The In-House SEM Debate

I've been following this thread on Search Engine Watch which debates the effectiveness of in-house vs. outsourced SEM teams.  The topic is of particular interest to me because, well, I'm an in-houser.  There was an article that SEMPO posted, which was written by Marcel Media (a search marketing firm, natch), called 6 Reasons Why In-House Search Engine Marketing is Ineffective.  Here are the 6 reasons, in brief (and my comments on each):

1) SEM and SEO Campaigns are time intensive. This reason goes on to say that "SEM programs, unlike traditional media, are not 'set it and forget it'."  Duh...this is basic knowledge to seasoned SEMarketers.   Yes, it's time intensive - I spend roughly 20 hours a week on my campaigns.

2) SEM requires dedication.  See my comments in #1 - in-house teams can be just as dedicated.

3) SEM is very competitive and the market drives costs up.  Really?  Again, duh.

4) Successful SEM campaigns demand accurate tracking and analysis of effectiveness.  This one goes on to say "Many in-house SEM programs lack effective reporting."  Since when?  This firm seems to think that any company with an in-house team is just bogged down in the stone ages and does not have access to the same reporting tools that they do.

5) In-house SEM programs often are unaware of search engine policies.  What, and agencies have access to this information, while everyone else on the planet doesn't?  Please.
 
6) In-house SEM programs do not have support.  I'll concede to a point on this one - it goes on to say that "Many agencies enjoy the privilege of being able to take advantage of any upgrades
or testing before the general publics [sic] is allowed."  Perhaps, but search engines are not going to just support agencies and not the thousands of other advertisers who do it all on their own.

Basically, this firm is making some pretty broad generalizations about in-housers in order to gain more business.  I posted a couple responses in the SEW thread - while in-house SEM should not be deemed completely ineffective, I think there is value in outsourcing to a consultant where there's a lack of knowledge, then training and transitioning to in-house.   It's a more sensible and balanced approach, especially when you don't have the budget to outsource your campaigns completely (and even if you did, would you?).

So - any in-housers out there?  Tell me what you think and what your personal experiences have been.