| 6:13 am on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think it will, it should encourage more advertisers to try out AdSense since they will feel they have control over where their ads appear.
| 6:21 am on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I can't see it hurting quality publishers, of which of course Iím one ;). Seems to me that the fewer the sites the better the chance of getting higher paying clicks.
| 6:36 am on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I can see that it has advantages for advertisers, and hopefully it wil mean more of them advertising in content, and quality websites gaining at the expense of scrapers etc.
I know that adsense are not likely to give us much (if any) information on if the advertisers are targetting us, if advertisers are blocking us, or if our ads are cpc/cpm. However, it would be handy to have *some* idea if our sites were valued by advertisers. How about it Google?
| 11:38 am on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Finally, a "smart pricing" feature that will actually work. Maybe they'll finally drop the one that doesn't.
| 12:13 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think some of us will have a rude awakening over the next several days as advertisers populate their site exclusion lists.
I just spent the last 1/2 hour adding 5 sites to my exclusion list in adwords - 3 of which I would have normally reported for invalid clicks.
One forum site I excluded uses single Ads as though they were forum entries - with click counts/popularity (faked).
For the sites I'm excluding, I don't care if I lose a little revenue - just so I can kill theirs.
| 12:25 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think a lot of advertisers are going to set up conversion tracking to see which sites convert, or dont convert. This in turn will also give Google a lot of information on conversions.
I personally think this is a good move on Googles part. I wish they would take it one step further to allow advertisers to choose which site to run ads on. Then allow publishers to place a link on their site asking advertisers if the want to place ads on this site.
| 12:32 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Could also give G an indicator of quality within certain subject areas - an incentive for publishers to produce quality content.
But again, that's subjective - what's quality for an advertiser may not be quality for a searcher.
Good all round though - should go at least some way to stop people profiting from copying others or churning out low quality rubbish.
| 12:35 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I've banned over two dozen so far - some appear to be fraudulent, others just plain awful or way off topic. As much as I'm happy to have a tool like this I'm a bit miffed at the time required to sift through logs etc to find the sites you want to ban, when google could provide us with the information in a far more accessible, less time-consuming manner...
| 12:42 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Here's an easy way to determine which publishers to nuke. All those scraper sites that send you an email stating, that they just added your site to theirs and would appreciate a reciprocal link. When you check out their site all you see are AdSense ads and links. Boom!
| 12:48 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Will this help quality publishers? |
It will help sites that convert - whether or not that relates to quality is a different topic altogether.
| 1:01 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"I personally think this is a good move on Googles part. I wish they would take it one step further to allow advertisers to choose which site to run ads on."
Isn't this already in the works? Site targeting for advertisers is coming out soon, right?
| 1:03 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yup, the world is not a "fair" place - in this business its not "quality" content that makes a blind bit of difference to the advertiser, its whether those doing the clicking eventulally "buy" and hence give a return on their investment.
If scraper sites deliver a return on investment they will prosper (like everyone else), if they do not, then they will fold.
| 1:22 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Isn't this already in the works? Site targeting for advertisers is coming out soon, right? |
I thought that is for eCPM campaigns only. I would like to see it also on CPC campaigns. But, I might be wrong.
| 1:31 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It would be nice to know if advertisers were opting out of your site - and why.
It wouldn't be hard - click for either "poor conversion rate", "untargetted", or "poor quality".
You have to wonder if part of the reason for the drop in revenue and CPM right now is tied to dataserver errors, or advertisers pulling out from you sites? Our sites are clean and above board, but that doesn't mean someone might not "like" the design, and so on.
| 1:44 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I use adwords to drive traffic to my site to gain customers and to (coincidently) generate adsense revenue.
I have removed 8 sites using the new exclusion tool in adwords - these were highest visitors counts to my site that are scam/no-content sites.
CPM on my adsense ads is going up up up (20%) so far this morning.
| 1:56 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This is a wonderful move for Google! We as publishers will just have to see if advertisers consider our sites quality :)
As state before, it would be nice to know if someone is opting out of our site.
| 2:03 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I just asked a question about this in another board. Someone was saying that advertisers could now pick specific publisher pages to advertise on. This didn't sound right to me, it's just a filter right? I don't use adwords, but I am a publisher.
| 2:16 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It thought that feature was in the works?
The flip side is if you get an advertiser on your site you don't want you can filter them out.
| 2:26 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|in this business its not "quality" content that makes a blind bit of difference to the advertiser, its whether those doing the clicking eventulally "buy" and hence give a return on their investment. |
If you read the thread in the AdWords forum, you'll see that some advertisers are already disabling scraper and other junk sites as a matter of course.
Just as important, having the ability to block junk sites for any reason will make the content network far more attractive to advertisers outside the traditional PPC realm--i.e., companies (both small and large) that care about their brands and reputations. Too often, Webmaster World members assume that everyone is like them. But not all advertisers are affiliates (who are selling someone else's brand) or very small e-commerce entrepreneurs (who don't have to worry about the CEO throwing a fit when the company's ads turn up on buds-neonazi-bondage-scraper-site.com). As ad dollars continue to shift from traditional media to the Internet, the ad network that can serve the needs of larger advertisers is the one that will end up on top.
| 2:35 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
EFV you are so wise - always good to read you!
| 2:43 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Okay, I've gathered that choosing a publisher site, or page, for your ads to appear on is something that is still in the works.
When it gets to that point, I'll be interested. I've been wanting to take on some more private advertisers, because of requests for the service, but the hassle involved with this...
It would be nice if I could just refer them to adwords, explain how to make their ads appear on the pages they are interested in advertising on, and let Google handle this for me.
| 2:58 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It sounds good, assuming advertizers think our sites are wortwhile, but I'm a little confused about it.
Does it apply to all ad campaigns, or just to CPM, or just PPC?
How does it work in relationship to the new (beta?) Site Targeting program? (Site Targetong is just for CPM campaigns, right?)
| 3:07 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
....and how does it work with the text ad? They show up as search content don't they?
| 3:35 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think this new Adwords feature is great. But you know what the first new feature wanted will be? Wild cards in the domain names filters. Domain name sales are going to jump again so the scrapers can stay ahead of the Advertiser's filters.
Also IMHO if you're an Adsense user you really should sign up to Adwords just to see what's going on. It's really free, and maybe in the future Google will constrain who gets in ( minimum expediture constraint? ), but the ones already signed up will probably be grandfathered in.
| 3:44 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
As a user of AdWords and AdSense, I also think this is a great idea from both perspectives. Like others, I'd also like it if AdSense would let us know when our sites were being blocked.
| 3:46 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
i agree that this is a great feature for both adsense and adwords. advertisers will have control, and quality publishers should reap the rewards as more advertisers feel comfortable to come on board since they can block.
but this adds a new twist... many publishers have been optimizing their pages to increase adsense CTR. now, however, publishers may want to focus some attention on the production value of their sites because they need to impress advertisers. some advertisers may not understand that 'content is king' and be more focused on the appearance of a site.
so, with this new feature, we need to make our visitors happy, we optimize for the SERPs, we optimize for adsense CTR, and now we need to make sure that advertisers like our sites too.
in the end, it appears that the golden rule - make your sites as good as you can for your visitors - will work best.
| 3:47 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
also... i wonder if google is going to take note of sites that appear in lots of advertiser's blacklists... if so, will they factor this fact into the smart-pricing algorithm?
| 4:03 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|also... i wonder if google is going to take note of sites that appear in lots of advertiser's blacklists... if so, will they factor this fact into the smart-pricing algorithm? |
Interesting thought. Why not? It would make a lot of sense--and it would encourage publishers to avoid tricks that jack up CTR at the expense of advertisers.
| 4:17 pm on May 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I don't think much will change as a matter of fact it will make things better. The only people that will mess with this are people that already have content network turned off. So if they turn it on ban some sites there is a chance for new ads that you did not have before.
| This 50 message thread spans 2 pages: 50 (  2 ) > > |