homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 23.22.29.137
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

Featured Home Page Discussion

    
Migration to https caused drops in earnings?
Google AdSense Earnings Drop With HTTPS Migrations
Mo_T




msg:4697241
 7:27 am on Aug 22, 2014 (gmt 0)

Reported on seroundtable that the migration from http to https (for ranking reasons) had caused a drop in RPM for some publishers,

that's the answer he got from Google:
"AdSense ads have reset to much lower paying ads. RPM are dramatically lower to what they were before the switch. I'm assuming that this is because the https site is a totally new site to Google -- and the trust I've built in the http site is lost on the https one."

anyone migrated to https lately?

 

netmeg




msg:4697269
 12:21 pm on Aug 22, 2014 (gmt 0)

No, and that's one of the two reasons I'm not jumping in yet. I don't think that the issue is trust for the "new" https site - AdSense will only serve secure ads to secure sites, and I'm sure there's a much smaller inventory of secure ads.

From the AdSense Help files:

HTTPS-enabled sites require that all content on the page, including the ads, be SSL-compliant. As such, AdSense will remove all non-SSL compliant ads from competing in the auction on these pages. If you do decide to convert your HTTP site to HTTPS, please be aware that because we remove non-SSL compliant ads from the auction, thereby reducing auction pressure, ads on your HTTPS pages might earn less than those on your HTTP pages.


The ads themselves are served by Google, but maybe the landing page has to be secure to be compliant; I dunno. All I know is I'm in no hurry.

atladsenser




msg:4697302
 2:33 pm on Aug 22, 2014 (gmt 0)

Wow. It looks like we've stumbled upon the proverbial fly in the ointment with HTTPS. That's another thing I'm glad I followed netmeg's lead on -- you're right, no need to rush into this until the details get worked out with it.

Swanny007




msg:4697384
 8:12 pm on Aug 22, 2014 (gmt 0)

Id did not know that about SSL ads, good to know! I have been giving it some thought of switching some of my sites to SSL since Google made the big announcement. I will continue to hold off though, surely Google will be pushing AdWords advertisers to use SSL-compliant ads you would think?

netmeg




msg:4697394
 9:34 pm on Aug 22, 2014 (gmt 0)

Could be, but as an advertiser myself, I haven't heard word one from AdWords about it.

hannamyluv




msg:4697406
 10:49 pm on Aug 22, 2014 (gmt 0)

I would not move to https unless I dealt in personal information (i.e. I sold stuff). I actually have an SSL certificate in order to comply with some FB things and I still would not do it. Yes, they announced that they have added it as a ranking factor (and by their own saying it is a very minor factor) but the negative effects of needlessly moving to https are far too great. This is just one more example of that.

netmeg




msg:4697425
 11:48 pm on Aug 22, 2014 (gmt 0)

I do think eventually it will become the standard (probably included with webhosting), but we're a ways away from that now.

Mo_T




msg:4697461
 4:42 am on Aug 23, 2014 (gmt 0)

But why does the landing page has to be secure?
Look at FB ads, they are not always leading to secure pages,
Or loot Adwords ads Google search, they also can go from https to http.
But for Adsense compliance all external links must lead to https?
what am I missing here?

netmeg




msg:4697518
 12:39 pm on Aug 23, 2014 (gmt 0)

I don't know; I'm missing it too. But I am more concerned with the bottom line. When they get all this sorted out, then I'll start installing SSL certificates. My ecommerce sites already have them, and my event sites won't suffer the lack of them.

furshka




msg:4697591
 8:53 pm on Aug 23, 2014 (gmt 0)

A slight drop in RPM here after migration to https 10 days ago. Also bounce rate is a little higher as it takes a bit more time for a page to load.

bwnbwn




msg:4698300
 1:51 pm on Aug 27, 2014 (gmt 0)

I find it interesting Google says jump and we say how high. It ridiculous to put a site under https. The lead generation pages sure but informational pages not gonna happen.

furshka




msg:4698383
 8:58 pm on Aug 27, 2014 (gmt 0)

It ridiculous to put a site under https. The lead generation pages sure but informational pages not gonna happen.


If you are an authoritative site, you want to make sure that the information you provide is not altered before it gets to the user.

Sheqel




msg:4698575
 12:16 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

If you are an authoritative site, you want to make sure that the information you provide is not altered before it gets to the user.

If you are so concerned about this, why didn't you migrate years ago (instead of 10 days)?

furshka




msg:4698579
 12:34 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

If you are so concerned about this, why didn't you migrate years ago (instead of 10 days)?

I am not concerned about this. In addition, I am not an authoritative site ;)

nomis5




msg:4698601
 12:58 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

Also bounce rate is a little higher as it takes a bit more time for a page to load.


That's always been my impression with https sites but I have no evidence to back it up. Also, the array of "invalid certificate" stuff that appears with some of them is also a concern.

EditorialGuy




msg:4698610
 2:01 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

I find it interesting Google says jump and we say how high. It ridiculous to put a site under https. The lead generation pages sure but informational pages not gonna happen.


Actually, Google didn't say "jump." It said that HTTPS is now a "lightweight ranking factor" (and on a page-by-page basis, at that). You get to decide how important that it is to you.

Google has said repeatedly that it has more than 200 ranking factors, and some of those factors are obviously a lot more important than whether a given page is "https://" instead of "http://".

netmeg




msg:4698613
 2:25 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

Actually I was already planning to install SSL on all my sites even before this, but didn't because I didn't want to lose my social media shares or have access to a smaller ad inventory. Once those two hurdles are overcome, I intend to go all SSL; I think it's probably a good thing overall.

eeek




msg:4698667
 7:32 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

I intend to go all SSL; I think it's probably a good thing overall.


Why do you think going to SSL is good? I can see it for some things, but it's so not useful for so much.

IanCP




msg:4698679
 9:09 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

A heads up to "https://" aficionados/enthusiasts

One thing I personally detest about some "https://" sites, it is quite surprising the number which trigger wholly unnecessary page security warnings in a browser, for no other reason than supplementary content, such as image files come from their "http://" server.

For what it is worth.

furshka




msg:4698691
 11:12 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

That's always been my impression with https sites but I have no evidence to back it up. Also, the array of "invalid certificate" stuff that appears with some of them is also a concern.

The increase in bounce rate for my site is very slight and not conclusive as I have been running on https for a very short time. It is not really something to worry about. I am on a dedicated server setup. I would like to throw that out there as I don't know how much impact it could have on shared hosting.
The invalid certificate warning is a concern if you are using external resources like style sheets, images, and other plugins. Fortunately, the cdn I am using supports https.

furshka




msg:4698692
 11:24 pm on Aug 28, 2014 (gmt 0)

I didn't want to lose my social media shares or have access to a smaller ad inventory

I had to give up about 100K likes over several pages. For me, it doesn't really matter. If you are using the FB comments plugin, you can either start fresh or point the comments plugin to the http version.

There is really no shortage of ad inventory. I check Adsense and the coverage is almost all the time 100%. My concern is that CPC might be negatively affected as there are fewer advertisers bidding.

robzilla




msg:4699173
 7:55 am on Sep 1, 2014 (gmt 0)

SERoundtable post that the OP refers to: [seroundtable.com ]

I wonder if HTTPS vs. HTTP matters for text ads. For image or Flash ads I can imagine there might be content that is served from third-party servers, which would have to be SSL-compliant, but text ads have no interactive or third-party content as far as I'm aware. My HTTPS site serves mainly text ads, so I hope it isn't affected too much.

netmeg




msg:4699217
 2:27 pm on Sep 1, 2014 (gmt 0)

When I run image ads in AdWords, I have to upload my ads to Google. I am sure they serve them from their own servers, so I can't imagine it's the ad images themselves that cause the issue.

robzilla




msg:4699268
 9:03 pm on Sep 1, 2014 (gmt 0)

Yes, but there are also third-party vendors whose ads may also be served through the Display Network, indirectly. Most but not all of those are SSL-compliant (see [support.google.com ]), so it could be that Google is referring to those.

netmeg




msg:4699269
 9:04 pm on Sep 1, 2014 (gmt 0)

Yea, I forgot about those (I have them all turned off)

atladsenser




msg:4699451
 3:17 pm on Sep 2, 2014 (gmt 0)

Yea, I forgot about those (I have them all turned off)


Hi there netmeg, wanted to ask about what you wrote above -- I've seen that you've mentioned that before also, that you turn off all third-party ad networks in AdSense. May I ask why? My assumption would be that having third-party ad networks in the auction would result in more competition for my ad space, but obviously you've found something else. What have you found to be the pro's and cons?

netmeg




msg:4699462
 5:17 pm on Sep 2, 2014 (gmt 0)

I ran the numbers going back a reasonable period of time, and found the combined total earnings from all the third party networks were less than ten bucks total, and the earnings from AdWords over the same period were high five figures.

All I needed to know.

nomis5




msg:4699504
 10:42 pm on Sep 2, 2014 (gmt 0)

All I needed to know.


?

Not "all" if I understand correctly. Third party earnings may have been minimal but that doesn't mean their inclusion didn't push up your earnings.

I use Criteo for a particular ad size on some of my sites and they exceed Adsense earnings. If they didn't then, by default, they don't appear. It's not a clear "win or loose" situation in many cases at all from what I see.

That of course is nothing to do with http / https but that's the way this post is going.

As far as http / https is concerned though I've had two requests in the last couple of days to change my links to new newly converted https sites. Why, I'm not sure, if they have re-directed correctly. But maybe the re-directs are not working as expected and they are now getting desperate. I don't know.

For me it's another "amber" light signal not to convert just yet, wait until the implications become a lot clearer. And when I do, as is inevitable, one of my smaller sites will be a test bed first before the other larger ones go ahead.

netmeg




msg:4699518
 2:01 am on Sep 3, 2014 (gmt 0)

Not "all" if I understand correctly. Third party earnings may have been minimal but that doesn't mean their inclusion didn't push up your earnings.


My earnings climb pretty steadily as they are. My August just finished out at 170% of last August. If I'm losing out on a few extra bucks, I'm okay with that. And I'm not willing to give the space to the third party networks. At least with AdWords, I'm familiar enough with it that I have a pretty good idea what I'm gonna get. The other networks, not so much.

But at the end of the day it was the earnings. I don't have time to overthink it.

furshka




msg:4699622
 3:00 pm on Sep 3, 2014 (gmt 0)

My earnings climb pretty steadily as they are. My August just finished out at 170% of last August.

Mine is a bit lower despite a slight increase in traffic. Both CTR and CPC are lower than they used to be. The decline started in April.

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