homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.163.91.250
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

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

Google AdWords Forum

This 35 message thread spans 2 pages: 35 ( [1] 2 > >     
NonConverting Traffic Coming From Google's DomainPark Program
Anybody else experiencing this?
seth_wilde




msg:1118039
 12:05 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Our ROI tracking is able to separate content targeted traffic from regular adwords traffic and then breakup the content targeted traffic by domain name. With one of our accounts we've seen an influx of completely worthless traffic coming from Google's DomainPark program. Even though the keywords in the domains sending us traffic are currently being bid on in adwords, Google instead shows our ads for a much more expensive keyword, that could barely be considered even marginally relevant. To compound the problem we're also seeing our ads displayed on adult themed versions of these non relevant parked domains as well as click fraud from one of these domains.

I'd expect this kind of crap from a 3rd tier ppc engine that I paid a few cents a click for.. But it's very aggravating to see this coming from a ppc engine that charges top dollar. Google seriously needs to rethink their DomainPark program (or at least do more quality control) and give advertisers more control over were their ads are shown and how much they pay for content targeted ads.

 

Shak




msg:1118040
 12:15 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

am I right in assuming that DomainPark traffic comes under the search partner syndication (aol, ask etc) rather than content (adsense)

?

Shak

skibum




msg:1118041
 12:19 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Are these DomainPark clicks coming from content syndication or are they considered "search" partners?

seth_wilde




msg:1118042
 1:33 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

They're considered content syndication although they contain absolutely no real content. All it consists of is a buch of adwords links, with category links pointing to more adwords listings (for things like weight loss drugs, male enhancement, loans, etc..)

Considering the client in question is B2B selling enterpise software to fortune 500's this is not the type of exposure they want.

All the content appears to be 100% provided by google.. If you click on one of the category pages your transfered to a google owned dowmain with the exact same layout.

AdWordsAdvisor




msg:1118043
 2:10 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Checking for info on this, and I'll post again when I know more.

Kind of late in the day to find the right folks, so it'll be tomorrow, earliest.

AWA

Jenstar




msg:1118044
 2:55 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Ouch, this is the kind of thing that will really make advertisers opt-out of content sites. There is a world of difference in the audience targeting between ads being shown on a content site and an ad being shown via DomainPark. This could really hurt the AdSense program.

If advertisers are getting junk clickthroughs from DomainPark, they will opt-out of all content sites, even if DomainPark is the only problem.

powerstar




msg:1118045
 3:05 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

content (adsense) is a problem and Google don't seems to care. I wouldn't turn to Google content if it's the last thing out there. I received 5 time as much traffic from content then search and guess what no conversation on expensive traffic (finance)

europeforvisitors




msg:1118046
 4:49 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

content (adsense) is a problem and Google don't seems to care. I wouldn't turn to Google content if it's the last thing out there. I received 5 time as much traffic from content then search and guess what no conversation on expensive traffic

Uh...you meant "conversion," right? :-)

Whether AdSense is a "problem" or an opportunity probably depends on your topic. A number of other advertisers have reported better performance from AdSense than from search ads, so your mileage (or the lack thereof) may vary. In my own topic area, there are advertisers who have been running content ads for months, and some of them are established brand-name companies in their fields.

Getting back to the topic of this thread, I think it's a shame that the DomainPark program is bundled in with other content ads. The program's existence just supports an argument I've been making all along: that advertisers need the ability to choose where their ads do or don't appear if AdSense is going to attract and keep mainstream advertisers.

Yidaki




msg:1118047
 8:19 am on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

>Worthless Traffic Coming From Google's DomainPark Program

That's something i have expected and criticized [webmasterworld.com] since (even before) the official announcement. Although it's bad for you I'm happy for this proof seth_wilde - i don't feel like a misunderstood whiner any more now with my critique.

>Are these DomainPark clicks coming from content syndication or are they considered "search" partners

Both. I ran some tests in the early days, before google officially announced their new DP feature. My AW ads have been displayed on parked domains as soon as either one or both of the additional display options have been selected (content + synd. search results). If none was selected (Google search only) the ads were not displayed. Advertizers don't have any control over the DomainPark display.

Google should at least provide their advertizers a third display option for the DomainPark system + they should disable it by default + they should inform advertizers about it at their account page.

TinkyWinky




msg:1118048
 2:01 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Yep - just checked all my advertising traffic - seems content delivered clickthroughs have jumped and only a very minor increase in conversion (which could actually be to do with anything)

I've just turned all my ads off from content - admittedly not the greatest loss for Google (about Ģ60 a day) but I am sure I won't be the only one!

Thanks Seth for bringing that to my attention.

bluelook




msg:1118049
 6:21 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Maybe Google can create more separate advertising areas, not just a bundle "Content"

- Search Adwords
- Content1 (Syndication)
- Content2 (AdSense)

As to domainpark, it shouldnīt definitely be put in the same bag as AdSense Content. In the long term it could ruin this program. We canīt have advertisers leaving the content option.
This is a proof that if the results from content traffic could be better, it isnīt because of the small/medium sites, but because of these other syndications...

Please donīt ruin this wonderful program! Protect it at all cost. In the long term it will be very important to Google too, is it isnīt already.
Donīt scare away the advertisers...

skibum




msg:1118050
 8:36 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Links on the Google site about DomainPark:

[google.com...]

[google.com...]

Jenstar




msg:1118051
 8:39 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

And another discussion from when DomainPark publicly launched [webmasterworld.com]

AdWordsAdvisor




msg:1118052
 8:41 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Ok, I'm back with some details:

* The ads are content targeted, rather than via search.

* As with all ads, the intent is to provide relevant and useful information to users who are looking for it.

* Our data indicates that this will be worthwhile traffic, which converts in line with other Content Targeted partners. As always, actual results will vary from advertiser to advertiser, industry to industry, day to day, and so on.

* If there are particular problems, we do of course want to know about them.

MODS - May I post a dedicated email address that may be used to report problems related to DomainPark? (BTW, this is an email address which is read by the right folks, but one in which the emails will not be responded to - basically a place to report issues.)

AWA

figment88




msg:1118053
 9:17 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Wow, I feel like I owe the original poster an apology for thinking he was in error - I couldn't believe Google would just start distributing ads to parked domain.

I also feel sorry for AdWordsAdvisor having to come with half-baked rationalization using shoddy in-house research.

People who want to argue that Content Ads are as good as search ads are wrong, but they have some reasonable positions. Google trying to claim domain park ads are equal to search ones, though, is just absurd.

Guess in current times Faust is spelled IPO.

justageek




msg:1118054
 9:44 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Our data indicates that this will be worthwhile traffic, which converts in line with other Content Targeted partners. As always, actual results will vary from advertiser to advertiser, industry to industry, day to day, and so on.

What data? How was it collected? Did you have sites willing to test and track ROI on this before it was released? If you know that results will be different for one industry versus another was it gleaned from the data? If so, why are the industries that perform badly even allowed to run and deplete an advertisers budget with nothing gained for them?

JAG

europeforvisitors




msg:1118055
 9:48 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

I have long maintained that search traffic has a much better ROI than content traffic, but try telling that to the guys in the AdSense forum! Wow, they jumped down my throat!

Jumped down your throat? It's more likely that they simply disagreed with you, and for good reason: Other advertisers have reported that content ads work better than search ads, either across the board or for specific campaigns. So who's right, you or those other advertisers?

Generalities are like averages: They don't mean much in real life. Every advertiser and ad campaign is different, and what works in situation A may not work in situation B (and vice versa). That's why testing was invented. :-)

Still, there's one generality that most people here would agree with: Parked domains aren't "content sites."

redzone




msg:1118056
 9:51 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Adwords displaying on domainpark reminds of when Overture was partnered with Oingo.. Worthless traffic that never converted..

None of our clients has content ads turned on, and this is just support for our recommendation.

While some sites may be experiencing positive ROI, PPC campaigns are all about "control", and if you don't know where you are paying for click throughs, the control factor just went out the window..

seth_wilde




msg:1118057
 10:02 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

"Adwords displaying on domainpark reminds of when Overture was partnered with Oingo.. Worthless traffic that never converted.."

It should ;) Oingo is now owned by Google and is the "google owned dowmain" I referred to in my second post..

msgraph




msg:1118058
 10:13 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>Adwords displaying on domainpark reminds of when Overture was partnered with Oingo..

DomainPark reminds me of UltimateSearch.

skibum




msg:1118059
 11:56 pm on Jan 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

Sure, it would seem to be the same game as any of the others who have come before, but did the others target their ads based on the domain name (which may or may not make a difference) or just show big money terms to turn a buck?

With respect to this, AWA:

Our data indicates that this will be worthwhile traffic, which converts in line with other Content Targeted partners. As always, actual results will vary from advertiser to advertiser, industry to industry, day to day, and so on.

I'd guess ya probably can't say to much about the study that demonstrated this but is this conversion to sale, lead, etc. or click rate data?


People who want to argue that Content Ads are as good as search ads are wrong, but they have some reasonable positions.

Generally I'd agree but there are some client campaigns that do pretty well with content though they tend to be lower priced keywords. Thus far anything with a CPC above about $0.50 isn't even considered for content syndication.

webdiversity




msg:1118060
 12:20 am on Jan 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

If advertisers are getting junk clickthroughs from DomainPark, they will opt-out of all content sites, even if DomainPark is the only problem.

The junk clickthroughs apply just as much to syndicated partners in the search network too.

We are about 75% of the way towards switching the entire Google search partner network off because some of the bigger ones are using their own proprietary tracking and it is screwing up our tracking, so when we try to send a visitor to a deep linked page, they send them off to the homepage.

We've got some requests for resolution in, but every day the bill keeps racking up. Some of the 2nd tier stuff is great.

A recent syndicated partner that moved from Espotting hasn't delivered us one single visitor since the move, due to these anomalies, you can bet your life their bill will go in for payment and advertisers will assume they got the traffic, but if you use any sort of tracking mechanics then you need to keep a close eye.

It's a dangerous tight rope and at the moment the safety net is full of holes.

msgraph




msg:1118061
 1:11 am on Jan 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>>but did the others target their ads based on the domain name (which may or may not make a difference) or just show big money terms to turn a buck?

No and neither does Domainpark on numerous parked domains that I have seen. Looks like a ripoff of UltimateSearch to me except instead of eating up expireds like that fella from Hong Kong does, they just grab the parked ones.

Either way money is money and that's how they see fit to make some extra cash.

AdWordsAdvisor




msg:1118062
 1:30 am on Jan 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

I'd guess ya probably can't say to much about the study that demonstrated this but is this conversion to sale, lead, etc. or click rate data?

You are correct skibum, and I've just confirmed that the studies measured both conversion and CTR.

AWA

freerunjeff




msg:1118063
 1:36 am on Jan 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

I previously worked for a very large webhosting company that monitized its customers 400,000+ parked domain names into approx $100k/month in new hosting and domain registration revenue by placing their own ads on the placeholder pages.

parked domain traffic does have value, its all in what content goes on them. A domain name is not much to work with to determine proper targeting.

powerstar




msg:1118064
 2:14 am on Jan 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>>* If there are particular problems, we do of course want to know about them.

AWA, how about turning off the content as default? If I wish I will join and I can tell you if you wait for me you are going to wait along time.

Adwords used to be a very good product but with content, broad match and soon email...not so good any more

figment88




msg:1118065
 2:57 am on Jan 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

AWA, I worked for several years in online market research. Citing some "internal study" is very cynical.

I have little doubt that I could take the same data and "prove" that traffic from parked domains severly underperforms all other sources.

nerowolfe




msg:1118066
 3:52 am on Jan 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

webdiversity, can you elaborate on this at all? I'd like to make sure it's not affecting our tracking system too!

We are about 75% of the way towards switching the entire Google search partner network off because some of the bigger ones are using their own proprietary tracking and it is screwing up our tracking, so when we try to send a visitor to a deep linked page, they send them off to the homepage.

danny




msg:1118067
 11:52 am on Jan 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

Aren't most of domain-parked sites reliant on Google for their traffic? And they're screwing up Google search results...

I think Google should stay miles away from parked domains without actual content. In fact they should do their best to keep them out of their search index!

racer_x




msg:1118068
 12:42 pm on Jan 23, 2004 (gmt 0)

I just came across the first site that used Googles DomainPark and I now understand why so many people are upset.

You only really end up on a parked domain by mistake. Most people do not intentionally go to parked domain. However when you do get there the only links that you can follow are ppc adwords or go to categories with more ppc adwords.

The domain name that this happened on contained the letters 'log' but site that use to be there had nothing to do with logs, however all the ads shown were log/wood/flooring related. This is a very low quality link when compared with a content site where more often than not the content matches the ad.

Don't get me wrong, there may well be some advertisers that want to advertise on a parked domain. But Google has to give advertisers the ability to have their ads on real content sites but not have their ads shown on a parked domain.

This 35 message thread spans 2 pages: 35 ( [1] 2 > >
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