homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.166.228.100
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdWords
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: buckworks & eWhisper & skibum

Google AdWords Forum

This 154 message thread spans 6 pages: < < 154 ( 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 > >     
Are you currently as happy with Adwords as you were last year?
bostonseo




msg:1151651
 6:40 pm on May 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

Simple yes or no question:

Are you as happy with Adwords as you were last year?

 

ThinkTank




msg:1151741
 12:46 am on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

no

Web_speed




msg:1151742
 2:07 am on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

no!

Syzygy




msg:1151743
 8:19 am on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

Paying more and getting less is the real issue for us.

What ever the reason - new players, fraud, rule changes - it only seems to go one way. And of late it seems to get worse. Adwords should be simple to use and maintain not a time and resource consuming monster that it has become.

Well stated, kidder. My thoughts exactly...

Syzygy

whoisgregg




msg:1151744
 3:09 pm on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

I hear what you're saying Israel, but I just don't see GoogleGuy talking about this thread in his weekly report. How, objectively, would you summarize this thread?

Here's my take:
"This week, in an impromptu survey of 60 anonymous self-selected forum posters, 47 said they are less happy this year than last, 13 said their happiness remained constant. Survey was offered on a extremely popular forum with presumably thousands of people seeing the survey, but only a small (perhaps tiny) percentage chose to participate."

There's nothing that any business can even do with that kind of information. If I told you that I talked to 0.01% of your clients and 80% of those tiny few were "less happy," what reaction would you have?

If the goal is to improve Adwords, then let's continue the WebmasterWorld tradition of offering concrete constructive criticism:

AdWords Wish List: Features You'd Like to See [webmasterworld.com]
Google Adwords Features I'd Like to See, #2 [webmasterworld.com]
Google Adwords Features I'd Like to See, #3 [webmasterworld.com]
Google Adwords Features I'd Like to See, #5 [webmasterworld.com]
Google Adwords Features I'd Like to See, #6 [webmasterworld.com]

P.S. Yeah, I don't know what happened to number 4 either. :)

DamonHD




msg:1151745
 3:15 pm on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hi,

Yes, the problem with straw polls like this, interesting though they certainly are (thanks again bostonseo for starting it), is that self-selected samples, especially small ones, tend to be biased towards those with views strong enough to want to express them.

If Nixon's infamous "silent majority", ie all WW users that did not vote in this poll, were unchanged in their "delight" (eek) with AS/AW over the last year, Google's stock should go through the roof. I don't for one moment, even as a Google supporter, believe that that is the case!

Is there any way that we could conduct a more thorough poll, with a larger sample size and less potential bias?

Eg, could WW ask 1000 distinct randomly-selected visitors to this forum over the next 48 hours to say yes/no/uh before seeing any content? BT could make himself a tidy side income in survey results this way! B^>

Rgds

Damon

AdWordsAdvisor




msg:1151746
 4:53 pm on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

...but I just don't see GoogleGuy talking about this thread in his weekly report. How, objectively, would you summarize this thread?

Thanks for the comments whoisgregg - and especially for pointing out the 'Google Adwords Features I'd Like to See' threads. I love those threads.

Though I have had very little time to post recently, I have still been following this thread with real interest. Here is what I've done with your posts so far:

* Summarized the thread in the Advertiser Feedback Report last week - and provided the link to the entire thread along with the recommendation that everyone read it in full. BTW, this report goes to many hundreds of Googlers, all of whom have subscribed because feedback from advertisers is important to them. I don't send it to anyone who has not asked to receive it.

* Quoted six of you, verbatim, in last week's report.

* Discussed the thread live in a meeting with a roomful of folks who are highly concerned with advertiser satisfaction, including several managers and a director.

* Included the link again in this week's report, which will go out about 12 hours from now.

* Left room in this week's report for the six most compelling quotes since last week.

I mention all this this in the hopes it will give all of you some confidence that feedback from this Forum (and elsewhere) is making its way to the right teams here at Google. In my view, that is the most important part of my job here.

AWA

metakomm




msg:1151747
 5:44 pm on May 13, 2006 (gmt 0)

no.

that's why i froze my account and put 100% of my money into MSN adcenter with much better results and less hassles (except for their buggy console and customer service...but the ROI is awesome)

MLHmptn




msg:1151748
 7:12 pm on May 13, 2006 (gmt 0)

metakomm,

You would think that MSN AdCenter representatives were listening in on this thread as alot of what we all want out of Adwords is already implemented in Adcenter. One of the things that I wanted out of Adwords like a timer feature for running your ads during certain times of the day is already the standard on AdCenter. I have also killed off my Adwords as well as I can't see wasting money on clicks from MFA sites or even for that matter Google's supposed search network affiliates of Shopping.com, Pricegrabber.com, Bizrate.com, and the like that should realistically be in their content network. The site exclusion feature should work for no matter what site you put in whether its a google search partner or content.

beren




msg:1151749
 8:53 pm on May 13, 2006 (gmt 0)

Overall, I'm going to say "no".

Google used to issue refunds when I pointed out obvious fraud. Last year I got refunds several times. Now when I complain, they say: yes, this is fraud, but we already filtered these clicks out of your bill. I don't know if I believe that.

On the other hand, it seems the content network is improving, as they have implemented smart pricing (lower prices).

It's true that MSN provides a higher ROI, but that is not a reason to abandon AdWords, unless you have a very limited budget. As long as AdWords is profitable, you should advertise there. MSN is better because they don't have bad affiliates and fewer advertisers use them so there is less competition. But that will eventually change as they come under pressure to add bad affiliates the way Google and YSM have.

metakomm




msg:1151750
 12:34 am on May 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

I simply froze my account in protest now that I have another cheaper, more efficient option.

My 6k+ a month that used to go to google is no more.

I may run a few ads on Google in the future, but right now I am going to stick with MSN.

I dropped Yahoo completely too.

It felt good to dump adwords after dealing with their flawed pricing algo.

It really pissed me off when I had keywords that I was paying .7/click for with double digit CTR jumped overnight to $1 and $5 minimums...F**k google!

Richard Overvold




msg:1151751
 1:11 am on May 14, 2006 (gmt 0)


Quoted six of you, verbatim, in last week's report.

Better have quoted me! ;)

Seriously though, I have alot of ads that are excellent Quality, the pages are relevant, but Google still wants $5 per click. HA! Lets just imagine Adwords without that minimum bid, and the old min of $0.05 per click. My listing would show and you'd make SOMETHING off my ads. And they're relevant, I don't know what Google's basis for knowing what's relevant to EVERY industry and what's not. Just my opinion, but I would think Google'd make more money having 5 ads showing at $1 per click instead of showing none of those 5 ads because they require $5 per click. Even if 1 ad is irrelevant... Doesn't matter anyway, I still see ridiculous ads for selling Oxygen on Ebay. Yeah, and I can't show an ad for my industry, nice.

Israel




msg:1151752
 1:26 am on May 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

It really pissed me off when I had keywords that I was paying .7/click for with double digit CTR jumped overnight to $1 and $5 minimums

It's little consolation, Metakomm, but you're certainly not alone.

It's like CTR is meaningless now, ad history doesn't count either. The only upside is that it led me to experiment more - to the extent of abandoning long standing campaigns to start fresh with new approaches.

Used to be I was terrified to mess with an ad that had been running profitably for 2 years. Now I have few if any of those so I don't hesitate to dump the budget drains that have been killing me of late.

The algo has either gotten so complex that flaws can't be unravelled or it's childishly simple.

I had an Adgroup using a permitted brand name containing the word "Treasure". It was used frequently in the keyword combos obviously. Google used to like 25 cent bids. Then they doubled the bids, then they went to $5.00 and most recently $10.00 -- Why? I can only surmise that "treasure" is considered something valuable. Even though this is a fairly non-competitive but productive niche. However, this "Treasure" is fool's gold, certainly not worth anywhere near $10.00 to anyone. The brand has no relevant ads showing now.

Israel

voted earlier

metakomm




msg:1151753
 1:57 am on May 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

And nobody from google EVER told me how to optimize for misspelled words.

I HATE google and it STINKS!

Google converted those misspelled keywords where I had a high CTR into $10/click minimum...And support offered NOTHING.

It's really too bad google got so bad...I used to tell other small businesses to open an Adwords account ASAP. Now I tell them to avoid Google like the plague.

Negative word of mouth can go a LOOOOOOOOONG way...

OceanDoctor




msg:1151754
 9:47 am on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

No way.

In March, I would have said "yes." However, the recent change in minimum bids has dramatically increased costs while the lack of adequate documentation, transparency and predictability has made experimentation an unsustainably expensive process.

I've encountered frequent increasingly bizarre results where one keyword in a particular Ad Group might have a minimum bid of $0.15 while another in the same Ad Group that is only the slightest bit different has a minimum bid of $10.00. This problem has impacted numerous and diverse campaigns. Such results are inconsistent and virtually impossible to manage.

In my judgment, AdWords is broken and is costing Google and its advertisers time and money. After spending an average of $15K/month on AdWords over the past year, I am now seriously considering pulling the plug entirely until this flaw is resolved.

ScottG13




msg:1151755
 8:04 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

Satisfied. We're a fairly large account but in a smallish market (under $10b annually) that few major players are figured out.

CPC is up about 15-20% this year which we expected but sales are up 3 or 4 times that. You can't expect AdWords to do all the heavy lifting. Their are internal optamization gains that we continue to make and improve our business model with.

Richard Overvold




msg:1151756
 8:45 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

Satisfied. We're a fairly large account but in a smallish market (under $10b annually) that few major players are figured out.
CPC is up about 15-20% this year which we expected but sales are up 3 or 4 times that. You can't expect AdWords to do all the heavy lifting. Their are internal optamization gains that we continue to make and improve our business model with.

Well, lets take for example Nextel. A typical cell phone sells for maybe $250. So, if Nextel sells a phone using Adwords, they make $250, they can bid $10 per click. Take the average affiliate. They get 10% of the same sale. So they make $25 per sale. The affiliate can only bid maybe $1 per click at MOST. What is an affiliate to do Google requests $5 per click on 60% of your keywords because they assume EVERYONE can afford it? They are getting too cute with their analysis, and it's destroying everything they were about when they started Adwords.

CrimsonGirl




msg:1151757
 10:15 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

it's destroying everything they were about when they started Adwords

What? Google thought requiring minimum bids would be good for them in the long run, so they made the change.

And from my perspective, and that of many others, getting "affiliate" ads off the Google screen is a good thing. It wasn't too long ago we were flooded with multiple eBay ads for searches, many from affiliates.

Richard Overvold




msg:1151758
 10:34 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)


What? Google thought requiring minimum bids would be good for them in the long run, so they made the change.

And from my perspective, and that of many others, getting "affiliate" ads off the Google screen is a good thing. It wasn't too long ago we were flooded with multiple eBay ads for searches, many from affiliates.


Was, or was not, Adwords created so the "little" guys could compete with the "big" guys? At the rate it's going, only the merchants are going to be the ones advertising, because they're going to be the only ones who can afford the conversion costs.

Real life example. About 6 months ago, I spoke frequently with one of my merchants. And he told me, "Bid $3 on 'x' keyword and you should bring in about 200% ROI, we are.". Well, what he failed to realize is this. He makes $150-$180 per sale, and I make $30-$50. I'd break even. And to this day, since their little change, I can't even bid on that 'x' keyword, because there's a minimum of $10 on it. So no one, not even the merchant can make money.

You're telling me that you agree this is good for the long term? In what world are you living in that this is good for each business involved?

The ebay ads were fixed the one domain per keyword adjustment. That's all that was needed there. Now we all have landing pages for it. They're trying to clean the clutter there, and it's affecting every market. Do you cut down the whole tree just because one branch is broken?

pdivi




msg:1151759
 10:54 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

Richard Overvold, you bring up some good points, which bring up some good questions.

To use your example, let's say prior to Google's minimum bid changes Nextel only needed to bid ~$1 because its Adwords competition (affiliates) could never afford to bid past that point. Google hikes the minimum bid to $10, Nextel can afford it, but no one else can. So Nextel bids $10 and everyone else folds. The question is, from a revenue standpoint, is Google now better off even though everyone but Nextel dropped out?

It'll be interesting to see where the balance falls. Google is on the hook to deliver financial performance, and you can bet they'll move in whatever direction it takes to maximize it.

Richard Overvold




msg:1151760
 11:02 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)


The question is, from a revenue standpoint, is Google now better off even though everyone but Nextel dropped out?

Well, my opinion on this is that there is always power in numbers. If I was Google, and I had my choice of Nextel bidding by itself at $10 per click. Or, 10 advertisers each bidding $1 each. I'd choose 10 advertisers bidding $1 per, because granted, Nextel probably won't go out of business, but lets say they did, and they stop bidding, where's Google? Getting nothing, now, if I had 1 advertiser drop out of my choice, then I still have 9 other advertisers bidding $1 per. Just my opinion though. Google's the expert though. ;)

CrimsonGirl




msg:1151761
 11:43 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

Was, or was not, Adwords created so the "little" guys could compete with the "big" guys?

No, it was not.

At the rate it's going, only the merchants are going to be the ones advertising

*shrugs* I don't really care. Honestly, Google has on the whole been a bad influence on the Internet in recent years because it has allowed the formation of all sorts of businesses that clutter up the net and provide no value to anyone. AdSense is worse as we have seen millions of made-for-AdSense sites invade the SERPs. Besides, I have no respect for salespeople in real life, so why should I respect "affiliates" on the net?

If I was Google, and I had my choice of Nextel bidding by itself at $10 per click. Or, 10 advertisers each bidding $1 each. I'd choose 10 advertisers bidding $1 per

I'd chose one advertiser at $10 per click. Fewer ads on the screen. Higher CTR for the high-paying ad. Better user experience and higher Google revenue.

Richard Overvold




msg:1151762
 12:53 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)


I'd chose one advertiser at $10 per click. Fewer ads on the screen. Higher CTR for the high-paying ad. Better user experience and higher Google revenue.

I assume you prefer going to malls with only one store, right?

hdpt00




msg:1151763
 1:04 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

I need to defend Richard here and my answer is a huge NO:

Prices have gone up dramatically, I cover about 40 niches. Quality has gone down dramatically. I can't get the impressions I used to with a very high CTR. I want to spend more on certain campaigns where the ROI is still there, yet am unable to get the traffic I want, even when doubling my bids.

A year ago I had more traffic than I knew what to do with, today I'm lucky to get 10% of what I used to.

And furthermore, even with these huge price increases, I've noticed no difference in AdSense revenue.

They should rebrand google and list on NYSE under WAJ: What A Joke.

Richard Overvold




msg:1151764
 1:10 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)


I've noticed no difference in AdSense revenue.

I've noticed a difference. Half what it used to be. :)

hdpt00




msg:1151765
 1:45 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

Well I guess I noticed that too ;-), ummm, YPN anyone? Although that is getting lower now too.

chief72




msg:1151766
 7:32 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

In reply to CrimsonGrrl, why is someone with such comtempt for "affiliates" posting in an advertising forum.
Don't get me wrong, do as you please, but why would you want to associate with people for whom you have so little regard.
Also, that one advertiser idea, brilliant stuff, who needs choice to confuse them. Hey, maybe we could all wear khaki.

CrimsonGirl




msg:1151767
 3:47 pm on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

I am an advertiser and come to this forum often. I use AdWords.

I just think of affiliates as like car salesmen and Mary Kay reps, and it's hard to respect them or feel sorry when they get cut out of the supply chain by increasing efficiency. Affiliate businesses worked on the web partly because the principals (buyers and sellers) knew less about the web and web-based advertising and because companies like Google were eager to show many ads. As the market evolves and people become more savvy, there is less space for affiliates.

And I never said I was anti-choice. The mall analogy doesn't hold: malls have a limited number of stores in each niche (say bookstores or bed and bath stores or teenage-focus). It is not the same as 10 ads for Nokia phones by Nokia and 9 affiliates. Real choice would be Nokia phone and Samsung phones and Sanyo phones, etc.

And yes, as a web user, the experience is better when there are fewer ads. I realize there must be ads to pay for the free service (just like there must be ads on commercial TV), but that doesn't mean I have to like them. I think most internet users feel the same way. I do advertise, though, and am not against advertising.

Richard Overvold




msg:1151768
 4:24 pm on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

Well, there's no need to argue with you, you seem set in your ways. Everyone deserves a fair shot, and if you were the affiliate, you'd think the same way, if you were Nextel, you wouldn't want those other ads either. As an advertiser, you have a biased point of view about advertising, and you can't really say for sure what normal surfers want.

Amarula




msg:1151769
 7:30 pm on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

Crimsongirl

But all the above said does not mean Google is driven by care for web surfers, sure there were other consideration in changing their pricing policy?

gregbo




msg:1151770
 8:07 pm on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

I'd choose 10 advertisers bidding $1 per, because granted, Nextel probably won't go out of business, but lets say they did, and they stop bidding, where's Google?

To Nextel, $10/click is a drop in the bucket. G is aware of this. G is also aware that Nextel isn't likely to go out of business (much less likely than the small businesses paying $1/click), so it has greater incentive to make Nextel happy. In fact Nextel can pay much more than $10/click without straining its ad budget, so G sees an opportunity for hiking its CPC not present with the smaller businesses.

rbacal




msg:1151771
 8:07 pm on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

Well, there's no need to argue with you, you seem set in your ways. Everyone deserves a fair shot, and if you were the affiliate, you'd think the same way, if you were Nextel, you wouldn't want those other ads either. As an advertiser, you have a biased point of view about advertising, and you can't really say for sure what normal surfers want.

I'm not keen on being surrounded by affiliate ads all selling the same thing, from, ultimately, the exact same source. But isn't the real question, this:

How do the majority of affiliates ADD VALUE to a) the original seller, and, b) the buyer?

I'm not sure that most actually do add much value, and if they have in the past, I'm not sure they will in the future. With affiliates from major companies, I do expect market forces to exert themselves, for the companies that know the net, resulting in much less concern for affiliates long term. FOr those that haven't a clue, and for the fly-by-night companies that exist on roping in affiliates, I suspect those will still be around.

Like a lot of companies, on say, clickx.

This 154 message thread spans 6 pages: < < 154 ( 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 > >
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