homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.204.128.190
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdSense
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: incrediBILL & jatar k & martinibuster

Google AdSense Forum

This 97 message thread spans 4 pages: 97 ( [1] 2 3 4 > >     
List your top theory on why eCPM slumped suddenly
Is there a consensus?
frakilk




msg:3499649
 2:49 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Google rolled out a new smart pricing algo (which also caused the glitch)

 

potentialgeek




msg:3499654
 2:59 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

I don't believe that because my pricing returned to normal about as fast as it tanked (after, what, two weeks). It's got to be something else...

p/g

zett




msg:3499660
 3:05 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

New SmartPricing algo gone badly wrong, with the channels issue being a side effect (coding error). Having said that, I believe SmartPricing to be nothing else than a money grab with a smart name.

Hobbs




msg:3499666
 3:11 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Weaker dollar, US economy approaching recession, advertisers pulling out, other advertisers saving up for an upcoming competitive shopping season.

As for that October night, it was just a normal maintenance, people were already reporting lower earnings before that, throw in the mix screwed up reporting and the conspiracy theory was ignited.

OnlyToday




msg:3499681
 3:19 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Yeah, I'll go with coding error and/or data corruption. It may initially have been an attempt at smart pricing. Those responsible for this may at this moment be frantically trying to contain the fubar and more importantly keep news of it from reaching their bosses.

I have been pondering the most effective way to bring wider attention to this problem. OTOH that may be a dead end, hard to say, but wider attention can only be better for those of us affected.

added in edit: The change was absolutely too abrupt and too large to be attributed to ordinary market conditions, anyone positing that theory hasn't actually seen the stats.

[edited by: OnlyToday at 3:23 pm (utc) on Nov. 8, 2007]

HuskyPup




msg:3499712
 3:47 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

The change was absolutely too abrupt and too large to be attributed to ordinary market conditions

Absolutely true for those of us affected, it has to be a bad data push or an unintended data push that has affected only certain sites for whatever known reason.

I had a similar occurrence last May with the canned response of earnings vary, number of advertisers etc, two weeks later my metrics all returned to my expected norm.

The same thing applied:

The change was absolutely too abrupt and too large to be attributed to ordinary market conditions

I do not believe it is StupidPricing (TM) since I am still getting the odd higher value click, just not as many as before.

Do I feel that they know they've made an almighty FUBAR, yes I do, do I feel they know how to rectify yet? No I don't!

Atomic




msg:3499722
 3:53 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

My eCPM is up about 15% this month. Don't forget to include the fact that not everyone's eCPM is declining in your theories.

HuskyPup




msg:3499728
 3:59 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Don't forget to include the fact that not everyone's eCPM is declining in your theories.

No one has said that everyone has been affected.

Absolutely true for those of us affected,

We know this however WHY were we affected and so consistently across-the-board, that is the question?

OnlyToday




msg:3499753
 4:18 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Another factor that I forgot to mention in my earlier post that argues against ordinary market factors is that prior to glitch day my eCPM was quite consistent within a particular range for months. Upon the abrupt change on glitch day the same range dropped and has remained consistently within the new lowered range--though there does seem to be more fluctuation within the new range.

This could be explained by the loss of a single large advertiser like eBay or similar, but we would have heard of such a loss in the trade news. The fact that some publishers are not affected at all suggests that those of us affected have something else in common aside from keywords or topic. Perhaps it is arbitrary, perhaps it is accounts kept on one particular server or in one data center.

HuskyPup




msg:3499764
 4:23 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

perhaps it is accounts kept on one particular server or in one data center.

I speculated this quite awhile back, I have said before that I always seem to notice these changes much sooner than most and have wondered whether I am on their experimental sever etc?

4+ years AdSense, how does this compare to the others affected?

OnlyToday




msg:3499766
 4:26 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

3+ years.

icedowl




msg:3499771
 4:31 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

3-1/2 years

King_Fisher




msg:3499859
 6:10 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Maybe Corporate was trying to hit quarterly earnings projections! :o)...KF

Edge




msg:3499896
 6:41 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Simple answer - Google keeping more for themselves...

martinibuster




msg:3499906
 6:54 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Tin hat on: Introduction of enhanced Behavioral Targeting backfired.

Tin hat off: Advertising dipped lower than usual for an October due to a weak economy, plus global effects of a weak dollar.

titaneye




msg:3499908
 6:55 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

WW seems to be the only forum left on the planet where the majority of it's members still blame a sharp drop in PPC earnings on a glitch. That is just plain silly. So let me get this straight, AdWords and AdSense simultaneously glitched, everyone's earning tanked, and a whole bunch of advertising dollars somehow got diverted where, the Red Cross? I suppose the 20 or so webmasters I know that have all seen a dramatic increase in traffic this year, while watching their AdSense earnings hit record lows, are also experiencing a glitch? EuropeForVisitors will pop in any time now and tell me it's just Leonid Brezhnev's SmartPricingŪ.

I honestly can't stand this forum, it has become the propaganda center for a Monopolistic Corporation, that increasingly tramples on the rights of the very community of people that helped put it where it is today.

Atomic




msg:3499918
 7:00 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Simple answer - Google keeping more for themselves...

Or they're giving it to me since my eCPM is rising.

These theories should fit everyone. Better yet, a theory is often(always) supported by evidence. If they don't, send them back to the shop for more work.

martinibuster




msg:3499929
 7:06 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

>>>AdWords and AdSense simultaneously glitched

Most people in this forum are aware of that. The question is identifying that glitch. As far as glitches go, not all webmasters were affected by it, it was not an across the board event.

drall




msg:3499933
 7:09 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

For us its pretty clear, Google has decided to change there rev share with our account.

We have been with adsense since the summer of 2003.
We have clean and well respected websites many with pr 6-7, we were actually asked to be featured as a success story once.
We have many millions of users per month.
We are business related. Plenty of sales funnel and no end in site for advertisers.
We have always made at a minimum $X0,000.00 range per month for 4 years.
Nothing has changed with our sites or traffic.
Nothing has changed with ad implementation or code.
Nothing has changed with ctr.
Our rep says our stats are great from the advertiser perspective.
Our rep insists we are not being smartpriced.
The drop happened across the entire account, across every channel at once ruling out market flux.

So......
There can be only one logical conclusion, Google has decided to take 50% more of our earnings thus shifting our old rev share %. As many others have noted increasing ctr, traffic or exposure seems to have no effect.

It's as if Google said, you are worth this much per month. Try as you may you will not grow. Have a nice day...

OnlyToday




msg:3499939
 7:12 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Tin hat off: Advertising dipped lower than usual for an October due to a weak economy, plus global effects of a weak dollar.

The chart simply doesn't support this. Abrupt drop-offs that remain consistent after the drop off simply don't happen without some other coinciding macro event.

I've been following and charting economic activity for a long time, crowds just don't behave like this. This was an event that happened within AdSense internally, anything external that large that happened quickly enough to precipitate such a drop off in advertising would have appeared in the financial news. Besides, if it were an external event it would have happened across the board, not to one subset of publishers.

[edited by: OnlyToday at 7:13 pm (utc) on Nov. 8, 2007]

Atomic




msg:3499981
 7:39 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

There can be only one logical conclusion, Google has decided to take 50% more of our earnings thus shifting our old rev share %. As many others have noted increasing ctr, traffic or exposure seems to have no effect.

I read what you posted and I can easily come up with another conclusion besides the only one logical one you came up with. Couldn't it be true that some advertisers pulled out of your category? Could it be that an advertiser decided to discontinue targeting your site? There could be more logical conclusions but those are two additional "only" logical conclusions I came up with in a few seconds.

radix




msg:3499986
 7:51 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Tin hat off: Advertising dipped lower than usual for an October due to a weak economy, plus global effects of a weak dollar.

Weak economy - maybe in the US.

Some of my sites are geared towards my native country - former Soviet block country. Economy is not too bad here, the revenue loss is still apparent. So, at least for these sites, that explanation is not valid.

berto




msg:3499993
 7:56 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Simple answer - Google keeping more for themselves...

Or they're giving it to me since my eCPM is rising.

These theories should fit everyone [emphasis added]. Better yet, a theory is often(always) supported by evidence. If they don't, send them back to the shop for more work.

Complex systems don't work that way. In a complex, dynamic, stochastic system, it's entirely possible for the average to go one way, even overwhelmingly one way, while a relatively few outliers go the other.

In a bear market, there are always winner stocks.

In Illinois (my state), July temperatures were much lower than normal this year. In focusing on the outlier month, should we ignore the fact that, overall, 2007 temperatures have been higher than normal?

Paradoxically, snowfall is trending upward in America's Great Lakes Region. Should we therefore conclude that Global Warming is bogus?

Your (possible) exception doesn't disprove the (possible) rule.

[edited by: berto at 8:26 pm (utc) on Nov. 8, 2007]

titaneye




msg:3500001
 8:00 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

berto, a race car is a dynamic machine, does that mean the diver doesn't know how to drive it. Google knows how to pull more revenue out of it's network easily.

drall




msg:3500004
 8:03 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Atomic,
This does not happen to six, pr 7 websites with millions of visits a month across thousands of verticles on the same day at the same hour.

Regular market flux cannot account for a 49.8% drop in epc on each and every site, many dealing with completely different areas of business.

PR 7 Site 1 - 49.8% drop in epc /Subject Widget A
PR 7 Site 2 - 49.2% drop in epc /Subject Widget B
PR 7 Site 3 - 48.1% drop in epc /Subject Widget C
PR 6 Site 4 - 51.1% drop in epc /Subject Widget D
PR 7 Site 5 - 51.3% drop in epc /Subject Widget E
PR 6 Site 6 - 49.7% drop in epc /Subject Widget F

Same advertisers, same adverts, same traffic, completely different areas of interest for each site, millions of visitors per month.

This is not regular market flux, I am well aware of standard deviations and this has nothing to do with that.

The odds of thousands of clicks/bids a day across hundreds of areas on six seperate websites all dropped by the exact same percentage are so remote, I would have a better chance of winning the lotto 6 months in a row then this happening.

berto




msg:3500006
 8:15 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

berto, a race car is a dynamic machine, does that mean the diver doesn't know how to drive it. Google knows how to pull more revenue out of it's network easily.

I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I think it's entirely possible (conjecture) that Google is keeping a larger share of *most* publishers' pies, while keeping a smaller share of *relatively fewer* publishers' pies. I think it's entirely possible that (again, conjecture), overall Google (a) has a new policy of increasing their take at the expense of *most* (but not all) publishers and/or (b) they screwed up around October 20 and/or (c) <some other overarching explanation>, while a *relatively few* (certainly not all) publishers are having a normal month or even a very good one.

BTW, I too had statistically improbable low CTR and eCPM clustered around October 20, with eCPM tending slightly downward since then. By itself, my experience means nothing. But the number and vehemency of the publishers negatively impacted recently by <your guess is as good as mine> is striking.

King_Fisher




msg:3500012
 8:24 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

There is only one conclusion to be drawn from all this.

Google wants a larger share of our earnings!

It has nothing to do with the phase of the moon or changing tide schedules.

Liken it to TV or newspaper raising the cost of your ads schedule.

Except they are more up front with their explanations for doing so!...KF

btas2




msg:3500023
 8:35 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

Google's changed it's business model with respect to some site.

They could do it again tomorrow and cut your current CPM by another 50%. Sure they'd lose some advertisers, but it's the overall bottom line that counts. If they lose 20% of their advertisers but make 10% more profit from smaller payouts, they win.

HuskyPup




msg:3500029
 8:42 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

I'm convinced I'm drall in disguise, our metric similarities are uncanny!

Apart from the FUBAR data push and money grab by G, we don't seem to be able to come up with much.

I am right in assuming that all the publishers involved are/were minimum, say USD 2,000.00+ earners?

Any big USD X0,000.00 or even X00,000.00 earners who have seen any problems would be interesting!

It would certainly be an easy grab to hit 1,000+ higher earning publishers in the pocket however the fallout from it is proving very costly I would suggest.

Atomic




msg:3500034
 8:45 pm on Nov 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

This does not happen to six, pr 7 websites with millions of visits a month across thousands of verticles on the same day at the same hour.

Then how about these possible explanations:

1. Your AdSense rep is wrong

2. Your AdSense rep is flat out lying to you.

This 97 message thread spans 4 pages: 97 ( [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