Advertising
The 100 Most Expensive Keywords on Google
The 100 Most Expensive Keywords on Google
What do lawyers do with all of those legal fees that they generate?
Apparently, they throw it at cost-per-click advertising on Google AdWords.
According to today’s infographic on the 100 most expensive keywords on Google by WebpageFX, search phrases related to legal services make up the vast majority of the rankings with 78 of 100 search phrases.
Why Lawyers?
The average cost across all industries for CPC advertising was $1.58 per click in 2015.
However, Google has has billions of available keywords, and the cost for specific keywords can range dramatically based on a number of factors. Some phrases are worth pennies, while others can cost hundreds of dollars. It all depends on the relevance and the potential revenue that can be generated off of a particular search phrase.
Many law firms are willing to pay in the higher end of that spectrum, particularly for business related to personal injury claims and car accidents. Phrases such as “top personal injury attorneys” or “Personal injury attorney Colorado” dominate the rankings, making them among the costliest search terms worldwide. The most expensive keyword of all is “San Antonio car wreck attorney”, which has an astronomical rate of $670.44 per click.
Keywords such as these are heavily location-based, while having strong regional competition. This drives up ad rates significantly.
That said, lawyers are still open to shelling out good money for these kinds of leads, as customers would be highly motivated while providing substantial revenue to their firms.
Location, Location
Of the 22 keywords that were not related directly to legal services, it was location-specific terms related to insurance and water damage that were among the most expensive.
Terms such as “Austin TX auto insurance” or “Flood restoration Chicago” commanded large bids, with $388.58 and $346.49 costs for each click respectively.
Ultimately, it turns out that 58 of 100 of the most expensive keywords on the list are related to location, with competition in California, Texas, Florida, and Colorado being the toughest.
Revenue
Charting Revenue: How The New York Times Makes Money
This graphic tracks the New York Times’ revenue streams over the past two decades, identifying its transition from advertising to subscription-reliant.

When it comes to quality and accessible content, whether it be entertainment or news, consumers are often willing to pay for it.
Similar to the the precedent set by the music industry, many news outlets have also been figuring out how to transition into a paid digital monetization model. Over the past decade or so, The New York Times (NY Times)—one of the world’s most iconic and widely read news organizations—has been transforming its revenue model to fit this trend.
This chart from creator Trendline uses annual reports from the The New York Times Company to visualize how this seemingly simple transition helped the organization adapt to the digital era.
The New York Times’ Revenue Transition
The NY Times has always been one of the world’s most-widely circulated papers. Before the launch of its digital subscription model, it earned half its revenue from print and online advertisements.
The rest of its income came in through circulation and other avenues including licensing, referrals, commercial printing, events, and so on. But after annual revenues dropped by more than $500 million from 2006 to 2010, something had to change.
NY Revenue By Year | Print Circulation | Digital Subscription | Advertising | Other | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2003 | $623M | $1,196M | $168M | $1,987M | |
2004 | $616M | $1,222M | $165M | $2,003M | |
2005 | $616M | $1,262M | $157M | $2,035M | |
2006 | $637M | $1,269M | $172M | $2,078M | |
2007 | $646M | $1,223M | $183M | $2,052M | |
2008 | $668M | $1,068M | $181M | $1,917M | |
2009 | $683M | $797M | $101M | $1,581M | |
2010 | $684M | $780M | $93M | $1,557M | |
2011 | $659M | $47M | $756M | $93M | $1,555M |
2012 | $681M | $114M | $712M | $88M | $1,595M |
2013 | $673M | $151M | $667M | $86M | $1,577M |
2014 | $668M | $172M | $662M | $86M | $1,588M |
2015 | $653M | $199M | $639M | $89M | $1,580M |
2016 | $647M | $232M | $581M | $94M | $1,554M |
2017 | $668M | $340M | $559M | $109M | $1,676M |
2018 | $642M | $400M | $558M | $148M | $1,748M |
2019 | $624M | $460M | $531M | $198M | $1,813M |
2020 | $597M | $598M | $392M | $196M | $1,783M |
2021 | $588M | $774M | $498M | $215M | $2,075M |
2022 | $574M | $979M | $523M | $233M | $2,308M |
In 2011, the NY Times launched its new digital subscription model and put some of its online articles behind a paywall. It bet that consumers would be willing to pay for quality content.
And while it faced a rocky start, with revenue through print circulation and advertising slowly dwindling and some consumers frustrated that once-available content was now paywalled, its income through digital subscriptions began to climb.
After digital subscription revenues first launched in 2011, they totaled to $47 million of revenue in their first year. By 2022 they had climbed to $979 million and accounted for 42% of total revenue.
Why Are Readers Paying for News?
More than half of U.S. adults subscribe to the news in some format. That (perhaps surprisingly) includes around four out of 10 adults under the age of 35.
One of the main reasons cited for this was the consistency of publications in covering a variety of news topics.
And given the NY Times’ popularity, it’s no surprise that it recently ranked as the most popular news subscription.
-
Money4 weeks ago
Visualizing the Assets and Liabilities of U.S. Banks
-
Education2 weeks ago
Ranked: The World’s Top 50 Endowment Funds
-
Markets4 weeks ago
Visualized: Real Interest Rates by Country
-
Politics2 weeks ago
Charting the Rise of America’s Debt Ceiling
-
Money3 weeks ago
Comparing the Speed of Interest Rate Hikes (1988-2023)
-
Urbanization2 weeks ago
Ranked: The Cities with the Most Skyscrapers in 2023
-
War3 weeks ago
Map Explainer: Sudan
-
Urbanization2 weeks ago
Ranked: The World’s Biggest Steel Producers, by Country