| 10:27 pm on May 7, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yes indeed Hughie,
I mentioned in another post that my "Inactives" went from 9000 to 3000 almost overnight.
Most of my "Inactives" were being penalized for unfathomable reasons too. Most often for including an extra preposition or article in a "phrase" or [exact] match which made no sense. Even though I had long ago began to alter my <ALT> tags to vary the phrasing to include different search variations.
Quite frankly, certain inconsequential terms like "of" or "the" should be considered throwaways.
They even told the searcher in Google at one time that the word "in" was not included in their search results, for instance.
Still obviously one must include these terms in an exact match like [widgets for the home]. Bit of a contradiction there the way that I see it.
Must I contrive my page text to make sure all these variations are included somewhere? Makes pages look spammy when one does that.
In any case, thanks for the rollback Google! I was getting close to packing it in.
Hey now it's down to 1804 though I did nothing!
| 1:14 am on May 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I was going to report this same thing. I'm just not so sure it's a rollback. There have been things happening with the index and I still have this nagging feeling that what's been going on with Adwords is related to it.
| 8:42 am on May 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Glad others are seeing it as well.
I had 10 or so different telephone conversations with google about this. Rather than admit they were wrong, each time they said my "quality scoring" wasn't high enough, even though my ads & landing page couldn't have been more on-topic.
None of their suggestions worked so hopefully the penny dropped and they turned something off.
fingers crossed it stays this way!
| 9:33 am on May 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I had the same thing happen to me. It started on 6th May. Did it happen on the same date for you or earlier/later?
Google have made an announcement recently about changes in how many Adwords advertisers they will show for different types of search terms. I wonder if it is related to that?
| 11:25 pm on May 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My two cents... it's been hard to infer any logic to when Google labels something "inactive for search." In my case, I was doing ads which were very specifically targeted, and the key phrases in the ad appeared in the page title as well as on the page one or two more times. The pages on my site are all the names of performers who are not super-famous, but I am targeting a certain kind of searcher.
In my case, all those ads were set at $5.00 to activate. I am tentatively concluding that Google just doesn't have enough data on those key phrases to decide on an amount. So they decide I need to pay them $5.00 a click to collect it. But I think they need a better system than that, because I ain't payin'! '-)
| 2:42 am on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My keywords started going back active on May 6th and were pretty much back in line by the 7th. I did, however, recently re-work most of the pages in the campaign that had the most inactives.
It looks now that my efforts may not have been required.
| 8:26 am on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
yeah, it was may 6th for me as well, be nice to know what's been going on.
| 9:38 am on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Is it possible that this is simply as a result of AW gathering more info, or less competition in your markets over the last few days?
I'm not saying that that *is* the case, but not every thunderstorm is caused by the deliberate action of a god; some things are just emergent...
| 10:49 am on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
DamonHD - no chance whatsoever.
| 11:23 am on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Hi everyone. Glad to see this has happened. My account looks like it's back to normal now.
| 11:26 am on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
possibly something like....
Google Operative:Well we've gathered all the info on our new adwords update.
Exec: Well, what's the result?
Operative: Well, the information tells us we've crapped up!
Exec: Oh, better go switch it back, and while you're there can you get me some property guides for buying a Volcano Island fortress.
| 11:37 am on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Israel May 7th 2006:
|I wish Google would reload a backup tape from a year ago ;) |
When Israel talks, Google listens ;)
Thanks Google! Looking forward to a profitable time again
| 1:51 pm on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I have suffered here in the past when I've stumbled on "cheap clicks" added them to adWords with really relevant landing pages only to see them go inactive....
I always look for the "low hanging fruit" and if G is allowing these cheap clicks that's cool $$$s = $$$$s or cents....
| 5:39 pm on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Ditto all my very specific "give us $5.00" kwds with specific ads and specific landing pages hav returned to normal except one group that is at $1.00. This would be almost funny if it had not had horrible consequences.
Were the techno-gods caught off the ranch when the CFO looked at the numbers? I would give serious money (at least 10 bucks:)) to know what they were trying to do or not do and who or what caused the reversal. And NO it was not because of some competitive change in my area.
| 4:55 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Oh dear! My impressions went up massively post May 6th but now they have gone down massively. Anyone else experiencing this pattern?
| 9:13 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The $5 and $10 minimum bids are back.
| 9:27 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yep I am seeing with mine also...brilliant
| 10:19 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
wrgvt - are you saying that you had the $5 and $10 minimum bids, then on May 6th they went and now they are back again?
Calc Richmond - are you saying the same as wrgvt or something different?
| 10:50 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
They're shooting up again, from c. 1800 inactive 2 days ago to 5591 at present.
never catching a break lately!
| 11:22 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Same here. Most of the keywords that were deactivated in April have returned to inactive as of today. Apparently, the "quality score" algorithm has a squeeeeeze mode that can be toggled on or off. Sure makes managing a business difficult.
| 5:35 am on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Same here ... up to 6306 and rising. Same campaign as before.
| 9:15 am on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
me to, what a pi$$er
| 9:37 am on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Just on the phone to google, same rubbish
So basically everything they told me to do last time which didn't make a blind bit of difference.
at the same to in my key search terms for "widgets"
there are about 10 completely irrelevant ads out of the full set. seems to be one rule for some of us and another rule for everyone else.
One plus side is my minimum CPC for my two main terms are slightly lower than before.
| 12:20 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Same here - since today we have the big maximum bids again.....
| 10:23 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I think I have figured this out - over the last few days my ppc costs had declined to a much more managable level - however I noticed that my daily maximum budget hadn't been reached for those days, all of a sudden yesterday the higher ppc costs kicked in, again, pushing my costs up well beyond my daily budget but averaging in the lower days it comes to on the average that maximum budget. I believe that Google is determined to milk us for every penny in our monthly budget by see-sawing the costs to the ceiling we have set.
| 12:07 am on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I have a theory as well...
1. Google found areas where bids were going for less than what its data said the clicks should go for (according to ROI data volunteered by advertisers under Google Analytics)
2. Google hiked up minimum bids in these areas and let them ride for a few weeks
3. Many people bit on the high minimum bids, but many people did not
4. In order to start capturing revenue from people who did not bite on the minimum bids, Google lifted the minimum bids. Google figured that a large % of the people who had accepted the minimum bid would just stick to their new bid, even if it weren't required.
5. To Google's surprise, once they lifted the minimum bids, most people dropped their bids to original levels.
6. Google went back to squeeeeze mode.
Note that I don't think any of this has anything to do with a "quality score"...just revenue.
It's just a theory.
| 12:49 am on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Its about the revenue stupid. (James Carville hybrid).
| 2:49 am on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Abigail ... My campaign that has the bulk of the inactives also had a daily budget 4.5 times the average daily spend. I've reduced the daily budget for that campaign to app. 1.5 times the daily spend to check your theory. Who knows?
| 4:20 am on May 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
ralent.....I have done the same thing - could be an interesting ride! I will let you know from my end in a few days.