homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 23.22.194.120
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 57 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 57 ( 1 [2]     
You can now stop promoting the $0 affiliate program
Onsite advertiser sign-up feature to be retired
oddsod




msg:3526705
 1:33 pm on Dec 13, 2007 (gmt 0)

Our recent findings indicate that the Onsite Advertiser Sign-up feature, which allowed advertisers to sign up for AdWords campaigns on your site, hasn't been performing as well as we had hoped.

According to Adsense [groups.google.com], it didn't work, wasn't a good idea and $0 commissions don't get webmasters all fired up.

You don't say!

When they announced it two years ago I started a thread [webmasterworld.com] condemning this free advertising they were screwing me for. Adsense Advisor dropped in to tell us they were listening, blah, blah. Net result: They continued running it for over two years and now they're discontinuing it so you can earn more money. Yeah, sure! ;)

 

Go60Guy




msg:3528621
 8:06 pm on Dec 15, 2007 (gmt 0)

As a new mod here, I'd like to suggest tapping the brakes on the drift this thread is taking.:)

That said, it is refreshing to see that Google is willing to admit one of it's AdSense promotional efforts didn't work out. We all know that often what takes place on the web is experimental. We're all trying to learn, Google included.

King_Fisher




msg:3528647
 9:10 pm on Dec 15, 2007 (gmt 0)

It is imperative for Google to keep searching for alternative features to keep
revenues increasing, some will work and some wont.

Rest assured we will see more in the future. We hope that they have the collective wisdom to dump the losers a lot quicker.

I imagine running Google is much like steering the Queen Mary with a canoe paddle...KF

PS Bad analogy, Queen Mary has been in dry dock for quite a few years.

SteveWh




msg:3528878
 11:14 am on Dec 16, 2007 (gmt 0)

The way Google implemented this feature, someone who clicked on the link was basically being invited to sign up for AdWords & master all the nuances of AdWords and then maybe, IF all the stars line up just right, SOME of the advertiser's ad spending might result in their ad appearing on widgets.com sometime.

Thanks for that concise summary. I didn't know that's what they'd go through. I thought it meant "Advertise on this site", not "Sign up for AdWords".

If I visit widgets.com and see an "Advertise on this site" link, I expect I will be able to click and advertise on widgets.com

That's what I *thought* would happen. The question in my mind is, having it work like that is so obvious and so obviously beneficial to both the advertiser (who *wants* to advertise on that site) and the publisher (who wants people who want to advertise on their site), why on earth isn't that how it was implemented?

It would be great if the feature were reincarnated in an implementation that DID work like that. Advertisers would get to advertise on a specific site where they want to appear (and might be willing to pay a bit more -- outbid others -- to do so), and the site owners would get advertisers who have already determined that the site is a particularly good location for their ads, and Google would get more ad revenue, too.

oddsod




msg:3528883
 12:04 pm on Dec 16, 2007 (gmt 0)

I thought it meant "Advertise on this site", not "Sign up for AdWords".

That's one reason why a lot of people didn't opt out.

I don't have anything against the fact that it was signing people up for Adwords. After all, it's in everybody's interest for Adwords to do well. I was against the fact that if you got Adwords a valuable customer - someone who went on to spend millions with Adwords - you'd essentially get nothing for generating such a valuable client.

The underlying idea wasn't to earn us more money but to sign up more advertisers (to answer your question about why it was implemented this way).

It would be great if the feature were reincarnated in an implementation that DID work like that.

It's right that complexity will turn some advertisers off. Particularly the small ones. And there are many of them who can still be tempted in. The way to do that would be Adwords lite where they click on the link on your site and have a simple way of advertising on your site. Once bitten... I would tend to be a bit cautious about any future implementation. Any future implementation, irrespective of how it's originally launched, could be "tweaked". In any event, I'd prefer if it were opt-in.

aleksl




msg:3529591
 4:59 pm on Dec 17, 2007 (gmt 0)

europeforvisitors: If you're worried about losing direct ad sales to AdSense, why have AdSense on your pages at all?

Two reasons:
1) There are places on website where it is hard to do direct sales. Like bottom of the page.
2) It is a very good gauge on how much to charge direct advertisers. Just don't forget to use a multiplier, as G$$gle underpays for your traffic ;)

So when G$$gle goes on placing their free ads and trying to persuade YOUR customers to sign up with them and pay fractions for YOUR traffic, that a) gets blocked immediately, and b) Adsense no longer occupies prime spots on our sites, so they have no chance in hell to compete for them.

fearlessrick




msg:3530249
 2:17 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

EFV said:
The vast majority of "AdSense sites" aren't good enough to get inquiries via "Advertise on this site" links, so the links had a low clickthrough rate.

You really know how to make friends, don't you, old master of advertising?

In your mind, individual sites are ill-conceived, poorly implemented, sloppy, and barely useful, but Google is near perfection in every aspect.

Sad, how you go through life with such a tainted point of view.

Happy Holidays.

oddsod




msg:3530281
 2:48 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

fearlessrick, but you've got to agree, there's no better insurance against losing an Adsense account than EFV's back catalogue of posts :)

Only kidding, only kidding, OK?! Don't bite my head off. :)

europeforvisitors




msg:3530300
 3:12 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Fearlessrick and Oddsod, are you trying to make the moderators' job more difficult?

europeforvisitors




msg:3530303
 3:15 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Fearlessrick and Oddsod, are you trying to make the moderators' job more difficult? And Fearlessrick, are you trying to tell us that the majority of "AdSense sites" are worthy of individual attention from advertisers? (If that's the case, you must be the guy who thinks Google is "near perfection in every respect.")

buckworks




msg:3530305
 3:18 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

The vast majority of "AdSense sites" aren't good enough to get inquiries via "Advertise on this site" links, so the links had a low clickthrough rate.

EFV is 100% right about that. As evidence, just look at all the threads about people trying to block MFA sites from showing up in their own ads, and wishing out loud for larger filters so they could block even more.

MsHuggys




msg:3530365
 4:23 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

I for one am very disappointed in this development. I initially rejected this idea. Then, when my traffic crashed during a Google update, I was desperate to maximum the traffic I had left.

So, I opted in for the "advertise on this site" and within a matter of 24 hours I began to see new advertisers on my site and they were BIG ones, with full block ads.

Since they were so well targeted, I didn't mind them at all. Also didn't mind the fact that my earnings almost doubled, overnight as my visitors clicked the ads.

Those advertisers stayed, and my earnings remained high. Because alot of my visitors are uniques each day, week and month, they do not get the 'ad blindness' many others complain of. So, my increase in earnings has been sustained.

Because inhouse I only offer flat rate advertising, which is much cheaper than Adsense, I saw no increase in my inhouse advertising. I believe this was because I do not offer the kind of flexibility in ad managment that Google offers, so I was never really in competition with them. In other words, they didn't lose any business from those who opted to deal directly with me.

I find it hard to believe that I am the only publisher who reaped such a huge reward from this "failed" plan.

What has hurt instead, was the option to decide how much an advertiser wanted to bid by website. This allowed them to decide if my site should have a lower maximum than others. Overnight, I saw a slide, that could not be explained in other way. In fact, I saw the slide on day one, day two, came here on day three to see what was going on, and learned the answer.

That recent change has resulted in about 25% decline in recent weeks. But that decline is over the months before and does not take into consideration year ago stats. For year ago, I had been slammed by low traffic due to the Google dance and it is hard to calculate changes for this comparrison with other country-wide and industry-wide economic factors to consider. Two years ago to date, I am down 25% though.

If not for this change at Adsense, I would have had a banner holiday (peak) season. Instead, right when we were expecting our biggest month of the year (November), it got yanked out from under us.

In the end, I am just thankful that I still earn enough to support two families. But, I continue to diversify, using my Adsense earnings for investments to ensure that Adsense fiddling with new features doesn't bring us crashing down once and for all.

That is not a matter of IF but WHEN as small businesses get tread into the ground by a huge partner working to maximize their own earnings.

I saw that happen to us in 2000 by a trading partner who ruined my business when they decided to optimize theirs. I had been their #1 trading partner, with my sales (and theirs) growing at the speed of light, and I was making a killing. Overnight, my earnings came crashing down when they discovered they could cut me out of the picture and take 100% of the revenue for themselves. I negotiated until I was blue in the face, and got some minor concessions, which came nowhere near to off-setting my huge revenue losses.

I sold that business to another who felt more confident they could improve the sales inspite of that recent development with the big partner.

I switched to another business line that I felt was much more secure (and it has been for the past five years)It is a constant threat for any small business who deals very closely with a giant, like Adsense.

That is an age old problem that now with the electronic age has only become a bigger threat to small businesses. When big business maximizes earnings, it is a given some small businesses will suffer. All you can do is hunker down and try to regain ground.

europeforvisitors




msg:3530430
 5:32 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

That is not a matter of IF but WHEN as small businesses get tread into the ground by a huge partner working to maximize their own earnings.

It isn't a matter of "a huge partner working to maximize their own earnings," but of whether the "Advertise on this site" link was generating enough traffic and signups across the network. If you want to be part of a network, you have to take the good with the bad--the "good" meaning access to advertisers who normally wouldn't bother with a mom-and-pop site, and the "bad" meaning the need to accept things that may not be in your personal interests because of the needs, performance, etc. of the network as a whole.

menial




msg:3530515
 6:46 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

And Fearlessrick, are you trying to tell us that the majority of "AdSense sites" are worthy of individual attention from advertisers? (If that's the case, you must be the guy who thinks Google is "near perfection in every respect.")

I dare to say that 100% of "Adsense sites" are 100% worthy of individual attention from advertisers. Because Google would not approve publisher sites otherwise (and profit from them), would it?

europeforvisitors




msg:3530555
 7:56 pm on Dec 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

I dare to say that 100% of "Adsense sites" are 100% worthy of individual attention from advertisers. Because Google would not approve publisher sites otherwise (and profit from them), would it?

When advertisers buy contextual ads on a network, they know they're taking potluck. They're targeting keywords, not individual sites, and the sites where their ads appear will vary in terms of content type, traffic, editorial quality, etc.

When advertisers target individual sites, they're targeting audiences, not keywords, so their standards for where ads appear are (or should be) higher than with contextual ads--especially if they're buying CPM ads, which represent wasted money if they reach the wrong audiences.

farmboy




msg:3530775
 1:13 am on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

So, I opted in for the "advertise on this site" and within a matter of 24 hours I began to see new advertisers on my site and they were BIG ones, with full block ads.

Since they were so well targeted, I didn't mind them at all. Also didn't mind the fact that my earnings almost doubled, overnight as my visitors clicked the ads.

...I find it hard to believe that I am the only publisher who reaped such a huge reward from this "failed" plan.

So you enabled the "Advertise on this site feature", advertisers saw the link on your site, clicked on the link, signed up for AdWords, opted-in to the Content network, got a budget and ads approved, the ads started appearing on your site in addition to wherever else, the ads were well targeted and your visitors started clicking enough that your earnings almost doubled. And all that took place in a 24-hour period.

I find it easy to believe you're the only or one of a few that had such an experience.

That's an incredible series of events in such a short period of time. If that was a common thing, lots more publishers here would be discussing the success and AdSense wouldn't have discontinued the feature.

FarmBoy

farmboy




msg:3530782
 1:16 am on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

As evidence, just look at all the threads about people trying to block MFA sites from showing up in their own ads, and wishing out loud for larger filters so they could block even more.

I guess I didn't notice at the time, but I wonder how many of the MFA sites (especially the "parked domain" version) even bothered to enable the "Advertise on this site" link?

FarmBoy

aegir




msg:3531154
 3:18 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

I have a site that has over 2 million uniques a month (7 million visits) and *only* used AdSense. When I've been approached by advertisers I've asked them to go through Adsense so this is a feature that I've used a lot. Now, sadly, I'm seeing a huge drop in income, hundreds of dollars per day and still dropping.

Are there any other ad providers that are still using this feature?

farmboy




msg:3531156
 3:22 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

When I've been approached by advertisers I've asked them to go through Adsense so this is a feature that I've used a lot.

What exactly do you mean by "I've asked them to go through AdSense"?

Did you refer them to AdWords, did you refer them to AdSense or did you instruct them to find one of the "Advertise on this site" links on your site and click it?

FarmBoy

aegir




msg:3531160
 3:26 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

I mean, told them I don't sell ads directly so the only way to buy advertising space on my site is through adsense. I've never used adwords so I'm not familiar with the process from there.

aegir




msg:3531164
 3:29 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

... I put an "advertise on this site" link on all my pages.

europeforvisitors




msg:3531204
 4:13 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

.. I put an "advertise on this site" link on all my pages.

I've got an "Advertising" link in my navigation bar, too. It takes the reader to a page that gives a pitch about the site and its audience and explains that two types of advertising are available: display ads through my rep firm/display-ad network and text ads through Google AdWords/AdSense. Links point the user to the rep firm's site and the Google AdWords site.

I much preferred it when I could send prospective text-ad advertisers to a Google landing page that referred specifically to my site. It's too bad Google couldn't have kept such landing pages even though it removed "Advertise on this site" from the AdSense ad units. I really think they've thrown the baby out with the bathwater: On a site where AdSense ads are the only ads available to smaller, low-budget advertisers, it would be nice if Google could make it easier for those smaller advertisers to take advantage of site-targeted ads. (And if Google could offer site-targeted contextual ads, as it suggested that it was going to do earlier this year, that would be even better.)

moTi




msg:3531217
 4:22 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

... over 2 million uniques a month ... told them I don't sell ads directly so the only way to buy advertising space on my site is through adsense ...

now that's crazy. whereas people here rightly proclaim "dont't put all your eggs in one basket" and most publishers would give everything to be in the situation that advertisers line up, this lucky boy here doesn't give a $hit about risk distribution and making more money through direct ad sales - he rather entrusts the whole income generation to google. unbelievable..

aegir




msg:3531234
 4:35 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

I do give a #*$! about direct ad sales, but being a one woman company I have opted to put all my time into developing content. This has paid off in the sense that I have good content and lots of happy visitors. As you probably know, selling ad space is very time consuming. Had I spent more time doing that, content might have suffered.

Putting all eggs in one baskets is what I've chosen to do, I tried other "baskets" but adsense has constantly been the best source of income, so why not? I'm not gonna use precious ad space on other lower paying ad providers "just because", I want to make as much money as possible.

aegir




msg:3531348
 6:26 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

I really think they've thrown the baby out with the bathwater: On a site where AdSense ads are the only ads available to smaller, low-budget advertisers, it would be nice if Google could make it easier for those smaller advertisers to take advantage of site-targeted ads.

That's exactly it. I understand that this feature might not have been used a lot by smaller site, but why couldn't they have kept it for those of us who benefited. I'm not the only one losing money on this decision, so is Adsense by default.

koan




msg:3531409
 7:43 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

Can't you guys use adwords referrals now instead? I put a "Target a specific audience, advertise with Adwords" referral text link in my contact page info, explaining they should target my site if they are interested (no, I don't promote actually clicking on the link itself). At least that way I run the chance of getting a commission, and Google handles all the backend operations for managing interested advertisers with their auction style system.

aegir




msg:3531429
 8:14 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

Thanks koan, I'll look into that.

europeforvisitors




msg:3531451
 8:33 pm on Dec 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

Interesting idea. I hadn't thought of that. Thanks.

This 57 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 57 ( 1 [2]
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