homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdSense
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: incrediBILL & jatar k & martinibuster

Google AdSense Forum

This 93 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 93 ( 1 2 [3] 4 > >     
Google to add CPM, other ad choices
According to the Wall Street Journal

 4:30 am on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

This from the Wall Street Journal today (Monday):

Among the changes: Google will let advertisers run animated display ads on non-Google content sites that contract with Google to sell ads. It will allow advertisers to specify the sites on which they want their ads to appear, without having to pick a keyword tied to the content on a page. It will begin auctioning ad placements for its partner sites based on how many people see the ad, known as cost per impression, as well as its traditional cost-per-click method.

This is huge news. The article says we should know more later today. Probably 9am ET since it's a US co.

For Wall Street Journal online subscribers, the article is titled "Google to Target Brands
In Revenue Push".



 2:52 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Just need to mention this. Fired off an email to G complaining about my numbers. Prior to the email, 8 clicks averaged 4 cents ea.

After email, 5 clicks, average 37 cents each. Really makes you wonder...

Visit Thailand

 2:53 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Advertisers have always had the option of dealing directly with publishers. They generally don't because most publishers can't deliver large blocks of impressions without excessive repetition.

Quite true although I am not sure I understand what you mean by excessive repetition.

Before only the very savvy webmasters had an idea about which AdSense sites delivered. With this new model everyone can test and try.

If I were a content advertiser I would test a site out for a while see what worked and then contact them directly for a quotation. If they cannot deliver, stick with AS if they can I could save money and they make a few extra Baht.

Plus with a direct deal an advertiser can organise placement which is not possible with AS.


 2:56 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

interesting point europeforvisitors,
So the plan is
1) develop a great looking site in an industry with deep advertising pockets where sales are not likely to occur online - may I suggest FMCGs.
2) ad adsense and enable image ads
3) wait for the CPM banners to start appearing
4) upload 10,000 pages for free widgets
5) profit
6) repeat


 2:56 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

thanks for the link

I hope there is an opt out option



 3:14 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Quite true although I am not sure I understand what you mean by excessive repetition.

Too many impressions per visitor. Frequency is useful up to a point, but if the average visitor clicks 5 or 10 pages of a site and sees the same ad each time, the advertiser who's paying a CPM rate isn't going to be happy.

If I were a content advertiser I would test a site out for a while see what worked and then contact them directly for a quotation.

You might, if they could deliver enough impressions to make it worth the time and paperwork. (If you're an ad agency or a media-buying service, though, being able to click a box in an AdWords console may be a lot more cost-effective, especially if you want to advertise on multiple sites.)

Another thought:

It will be interesting to see how if this new CPM option evolves into a true CPM alternative to CPC contextual ads, not just run-of-site filler ads for use when contextual ads aren't available. The fact that advertisers can choose the sites where their ads run could make a CPM option desirable (even at relatively high CPMs) to advertisers and ad agencies who are leery of taking potluck when they bid on content ads.


 3:17 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I doubt that disallowing image ads is going to be the easy way to escape CPM ads because they also apparently come in "expanded text" form.

One text ad in an adblock no matter how many regular text ads the block could hold. Sort of like the PSAs.


 3:29 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

It's 8:30am in California now... should we expect any official announcements soon?



 3:32 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Just because the minimum is $2 CPM doesn't mean that it will allow the system to show on your site for only $2 CPM. Why would Google do that, when it knows it can get $1O OR $20+ CPM on your site otherwise? Google is in the business of making money, and it wouldn't make business sense for them to show an ad worth $2 CPM over one worth $25 CPM, even if the $2 CPM advertiser is one that has chosen your site specifically. It should either not display the $2 CPM ad at all or require the advertiser to set a higher CPM that would beat out the current CPM on that site.

Is this official? My concern is that I'm currently getting an eCPM of over $30. I simply don't want CPM unless it's going to generate more revenue than I currently get, and I seriously can't see advertisers paying this on a CPM basis.


 3:36 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

OK, I keep seeing people going "OHHH! $2 CPM, 3 AD UNITS, MORE MONEY!"

Hello people, it's time for your 8am wake up call, that's before Google takes a 50%-60% slice of the pie.

Can you say $1 CPM?

With 3 ad units that's $3.

For 1,000,000 ad impressions that $1,000 dollars which is about 1/4 of my current earnings with AdSense.

If this only augments where PSA ads once played to fill gaps and increase the bottom line, I'm all for it.

If it replaces well paying ads ($0.03/click and up) with banners ($0.001/impression and up) that has never fared well on my site and impacts my bottom line it's the end of AdSense.

I'm now in a wait and see mode
- no reply from Google
- no PurplePills yet that I can see today, maybe the filter took a while


There's a banner ad for a Dodge Charger, ARRRRRRRRGH!


 3:51 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

imo, this program is designed for those pages that do not perform well with PPC ads. google probably had some big advertisers that cared more about branding than about clicks and since google has the network already in place to satisfy the demand - it was a perfect fit.

i cannot imagine that these ads will replace the high-paying PPC ads anywhere - that is google's bread and butter. this will be a supplement to their existing revenue. these type of ads will likely appear on pages that usually get PSAs or those that dont receive well-targeted PPC ads.

i think the good sign is that the big advertisers are coming on board. in a recent report on advertising, the internet only accounted for 3% of total ad spending - there is plenty of room for this to double and triple. i think its a good sign that the deep-pocket advertisers are coming online - in the long run, i think this means more money for google AND publishers.


 3:54 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Visit Thailand,

Today the TOS for advertisers were updated.

The advertiser has to agree, not to contact the publisher directly for offering him a deal.


 4:10 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

> The advertiser has to agree, not to contact the publisher directly for offering him a deal.

If this is true, then what would it be good for an "Advertise here" link on our sites? Should we all be forced to contact those that are advertising on our web sites because they are no longer allowed to?


 5:10 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I already have direct advertisers that also use AdWords, this is a HUGE can of worms.


 5:23 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I Seeeeeeeee it!

I changed proxy to public one in USA and now I can see
those damn Purple pills.


It is even worse than i thought.
(Quality is excellent but not content match).

Does anyone knows how to kill it?


 5:23 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Is this official?

I used to $25 CPM as an example. I also have CPM much higher than that, and it will be competitive with what you already have.

Jenstar's update of changes

Coming right up, I'll post in a new thread so everyone can spot it :)


 6:05 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Google claims:
For every eligible impression, both pay-per-impression ads and pay-per-click ads compete in the same auction. Our technology will automatically display the highest performing ads on your pages.

If Google is truthful in that only the highest performing ads for my site will be shown then I expect the banners to vaporize on their own in short order.

Maybe I was too harsh pre-judge (but I doubt it, my spider senses are tingling) assuming a high CTR (on my site) of 3% with the minimum CPC bid @ $0.05 would only be worth $1.50 total vs the $2 CPM minimum which is $0.50 more for the same thousand ad impressions.

However, that would assume it's a CPM text ad mixed in the leaderboard.

If we're only talking about a single banner for $0.001/impression it stinks.


 6:52 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Two things:

1: Maybe I just hadn't noticed this befor because I simply set my prefs to text ads only. But this might be of some relevance to this new CPM deal. Apparently we could allow image ads on a per page basis. That would open some better possibilties in my mind.

You may override your ad preference on a page-by-page basis, by selecting the desired Ad Type option in your Ad layout code page.

2: There is now some info on the Adsense "What's New" page, there is a link on the stats page after you log in.


 7:19 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

For every eligible impression, both pay-per-impression ads and pay-per-click ads compete in the same auction. Our technology will automatically display the highest performing ads on your pages.

I wonder if "Highest performing" means earn webmaster most money, earn Google most money, convert best for advertisers irrelevant of click price or what? My reading is that G will put the highest bidders first, but the wording might be open to interpretation.

I also wonder if the new features means a dissapearance of all the Ebay "New & used Buckingham Palace - all sizes available" spammy nonsense - surely that crap doesn't outbid real advertisers in a real auction?


 7:24 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Are the image ads all CPM?


 8:15 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I don't think they will have a problem with impression fraud. They are on top of that, according to the email I got from them a few days ago. Seems, my new link partner was sending too much traffic, too large of an increase, and Google warned me.

We thought we were in the right, until I scoured the TOS and saw the language on impressions.

I see this as the beginning to the end of ppc, and ppc fraud. It was only a matter of time.

Now, you will make money based on more on your Alexa, and suitability, which is fully within your control.

Bidding can be fabulous for some publishers. Opting out from some publishers, is going to kill alot off.
It is like Mr Clean working to get the germs off the web. I think the advertisers have been screaming for more control.

As far as Adbrite. We have been testing it, and it is weak. It is a time game. Over time, I am saying a year or two, it will pay off. But, it is going to be a long, slow haul. We modified our setup with them, to settle down for that long haul. Unless of course something else better comes along. (we have applied for notification at yahoo)

We added BrightAds, not to be confused with Adbrite, today. I am not impressed at all. I don't want to feed insurance ads to my visitors, especially on pages that relate to specific product lines. I can see the revenue is going to be weak. So, we are only trying it on a few pages.

Big beef there is no FAQ for reports, and no real reports data on impressions and cpm...

I am going to test drive it a while and see if the ads get better. Because they are hand edited, there is no way to target specific pages, so you get overall generalized ads. That will not convert well.

All the changes in ad servers are starting to remind me of the turmoil of the engines in the past 18 months. I think I need some antacids. Who has the site with those ads? (kidding)

Hold on publishers, it is going to be a wild ride this next year. I can see it coming.


 8:19 pm on Apr 25, 2005 (gmt 0)


You have a devious mind ;)

But, good point, as extreme as it is. The media is full of stories of corporate wars being fought in Adwords/Adsense to break a competitor. Maybe it is not so far fetched.


 1:13 am on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

If this program pulls in deep-pocketed branding advertisers, I'm all for it. The more funds that flow into the online advertising industry, the more that can potentially flow into our coffers.

More $$ resources, greater diversification ... how can anyone complain about that?

I'll give Google a thumbs up on site-specific CPM advertising.


 1:40 am on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

So from what I'm reading concerning the CPM banner ads, does this now mean we are no longer allowed to VIEW our OWN pages over the net to test and ensure they are loading and working properly for fear of triggering an impression fraud cancellation? That's unacceptable, considering sections of our site are used by our staff as well as outsiders to monitor constantly updated data. Since we use a dynamic ISP connection and sometimes proxy connections like AOL in common with other local users we can't filter ISPs without losing credit for significant visitors.
Also the ability to select what sites they advertise on (which is not a concern to me in itself) seems to indicate they will be provided with detailed statistics on a per site basis in order to make that decision (which IS a big concern to me). For instance I do not want my competitor to be able to identify my most popular impression pages, or to determine what ad formats are producing the best CTR by monitoring my stats from ads he has placed (we occassionally allow certain competitors to advertise which could come to an end NOW).
This, along with the "not contacting us directly for advertising" (we had many of our advertisers who NOW also advertise on Adwords at OUR recommendation LONG before Adsense did - and G KNOWS we send them a lot of new biz) could spell the end of OUR relationship with Adsense.
So where are the supposed new ADVANTAGES for Publishers. I just got an e-mail from G that starts out:
We've made many recent improvements to Google AdSense...

and then two sentences later finishes:

...has introduced a number of new features for ADVERTISERS (my emphasis),

How about Publishers ADVANTAGES like "design-your-own formats" and "pick your minimum acceptable PPC/CPM"?
At least they could let us know which displayed ads are CPM and which are PPC. So we know if we are violating the TOS or not by viewing them.

...and JUST as we were starting back into an up-cycle in CPM they have to go and screw with it as usual.


 2:51 am on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

I wonder if they will allow large forums that get many page views (impressions) to benefit from this CPM.

For example, my Page CTR is 0.1% and my Page eCPM is $0.09

I would like to paid more CPM, for example $0.15-$0.20 per thousand impressions would be excellent.

How does this affect someone like me?


 3:56 am on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Uh oh, maybe CPM ads will come to webmasterworld, Brett can turn a profit now!

Visit Thailand

 6:03 am on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

The advertiser has to agree, not to contact the publisher directly for offering him a deal.

Thanks for pointing that out. Must admit I can only smile at how ludicrous that rule is. Might look good on paper but is next to impossible to enforce.

Mod edit: continued [webmasterworld.com...]

[edited by: engine at 2:26 pm (utc) on April 26, 2005]


 4:11 pm on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

my view is that this is for web-wide ads, like those mortgage ads or if GM wants someone to manage their web ads for a new car launch etc. It's smart for Google though, they alreay have the infrastructure in place and this is a new market. Even though it may not produce the same ROI as clicks it's like money you never had in a sense.


 5:46 pm on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Think we already got a CPM banner last night. It was for that original domain registration company from way back when whose name starts with n. If you look in the link code (at least in this case) it says "banner" right after the url. It was quite inappropriate for the position, but if it was paying more than the expected CPM for that spot, then I guess I gotta trust G to make the right decision.
Anyone know if there is a way to opt out of CPM impressions altogether or has anyone tried filtering them yet?


 6:36 pm on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

my view is that this is for web-wide ads, like those mortgage ads or if GM wants someone to manage their web ads for a new car launch etc. It's smart for Google though, they alreay have the infrastructure in place and this is a new market. Even though it may not produce the same ROI as clicks it's like money you never had in a sense.

I think the CPM ads can be a lot more targeted than that. Remember, Google is offering "site-targeted" ads. This is something that banner networks like Tribal Fusion have tried to offer, but they've never had the critical mass that Google does. Google has brand recognition, search technology that enables "site targeting" on a huge scale, the ability to serve ads regionally (via geotargeting), and so on.

If you're the ad manager of the Widgetonian Tourist Office and you want people to think about visiting Widgetonia when vacationing in Eastern Europe, your media buyer can purchase advertising impressions on European and Eastern European travel sites just by selecting boxes in an AdWords console.

Later on, you might even try CPC for more specific campaigns, once you've become comfortable with Google's content network. And over the long term, you may find that there's a place for both CPM and CPC in your advertising strategy--just a cruise line might advertise in CONDE NAST TRAVELER or PORTHOLE to build awareness while using direct mail to stimulate bookings from targeted groups of prospects.

Bottom line: CPM represents new opportunities for advertisers and publishers. Google isn't afraid of it, and publishers shouldn't be, either.


 6:49 pm on Apr 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Be prepared to see Coke, McDonalds, car ads

God, I hope so. Do you know how much companies like that pay for advertising?

Personally I don't understand the fear of mainstream legit ads. My fear is that I'm going to get flashing "You have won!" banners, casinos, work at home schemes, all that crap. But the tone of your site is not going to be lowered by mainstream ads that people have already seen on TV and in magazines. Quite the contrary.

Assuming the ads are legit and legal, what's important is that you get PAID as much as possible. If it's CPM, it doesn't matter if someone clicks. Quite the contrary, it's good if someone doesn't click, because you get paid for showing that ad AND you still have the possiblity of sending the same person's click elsewhere.

No matter what your site's theme is, some of your visitors have acid reflux. Heck, my sister-in-law has it. I've had an ulcer and let me tell you, I would have tried anything to get rid of it, and I wouldn't have cared what site I saw the ad on - I was always looking for help. And as a webmaster, all I want is to be honest, not run ads that mislead or hurt my visitors, and get PAID. So bring on the purple pills.


 12:21 am on Apr 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Concerning the fraud issue that has been raised by a few of you, I beleive a next kind of fraud will take place: bulk traffic buy. You can buy nowdayz about 20 000 unique visitors (unique IPs) for only 15$... I think this will be a real problem in the near future if this CPM system is to take off...

This 93 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 93 ( 1 2 [3] 4 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdSense
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