| 3:04 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
i just started so i have no data but why do you have doubts?
| 3:30 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I am giving it until the end of the week, but I must say I am pretty darn surprised, to say the least. But things could be skewed due to holidays, hurricanes, etc. So I am continuing my testing through the weekend.
My advice to everyone - set channels on the different ad units on each page, and you can judge the results for yourself.
| 3:35 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I will be trying it for at least another couple of weeks unless I get some client feedback. One week of stats is not enough to make any realistic assesment as there are just too many factors involved.
| 4:00 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
why the doubts? well, it may be too soon to make a call particularly since this is a holiday weekend, but epc seems to be taking a hit along with overall earnings. also, I wonder about the effect of increased impressions, lower ctr and lower cpm having an effect on smart pricing.
| 4:12 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I took mine off for about 12 hours and then replaced them but in their own channels so I can examine the results later. But it is a very long holiday weekend and not a time make a rash decision. It has been interesting watching the clicks in different channels.
| 4:36 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I placed a second ad at the top of my website pages which was a mistake. When the google adbot couldn't place a second ad on the page, i ended up with nothing in my primary ad spot due to the top down rendering. I could fix that, but overall even when there were two ads, i was losing money. I wasn't even making the same as I would before. I know some sites are different, but i didnt design my site to have multiple ads - so it didn't help.
| 6:12 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Ever since I put the second ad uint I am experiencing dramatically low ctr,epc and cpm as the impression (traffic) remains more or less same. I wonder what would be the reason? Should I remove the second ad unit to see any improvement in epc? My site looks pretty neat even after putting the second ad unit.
| 11:26 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I did. But that was mostly due to the fact that I'm too bad at css to be able to keep the good ads where I want them.
I have used a skyscraper running alongside articles, and added a box below longer texts. That code was called first when loading the page and got all the good ads, while the skyscraper (when actually displaying) mostly contained one or two ads only.
As soon as I find time to figure out how to call up the code later on on the page, I will go back to two ads.
| 11:32 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I was surprised to get a very very nice click through rate on the 2nd ad units at the very bottom of the article. At least it tells me that our visitors are actually reading to the end of the articles
| 11:35 am on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
alika - did your overall EPC suffer?
| 1:29 pm on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
adfree ... compared to same period in August, my EPC decreased ever so slightly by 3.98% But I attribute the decrease more from the long holiday rather than the addition of the multiple ads last Sept 1. My CTR also very slightly increased by 0.71%.
I'll still keep tracking it though. Give it another couple of weeks to see how the addition of ad units really impact the bottomline.
| 2:53 pm on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I've gotten the impression so far that the use of multi ads is highly dependent on the advertisers in a particular area. If there's a huge gulf between the top two or three advertisers in an industry and EVERY OTHER advertiser, then multi ads seem very counter-productive to a publisher's bottom line. my early adsense stats today are not particularly encouranging. It fact, they're following the same trend of a downward spiraling epc. makes you wonder if multi ads are only good for advertisers who couldn't get exposure otherwise because their bids are so low.
| 3:31 pm on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Ultimately I'm expecting this: much lower CPM and EPC, but a sharp increase in number of clicks. A higher number of clicks multiplied at a reduced EPC can still be an overall revenue gain.
The number of clicks is definitely up and the EPC is definitely down.
| 3:36 pm on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Weird, I just checked my channels and my second set of ads have a lower number of impressions then the first set. The first set is at the top and the second set is at the bottom of the same page.
| 3:48 pm on Sep 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
That isn't interesting - it's normal.
| 3:41 am on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I still haven't jumped in with multiple ads.
Waiting and reading here first.
I have not seen any WOW posts that it has been great yet . . .
| 4:49 am on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I setup 3 different channels for 3 groups to be used on a related set of pages (within one site). Not sure if it's the weekend, but the results are so bad I'm pulling one of the groups now (I'll give two a try for a couple days).
Group 1 CTR - 100% (during testing period)
Group 2 CTR - 7% of group 1
Group 3 CTR - 11% of group 1
Group 1 CMP - 100% (during testing period)
Group 2 CMP - 4% of group 1
Group 3 CMP - 4% of group 1
Prior Month CTR with only one group - 102% of group 1
Prior Month CMP with only one group - 151% of group 1
Group 3 is only on a few pages with groups 1 and 2. Groups 1 and 2 are on about 40 pages. I'm going to remove group 2 and test for 1-2 days.
| 12:00 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
So far I haven't heard one "wow, the results are great with multiple ad blocks" story. I wonder if smart pricing is to blame. Theory: you add more ad blocks and get more impressions relative to clicks, so your effective cpm goes down and then your payout percentage gets cut. On top of that, you also get lower paying ads which makes for a double whammy. If this is the case (and I have no idea if it is, but I'm fairly suspicious), then this is one of the dumbest, lamest stunts ever pulled by google---particularly since a fair number of publishers spent many hours swapping out ad code only to lose money while google got to trot out some lower echelon ad inventory. I might have to credit EFV on this one. If it looks and smells like a dead rotting fish...
| 12:32 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|then this is one of the dumbest, lamest stunts ever pulled by google |
Google has given us options, and in my view choices are great for everyon, one does not have to have one ad unit, two or three - it is down to us as publishers to decide what best works for you and your site(s).
Plus time is needed to evaluate this whole thing.
| 1:33 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|If this is the case (and I have no idea if it is, but I'm fairly suspicious), then this is one of the dumbest, lamest stunts ever pulled by google |
Absolutely not. The fact that we are getting almost 2 digits in CTR for ads placed at the bottom of the article -- an option we would never have considered if the multiple ads format was not allowed -- is the wow factor for us.
With this arrangement, we are hitting two birds with one stone: we are getting users to read our entire article, and we are getting them to click on ads. Whereas before where we placed large rectangles at the start of the article -- users who clicked may invariably left our site without reading our entire content -- now we have the perfect arrangement of showing users what we got and earning from them when they are done reading the content. It is very heartening to know that users are actually reaching the end of the page, no matter how long the article! Hence, users now have two options -- not read the article and leave the site by clicking on the ad at the start of the article; or stick around to read the entire content then leave via the ads at the bottom of the page.
Give it a try. Track it very carefully. And see if it works for you. If not, big deal, simply remove it. It is hard to make decisions from what people say here. Remember, it is easier to complain and whine (and we have lots of that here) than write about good experiences.
| 2:19 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|then this is one of the dumbest, lamest stunts ever pulled by google |
Think of all the webmasters that pleaded with Google for multiple ad units. So now they go and offer what so many wanted, and it is a dumb stunt?
No one *has* to run multiple ad units. If you don't like the results, just take them down. But like alika, you never would have known til you tried, and those are great results.
The jury is still out on this one for me. I am waiting until the end of the weekend before making any decisions.
| 2:25 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Plain and simple, we're seeing additional clicks at the bottom of columns (we only have the room, really, for 2 ad sets) that we wouldn't before. Its not much money on the bottom ads, but more than we would have had before.
And its a damn sight more money than the affiliate style programs we were testing out. Naturally those had to be "general" in scope, as our site is geared that way, and that meant a very low clickthrough rate compared to the targeted stuff.
And with one series in particular, where quite a few people read all the through, its been a godsend - it's a love it or leave it type of series, and our tests at the top and then later the bottom last month were inconclusive as for the best placement... this way we get the best of both.
But overall, our CPM / total payments are diminishing rapidly since the beginning of the month. I hope its hurricane season/vacation/school starting, and not the start of a down trend. For the past 6 months we've been improving every month, sometimes dramatically.
Only other thought here is that we haven't added a lot of content last month, so we're seeing a "hit" for it this month. That's where the down trend may be. I think its total coincidence with this new launch.
Anyway - don't even think twice about trying it, go ahead and do it, put a trial several columns if not your whole site. I mean, how could it make things worse?
| 3:00 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
well, maybe it's neither lame nor a stunt. and perhaps its success or failure will vary by website, website and industry, and the thoughtfulness of the webmaster who decides how to implement additional ad panels. But..."if" additional impressions and declining effective cpm do play into smart pricing calculations, it's still a bit disappointing. I guess the monitoring of results will continue and, hopefully, others will report their thumbs up or thumbs down evaluations.
| 3:01 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
If you use multiple adblocks to spread the ads out over the page, without adding to the number of ads it might be another story.
In other words, instead of one - 4-ad block, use two - 2-ad blocks. Or some similar combination.
You CTR would still fall, but you would not be exposing your site to additional, lower paying, ads.
The CTR drop is still bothering me though. If CTR figures into smart pricing, then you might need to get quite a big an increase in clicks to compensate.
Anyone done this and seen an maintained their CTR, or seen an increase in CTR?
| 3:13 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|don't even think twice about trying it, go ahead and do it, put a trial several columns if not your whole site. I mean, how could it make things worse? |
How could it hurt? That might depend on how smart pricing works. If smart pricing only allows for downward movement of EPC*, then an unsuccessful trial of multiple adblocks could have a long term negative affect on earnings, even if a publisher reverts to displaying a single adblock on each page.
* I don't know if Smart Pricing allows for EPC to move up as well as down. Anyone here know from experience?
| 3:16 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Ha - if they are, they're probably not here like we are wondering if it's working or not. :-)
I guess we shouldn't jump the gun on data less than 8 days old, anyway. Generally speaking the longer the data the better things will look or at least the truer the picture. I've made some fast decisions about data - things based on a few days of results - only to find that it was a blip, and long-term my original idea was more sound.
| 3:28 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|If smart pricing only allows for downward movement of EPC* |
Our EPC increased by 30% after smart pricing was introduced in April. And onwards after that we saw a continuing increase.
We started with Adsense in June last year, and saw our EPC continuously drop every month. Smart pricing, though, was godsend to us as it increased back our EPC to the July-August 2003 levels. Our EPC is now higher than ever
It is NOT TRUE that smart pricing only allows for downward movement of the EPC. Some sites benefit from it, while some are whacked in the head by it.
| 3:38 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
My EPC has been pretty steady, so I couldn't attribute any previous minor ups and downs to Smart pricing.
Good to know it works both ways.
| 4:09 pm on Sep 8, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I just think that it's coincidental that EPC nose dived at the same time they allowed multiple ads...maybe others didn't experience the same events.
| This 43 message thread spans 2 pages: 43 (  2 ) > > |