced to compete with any rabble with a higher bid than them.

Louis Vuitton, for example, was fighting to boot manufactures of knockoff designer goods using their brand name out of search advertising.

“Advocate General Poiares Maduro considers that Google has not infringed trade mark rights by allowing advertisers to buy keywords corresponding to registered trademarks,” the European Court of Justice said in a statement.

Though the court has yet to make the ruling, the court’s decisions typically fall in line with their court advisers.

Google’s lawyers said the likely ruling came because consumers are smart enough to know the difference between real and fake ads.

“We believe that selecting a keyword to trigger the display of an ad does not amount to trademark infringement, and that consumers benefit from seeing more relevant information,” said Google lawyer Harjinder Obhi wrote in a statement. “Consumers are smart and are not confused when they see a variety of ads displayed in response to their search queries.”

The decision also hinges on the fact that Google doesn’t directly make money from the trademarked name.

Google argued that they make money by Internet users clicking on the keyword, and the decision to click or not belongs to the user.

The decision could end a seven-year fight — Google is appealing a unfavorable decision brought against it by a French court in 2006.

Google’s trademark policy varies across the world. In some countries, mainly in Europe, Google blocks names from being chosen as keywords once it’s received proof that they are protected trademarks — not so in the U.S.

The decision could mean that blocking trademarked keywords could soon end around the world.