| 11:09 pm on Oct 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I block them all. But the number does seem to vary from time to time. Mine was 6to start with, then 2, now 18.
What is the Google Test Network?
Do I really want to know?
| 11:13 pm on Oct 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Oops, me bad. I have double checked and have 18 on both.
Yes, I too also block them.
| 7:06 pm on Oct 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I'm blocking them all too, but I'm wondering why. Do you know anything about any of them, or are you blocking them on general principles?
| 7:20 pm on Oct 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
This is interesting--more information about the ad networks, in Adwords help. Scroll down to the bottom for a collapsible list of approved vendors:
| 7:24 pm on Oct 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
purplecape, there are two reasons why I block them.
1: Google could not be bothered to tell us what each of them target, so why should I include them?
2: I can see banned adword accounts returning by using one of the vendors.
| 7:51 pm on Oct 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
1. True, but aren't we just about as ignorant about the ads served by Google, especially if they are contextual (And I believe ad network ads can be contextual).
2. I hope not! You would think that Google would have safeguards in place to prevent this.
| 8:31 pm on Oct 25, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Although this link lists 90 Google 3rd Party Vendors, it contains ONLY ONE of the current 21 "Google Certified Ad Networks" - Teracent.
Can someone please explain why this is the case?
What am I missing?
| 2:10 am on Oct 26, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I noticed that too. From everything the documentation says, the "Google Certified Ad Networks" that are showing up in my Ad Review Center should be among the companies listed on that page.
And they aren't, with maybe one or two exceptions.
Very strange discrepancy and one that I hope ASA addresses.
| 5:20 pm on Oct 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I now have 22. Two new ones were added, and one was removed.
Is it alright to list them here? After all, every person with an AdSense account can see them. Or are they "secret" to the outside world?
| 6:23 pm on Oct 31, 2009 (gmt 0)|
| 1:23 am on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Yes, I see 27.
Four are new.
One has returned.
Two more have been removed.
Too bad that doesn't add up - I can't keep track.
Some only last a day or two.
Three don't even have a website.
But, yes, 27 now on the list.
| 3:38 pm on Nov 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Seems to me that if they are just names, and we can't find any other information about them, that's a red flag right there...
| 2:36 pm on Nov 4, 2009 (gmt 0)|
| 4:26 am on Nov 5, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Up to 31 tonight
| 6:00 am on Nov 5, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Here is another link from adsense help articles
It seems that these certified ad networks are currently available to publishers in few selected countries
Keep in mind many of these ad networks such as TradeDoubler do not have CPC ads but have CPA kind of affiliate code where you need an action like a sale, a lead etc
There are people who claim they have seen a rise in earnings from these networks with an ad format of 300x250 which is a standard ad size for new media ads and I kind of believe that
Another issue that third party ad networks help resolve is filling your ad inventory for regions which do not have adwords ads such as ads from certain regions due to the unsupported languages in adsense
All in all, its like Google doing a hostile take over of all ad networks and bringing it under one umbrella
| 8:01 pm on Nov 5, 2009 (gmt 0)|
32 this morning.
| 12:51 pm on Nov 6, 2009 (gmt 0)|
me too, 32 on my side since yesterday 5 nov 09
| 6:13 pm on Dec 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
There are now 60 Certified Ad Networks.
As of Friday Dec. 18, 2009.
Anyone have any luck with these?
Most do not seem to be very "polished".
| 6:17 pm on Dec 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Yesterday there were 58, so 2 more have been added (and blocked) since then.
| 6:45 pm on Dec 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Are the results from these companies reported (broken out) in the AdSense reports?
I see this as the biggest issue. We can't see if they are any good, or not.
If we can't measure their performance, why on earth would we want to specify them?
I think that is why most publishers are turning them off.
"Trust me" from ASA does not seem to be working, and I understand why.
Only when they SHOW US the data, will there be acceptance!
Speculation arises - the data is not good. This becomes the inevitable presumption. Many will leap to the conclusion that they are no good, when reported recent overall poor performance is due to entirely different reasons. A "Guilty" verdict, caused by no data.