| 11:54 pm on Jan 25, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Not sure what this means, but they looked over (reviewed) a site that I did not use as my "sign-up" site.
| 11:56 pm on Jan 25, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I got the same email. Also the first I've heard of "custom placement packs".
I went ahead and switched to the smaller rectangle format (I was already using the large rect format), and enabled the channels for this format to be "targetable" by advertisers.
Will be interesting to see what happens.
| 12:45 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I just got the e-mail, too. My site is small and quite specialized, so I can't imagine which "largest brand advertisers" would want to pay to put their ads there.
If anybody has a channel set up to run these advertisers' spots, I'd appreciate feedback. Are the new ads "on target", or do they push unrelated (but high-profit-margin) items or services for which the advertiser merely wanted "lots of eyeballs"?
| 1:17 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Me, too, just now.
Is this a good idea? It would require that I drastically change the layout of our website home page.
| 1:32 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
"After a recent review of your site, we would like to include (my-personal-site . com) in our custom placement packs program..."
I really can not take this email seriously, given the site they referenced in the email. It is a non-producing, totally ugly personal family picture site of mine, which has not been not been updated in 7 years.
| 1:44 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I got it too. Maybe it is some phishing scheme. Can anybody confirm it is legit before I waste 20 seconds and log into my account? haha
| 1:45 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Apparently, Google sent this email to specific publishers within the past hour (8:00pm - 9:00pm EST, US).
I only have one site, so they referenced the correct one. My only problem is, they're asking me to begin using more ad units of a certain size that I normally don't use.
Not really sure how this "custom placement packs" program works, but it sounds as if certain advertisers are allowed to request ad sizes and ad types for site-targeting -- if the publisher does not currently use that ad size.
|My site is small and quite specialized, so I can't imagine which "largest brand advertisers" would want to pay to put their ads there. |
A site like yours may be exactly what a large advertiser is looking for. If you have a unique, targeted niche, the advertiser may feel their ROI would increase when advertising on your site.
| 1:54 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I also got one. The funniest part about this is that last week I have removed all Google AdSense ads from this website because the eCPM got very low and we are switching to our own ad system anyway.
I dont have 300x250 above the fold available anyway. (I can do 250x250)
To Google Adsense: If you can offer me a guaranteed eCPM of at least $10 we can talk other than that there is no AdSense on my website.
|makes a little sense|
| 2:19 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I think everyone received this email. It also sounded pretty general, and I would imagine a database just inserted every single website into the email form.
| 2:30 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
And here I thought I was special. I got one too.
| 2:48 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I found the email very odd, as we had in the past been encouraged by Google to switch from 300x250 to the larger 336x280 format (and it did lead to higher revenues). One would think that if they had an advertiser with a 300x250 banner ad willing to pay enough, they could serve that ad in the 336x280 spot, with appropriate surrounding white space.
| 3:02 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Me too. Anyone NOT get the email? :)
Isn't that a really huge square? I think the ads I'm running are text-only and are all 468x60. A 300x250 is almost 3 times the real estate (75k pixels vs 28k pixels), and significantly, two more ads.
If I go along with this, should I remove the second 468x60 unit and just go with the single 300x250?
I currently have the following format:
468x60 2 ad unit
1st paragraph text
468x60 2 ad unit
Rest of text
In which location would you place the rectangle, and would you keep the second unit?
Currently both units run similar CTRs with the top unit getting 4 clicks for every 3 clicks on the second unit.
| 3:11 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I just received this email too. I'm emailing a contact at Google to find out more. This would require a major rewrite of my site, but if the advertising money is there, I'm willing.
|indias next no1|
| 3:37 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
i have also received a similar email, currently i am using 336 x
after getting some idea through you people i have to decide whether or not to use 300 x
| 3:46 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I received the same email, and I have already implemented the ad units on about 30% of my pages.
I'll test it for a while and see if it increases revenue.
| 3:47 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
One problem is that the package apparently consists of both text and image ads. Another is the ad format, which doesn't work with every site layout. Still, it's good to see that Google is taking a step toward giving advertisers greater control over where their ads appear.
| 4:00 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Above the fold.
At what resolution? I'd be more inclined to keep what I have as far as placements go and use the channel/placement targeting feature they also introduced today.
I can see why they want above the fold placement, but that's a big hunk of srceen to be allocating on a hope. At least I can't see it happening on most of my pages.
| 4:24 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I don't think all adsense publishers will receive it.
There are too few "me too" posts.
|makes a little sense|
| 4:49 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Consider how many AdSense forum members represent AS members who don't even participate on the forums.
Yeah. There be a TON of emails goin' out, my friend. If anything, I bet some people thought they were in a special group.
| 4:55 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I got one too and at first it scared the #*$! out of me because I thought they were going to close my account :)
I have changed my site (easy since I use an include file) but like everybody else, if I don't gain anything from it I'll switch back in a heart beat.
The 300x250 gives you fewer ads than 336x so if the video ads are not good and not targeted it probably will mean less income.....
Maybe they'll use YouTube videos?
|indias next no1|
| 5:25 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
above the fold :
they will run CPM ads, that'why they are telling place above the fold
| 5:50 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I got this email too.
If you do this, my guess is you will get more targeted ads. If that's the case, make sure you run the max amount of ad units they allow, that way you aren't showing "just banners" the other ad units will show the contextuals, while the medium recs are showing the banners.
| 5:52 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Me too! I got the e-mail regarding a 300x250 unit. Well I have a 300x250 unit above the fold on my home page *already*. I replied anyway.
| 5:55 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I got it too, and thanks for this topic. I was wondering if my site was REALLY selected from others, because in order for me to place these ads, I would have to re-design all my site, which is very time consuming. Besides, they supposedly "selected" the default site I have, my very first one, that I started my AdSense account with, and honestly this is not the best site I have, it has the lowest click-through rate.
I was thinking if it was a good deal or not. But now I see that they were just sending this canned message to all publishers. Standard promotion. Nobody really "selected" my site, so not worth my time.
| 6:25 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Me 28 :)
I wrote back asking about whether these were cpm or cpc ( as I already have gotten rid of ppc image ads which target my site) and also asking about when cpm they were paying.
Maybe they plan on rolling out a new program so first they need the advertising space to do so.
| 6:42 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
they are telling me to enable "Image ads" also so that my advertisers can put more ads on my site.
Should i enable image ads?
| 6:45 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
>>Should i enable image ads?
Taht's up to you, but I am only going to do so if this is a cpm deal. I've tried cpc and it didn't work as well as normal ad units.
| 6:53 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Just curious if there is anyone here who did NOT receive this email. Did they review everyones' sites by hand?
| 7:41 am on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I got one too. What made me think it was odd is that recently I got invited by Google for something else - and in that email, they addressed me by name. This email seemed quite generic, and was in an odd font (for a G email anyway.)
Obviously, I immediately came here to see if anyone else got one.
As has been asked previously - did anyone NOT get one?
| This 171 message thread spans 6 pages: 171 (  2 3 4 5 6 ) > > |