homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 50.19.206.49
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdWords
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: buckworks & eWhisper & skibum

Google AdWords Forum

This 77 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 77 ( 1 2 [3]     
Broad match huts relevancy?
johnnydequino




msg:1145668
 4:51 pm on Nov 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Now I know exactly what the problem is with google - it's broad match. I can't believe how many advertisers are using this function, and it's making most, if not all adword results irrelevant.

For google.com, since adwords are like banners, I guess this works. But for text links, such as the partner sites, irrelevancy is not good at all.

I think google should adopt a new policy that makes sense. If you own the exact match keyword, you should be placed higher than phrase or broad match.

Placement: Exact match, phrase, broad

Use CTR rates to mix/match.

I just refuse to compete with irrelevant advertisers. I was looking to increase my spending on google, but until the relevancy improves there is no way I try it.

Comments? Anyone else notice this?

jd

 

johnnydequino




msg:1145728
 10:58 am on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Broad match is a large budget advertiser dream move. I would guarantee that googles average cost per click has skyrocketed due to the change.

I have tried to combat broadmatch with exact match, and I seem to be winning and losing some battles.

Large advertisers will never understand or take the time to play the pay per click the way the game is supposed to be played, serving relevant, targeted results. I would argue the small advertiser who puts in the work would have a higher ROI and serve the best, relevant results to a visitor.

While google is private, they should tinker and rank results on CTR rate. Even though this may be a bit skewed, as ads in the top spots will get the most clicks by default. Tinker, google, tinker.

jd

Robino




msg:1145729
 2:56 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Large advertisers will never understand or take the time to play the pay per click the way the game is supposed to be played...

Why is this? Maybe they know how to play better.

If you're making money and meeting your ROI goals, you're doing things right. That's all there is to it!


jkwilson78




msg:1145730
 3:29 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Imagine if the big companies DID take the time. Their ROI would soar and they would throw even more money at Adwords and squeeze more small advertisers out.

Just because you are making a profit doesn't mean you can't improve. Let's hope the big guys don't figure this out for a while.

thaedge




msg:1145731
 3:53 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

New Article related to the topic:

[news.com.com...]

europeforvisitors




msg:1145732
 3:56 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Large advertisers will never understand or take the time to play the pay per click the way the game is supposed to be played...

Who says there's only way to "play the game"? Different advertisers have different needs and goals. For an affiliate site that uses PPC advertising to earn commissions on click-generated sales, immediate ROI is everything. But for a large business (or even an established smaller brick-and-mortar business), lead generation may be the real objective. If leads from AdWords/AdSense are cheaper or of better quality than leads from direct mail or a magazine ad, the traditional advertiser may happy to bid amounts that would make a small entrepreneurial PPC advertiser flinch.

airpal




msg:1145733
 4:17 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

(I thought this might amuse some people...)

Anti-anti-google article. There are tons of factual mistakes in here ... (unless lack of sleep is really affecting me), so let me amuse you.

"Google and Overture don't display the prices that advertisers pay for listings, but some of Overture's keyword prices are listed by rival FindWhat.com. "

Hmm, main page -> advertiser center -> tools -> view bid prices
And since this is such a non-cutthroat industry, i'm sure Findwhat would be nice enough to use their limited resources by providing us with OVERTURE's keyword prices instead of Findwhat's own keywords.

"Although Google has not disclosed the new threshold, the company now disables any ad that has a click-through rate lower than 0.5 percent."

Wasn't 1 percent posted numerous times on this board as the new threshold? Or was that a guesstimate?

"Overture has said it would launch broad matching tools in recent months, but it has not implemented it as of yet."

Umm, maybe I'm dazed and confused but I do remember seeing a Standard/Phrase/Broad option in my Account Center and even in a flash tutorial.

"The net effect of (the changes) is that we are now serving fewer ads than before, and the ads are of higher quality. That is reflected in the higher click-through rates we're now seeing for ads on Google," Salar Kamangar, a director of product management at Google, said.

Actual meaning: The net effect of the changes is that we are now serving far more ads at higher prices, and the ads are of lower quality. That is reflected in the higher revenue we are now seeing for ads in the Google Adwords division... another middle management officer going nowhere in life, said.

cline




msg:1145734
 4:48 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

When you're dealing with any form of broad matching it's always possible to come up with some odd search query that induces a match but for which the match is not appropriate.

Really, how many people are typing misspellings of Italian words into English-language Google? And even if they are searching in Italian, the fact that they chose the English interface strongly indicates they're bilingual, which means they can read the English ads.

It's not the broad matching feature that's harming relevancy; it's advertisers who don't know how to target. Give it time. They'll either be kicked out due to low CTRs, or beaten back by competitors employing SEMs who know to target accurately.

jkwilson78




msg:1145735
 5:08 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Really, how many people are typing misspellings of Italian words into English-language Google? And even if they are searching in Italian, the fact that they chose the English interface strongly indicates they're bilingual, which means they can read the English ads.

Great perspective. Never thought of that before. I agree with the lack of proper targeting by some advertisers. Personally I just use phrase and exact match and try to forget broad matching even exists.

SlyOldDog




msg:1145736
 6:40 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Really, how many people are typing misspellings of Italian words into English-language Google? And even if they are searching in Italian, the fact that they chose the English interface strongly indicates they're bilingual, which means they can read the English ads.

It's just an example. In fact the same thing happens on Google.it - try it. English language Ads display again!

If the expanded match was working for relevance it would display the Italian hotel ads. But they don't because the English ads have a much higher CPC.

Anyway - I am not Italian. My point is that if an ad with high CPC can show up for rubbish like this, what else is it showing for too?

If someone clicks that ad, it's probably going to cost the advertiser between 1 and 2 dollars. That's bad targeting. Google's fault or the customer's? I'd argue that the customer is always right.

rustyzipper




msg:1145737
 8:04 pm on Nov 20, 2003 (gmt 0)

Expanded Broad Match is awful - our cost per day triples from $50 to $150 with no measurable increase in sales.

I just want plain old Broad Match back, drop the Extended.

Google needs allow advertisers four options & they need to do this quickly:

Exact
Phrase
Broad Matching
Expanded Broad Matching

How hard would that be?

I'm going back to Phrase matching, which means I'll be spending less than I was with the old Broad Match.

This fiasco is so un-Google - They need to publicly aknowledge their error & make up to their customers.

caveman




msg:1145738
 3:13 pm on Nov 25, 2003 (gmt 0)

We've used AdWords for a little over a year now. Spend about $20K annually.

We *were* very happy with it. About 5000 kw's, broken into many groups.

But I agree that Expanded Broad Match is awful. The day we received notice of it we wrote G, objecting to their apparent attempt to sqeeze more $ out of advertisers. Cookie cutter response. So I called... very defensive.

Their attitude was "If you don't like it, add negative kw's."

OK, that requires a great deal of time for *no* gain on our part, just to get them to stop running our ads in irrelevant SERP's. I tried to explain that essentially G is now running ads on our behalf *without our permission.* And as others have suggested, I don't believe that they have shown us, nor have we identified, all the expanded searches we may be appearing on.

Go back to exact and phrase only? That would lose us the generally good searches we were getting with Broad...

This didn't have to be difficult. All that G had to do was to make Expanded an opt-in choice. Any publisher offline would have done it that way. And that would have been a service to the advertisers.

Instead, a company I once loved is, on all fronts, becoming arrogant and unresponsive before our very eyes. It happens all the time, but somehow this one makes me sad. I want the old G back. <snif, sinf...>

jothelion




msg:1145739
 5:49 pm on Nov 25, 2003 (gmt 0)

My experience of google till recently has been excellent as far as adwords were concerned. I've never had a need to look at any other PPC options. I joined them at the beginning.

Small fry compared to many others but still spending about 500 a month.

My top keywords are now taken over with irrelevant results, have emailed google several times - no response at all. Not even an acknowledgement.

Popped over to Overture last week, set up a campaign, many of my keywords are in fact 1/2 the cost of the same in google. Have to say impressed so far.

There I can at least come up in relevant results under my chosen keywords.

My google spend has now reduced substantially so am looking to spend this money else where.

jothelion.

brianmcc




msg:1145740
 6:03 pm on Nov 25, 2003 (gmt 0)

Exceptional post, Caveman. Especially concerning how they have, essentially, put our ads up in loads of new places that we gave NO CONSENT for. And if we find that these new places are garbage, what recourse do we have? They don't give us the option of going back to the old way.

Isn't that the point of all this himming and hawing? If I'm an advertiser, I want control of where my ad is shown. Google has taken that away from me.

Not only are my ads suffering, but I am actually spending less. Can you believe? After these changes, it is HARDER for me to serve ads on google, HARDER to give them money!

Insanity.

Speeeedy




msg:1145741
 8:24 pm on Nov 28, 2003 (gmt 0)

I've tried Adwords for about 2-3 months now...
Here is how my overall campaign is doing thus far:

Clicks: 1,068
Impressions: 21,910
CTR: 4.8%
Avg. CPC: $0.25
Total Cost: $269.71

I'm very happy with the CTR for my client, but unfortunately her merchandise is not high-priced and in high-demand. High demand, but low-prices. So, the amount of sales have not superceded what we've spent so far.

Adwords Cost: $269.71
Sales: $98.50 (very good for these small items)

That's 63.48% more than sales. Horrible conversion rate. She doesn't mind it since she just launched her merchandise and wants to get the word out. But I think there has to be better options out there.

Can anyone suggest other avenues?

--Jim---

RedWolf




msg:1145742
 8:39 pm on Nov 28, 2003 (gmt 0)

Avg. CPC: $0.25
Total Cost: $269.71

I'm very happy with the CTR for my client, but unfortunately her merchandise is not high-priced and in high-demand. High demand, but low-prices. So, the amount of sales have not superceded what we've spent so far.

Adwords Cost: $269.71
Sales: $98.50 (very good for these small items)

That's 63.48% more than sales. Horrible conversion rate. She doesn't mind it since she just launched her merchandise and wants to get the word out. But I think there has to be better options out there.

Can anyone suggest other avenues?

Can you drop the CPC and still stay on the first page? I've found that unless I am in the first position (mostly trying for premium slot) my actual position doesn't matter too much in either CTR or conversions.

My average item sale is about half of you total sales yet I still refuse to bump my CPC above 15 cents. In fact most of mine are in the 5 to 8 cent range. Even then I still am paying over $150 a month for advertising about 1/3 of my products so they aren't exactly low-demand items.

Personally unless the average sale is over $15 or you have a very good conversion rate, I don't think Pay-Per-Click is a good advertising model. Without knowing the product it is hard to think of a good approach. You might look at setting it up to wholesale to other stores that can include them in their standard merchandise. Another option is to try to upsell maybe group discounts or such to get increased average sales to help the bottom line.

Robsp




msg:1145743
 9:18 pm on Nov 28, 2003 (gmt 0)

Speeeedy,

I suggest you start tracking were your conversions come from. This is the only way to bring conversions up.

Since we started optimizing for ROI with G's measuring tools our ROI has skyrocketed. We kicked out content ads and have shut down quite a few non converting adgroups.

To counter the last few posts; we are bringing in very profitable results where the adwords cost are a fraction of the revenue, also for low priced (<30$) items.

eWhisper




msg:1145744
 4:04 pm on Nov 29, 2003 (gmt 0)

I'm very happy with the CTR for my client, but unfortunately her merchandise is not high-priced and in high-demand. High demand, but low-prices. So, the amount of sales have not superceded what we've spent so far.

The simplest solution is to create a demand for the item. Pet rocks sold like crazy, a real demand - no, a consumer demand - yes. This is often very complicated depending on the product - but can be done.

Another avenue is to examine your keywords, and see if there are better places you'll fit in. I remember seeing a dance instructional studio advertising under weddings. They had a great return from grooms who wanted to learn to dance for the wedding. Not a place many would think to advertise, but they took a shot and made it work.

This 77 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 77 ( 1 2 [3]
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdWords
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved