homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.22.78.233
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdWords
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: buckworks & eWhisper & skibum

Google AdWords Forum

This 239 message thread spans 8 pages: < < 239 ( 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 > >     
Going from "Great" 0.03 bids to "Poor" 0.50 bids
How can this be
eljefe3




msg:3361784
 4:23 am on Jun 8, 2007 (gmt 0)

So I've had a campaign running for keyword and I happen to have keyword.org as the domain. Ad and landing page are all about keyword. Suddenly overnight all the keywords that were getting double digit CTR's have been reevaluated to "poor" and I've been asked to pony up 20X more per keyword.

Anyone else seen this and why would this be when everything is relevant? BTW I don't use analytics or anything else to allow any tracking of conversions from their side, but I can tell you the kw's that got bumped up high were converting.

 

cabbagehead




msg:3364660
 7:44 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

> "Simply clutter (non-malicious Web SPAM) giving users no extra choice but a bunch of wasted clicks..."

I understand that logic for the organic SERPs ... but for sponsored links ... it just seems odd to me I guess. Actually, most "civilians" I encounter still don't realize the sponsored links are paid. This is probably why AdWords performs so much better than banners - perhaps that is Google's goal - to keep the line blurred - keep the results similar to the organics so people don't start asking questions and stop clicking?

James45




msg:3364686
 7:56 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

Not sure about the quality score but for several months I've run an ad that pulls 20%-35% and I'm paying over a 1.25 per click. This ad hasn't changed in years. Last year it cost .70 a click and pulled only 5-15%. Makes you wonder...

Rehan




msg:3364713
 8:21 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

Re: organic results vs. paid results

One of Google's AdWords Evangelists said this in an interview posted on a blog recently:

Q: Does the “freshness” of content matter to Adwords QS? i.e. if you update your content regularly with fresh articles etc… does it make a difference to your QS?

A: Not currently, however as a general rule, it is good to assume that down the line many of the factors that affect organic ranking, like content freshness will eventually become part of the landing page QS.


So Google does envision the "quality" of the paid ads being somewhat similar to the organic results.

Plan ahead.

cabbagehead




msg:3364736
 8:40 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

> "t is good to assume that down the line many of the factors that affect organic ranking"

lol - so remind me again why we're *PAYING* for those listings instead of just investing in SEO.

aeiouy




msg:3364752
 8:49 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

I am not sure Google realizes the disastrous outcome if they bring the two sides too close together.

If people who do not have top serp rankings can't pay to get exposure, they will stop advertising. People with top serps exposure will stop advertising, especially when all the lower ranking competition in ads goes away because they can't get exposure because they don't rank ala serps.

The net out come is serps with no ads. Is that really what Google wants?

netmeg




msg:3364767
 9:06 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

I just don't see that happening, at least not from my vantage point. I have clients who advertise in AdWords because they don't have reasonable ranking in the SERPS, and they're not affiliates, mostly just mom and pops, and they didn't get hit. Maybe they will in the future, but so far none of them have ever been hit. And I have other clients who DO have good rankings, and they still advertise because they want the other networks, and they want to cover more real estate on the google page. As long as it's working, I don't think they'll be pulling out.

jtara




msg:3364768
 9:07 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

> "Simply clutter (non-malicious Web SPAM) giving users no extra choice but a bunch of wasted clicks..."

I understand that logic for the organic SERPs ... but for sponsored links ... it just seems odd to me I guess.

Not sure why it seem so odd to you.

It gives the user the initial impression of extra choices, but, in fact, no extra choices. This reduces quality.

If you have 5 ads that are advertising the same merchant, it is just clutter.

This is why Google has a rule that only one ad can show for the same merchant.

Sites that simply pull the merchant's inventory from a database (and usually look ugly as sin to boot) offer nothing to the consumer but clutter.

Banning affiliate sites that are just a thin veneer over the merchant's site is just an extension of the "one ad per merchant" rule.

Rehan




msg:3364817
 10:05 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

If you have 5 ads that are advertising the same merchant, it is just clutter.

This is why Google has a rule that only one ad can show for the same merchant.


I wish they would actually improve the enforcement of their existing rules before getting ambitious and adding new ones!

aeiouy




msg:3364864
 11:52 pm on Jun 11, 2007 (gmt 0)

I just don't see that happening, at least not from my vantage point. I have clients who advertise in AdWords because they don't have reasonable ranking in the SERPS, and they're not affiliates, mostly just mom and pops, and they didn't get hit. Maybe they will in the future, but so far none of them have ever been hit. And I have other clients who DO have good rankings, and they still advertise because they want the other networks, and they want to cover more real estate on the google page. As long as it's working, I don't think they'll be pulling out.

Why not? Your mom and pops don't show up in the serps. If they start making that the measuring stick to get your ads visible, they will be kicked out of being able to buy ads, unless they pay an obscene premium. It is not like they would be given a choice.

With them gone, those int he SERPS who might now also advertise will have no need to, as they will be getting more clicks for free. They want to cover more space to fight for those eyeballs. If all the non-serp advertisers are gone, there will not be the same need to advertise and double-up and many will find it much less necessary.

cabbagehead




msg:3364874
 12:05 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

The whole thing still doesn't make any sense to me. Creating such a high barrier of entry is extremely not business friendly. Its becoming like the IRS where everyone will have to hire a professional to be able to interact with the entity of interest. And yeah - the cost of doing all these landing pages, all this research etc - its going to get rid of anyone but the very serious advertiser. All of this must inevitably have the impact of substantially lowering competition per click. I just don't see how this will lead to anything but a major financial loss for Google. Its very weird to me. I'll be interested to see how the stock investors react next qtr to what must be a major loss in ad revenues in the months that follow.

chinara




msg:3364875
 12:09 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

I wish they would actually improve the enforcement of their existing rules before getting ambitious and adding new ones!

Well said.

Unfortunately, google is under enormous pressure to deliver higher stock price and they have only one source of revenue = advertisers!

Trust me your quality score will be less and less and your min and actual cpc will be higher and higher till google collapses like hundreds of search engines before it.

cabbagehead




msg:3364882
 12:16 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

Hmm ... perhaps this is why the minimum CPCs are going so high - to account for the assumed lost competition that was otherwise previously naturally driving price up? I guess all this means they're moving away from a purely market-driven pricing model (quality content considerations aside).

netmeg




msg:3364883
 12:17 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

Why not? Your mom and pops don't show up in the serps.

Most of them do - eventually. But not at first.

chinara




msg:3364899
 12:48 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

they're moving away from a purely market

No kidding, they almost have a monopolistic position, so they are setting floors etc…

For those who don’t know your competition’s CPC bids and CTR impact your quality score as well. Google doesn’t just look at your landing page they are trying to make $ from their traffic so they test a combination of result sets to determine the most profitable set. And sometimes it is more profitable to knock someone out…

cabbagehead




msg:3364906
 12:58 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

> "they almost have a monopolistic position"

Yeah. its looking more and more like Microsoft a la 1998. Yahoo is the analog to apple: the only theoretical competition but in reality not competition at all. So yes, a monopoly indeed.

Hopefully we all see the results now of sharing all that data with Google over the years. It was really just delayed payment for all those "free" wares they provided us. And now we'll be paying them pack in spades!

trinorthlighting




msg:3364937
 2:08 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

Google can get rid of the middlemen and end up making more money by providing quality and not quantity to its users. Smart move google!

justshelley




msg:3364963
 2:28 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

Today I found out that Google is washing out a tiny vet business in NY (inactive keywords and minimum bids at $5 to $10) Their reply...he had a bad keyword history.

The account is three months old and he tried and failed at a pet food recall advertising campaign. Then he tried another advertising strategy and now he's on his third landing page and ad revision.

Basically Google is saying that if he's willing to suck up to those $5 and $10 bids, he can raise his quality scores...what? at a cost of several hundred or thousand dollars just because he tested three different advertising strategies in three months?

I guess that's a warning for all new AdWords accounts that you might not want to test any "innovative" or "creative" ad strategies or pay the penalty if they don't work out!

Green_Grass




msg:3365145
 8:09 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

Any one experiencing 'Content' impressions slowdown?

Has it stopped for guys with low QS in this latest update?

Couple of campaings seem to have stopped totally for me.. ;-(

bluelook




msg:3365219
 10:31 am on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

I had the same problem weeks ago, and what I did was split the main campaign in several smaller ones, with few keywords with good ctr, the keyword appearing in the title and body (not even in the domain) and the problem was gone.

marcus11




msg:3365370
 2:08 pm on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

Yes green grass most of the content network had ground to a halt by Saturday, but is slowly returning up to less than 20% of what I would call a normal level. Search is non existent unless I increase my bid by 100x what I was paying before Saturday.

chinara




msg:3365372
 2:09 pm on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

It was really just delayed payment for all those "free" wares they provided us

It is surprising how many people do not know that “Free cheese” is a mouse trap.

It is no brainier that when google sees how much money we make they are going crazy realizing missed opportunities… So with each update they are trying to shift the ROI from you to them.

justshelley




msg:3365451
 3:23 pm on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

Good news. If you have a Google agency rep, call or email them if you feel you or your clients have been unfairly affected by the quality score changes.

The vet I referred to yesterday in my post has been fixed this morning. His bids are back to normal.

metakomm




msg:3365476
 3:56 pm on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

i called...no dice...all i know is i refuse to pay $1 bids on keywords with no competiton when my keyword is pretty much exclusive...

stupid google...when i report back to the client how shaky things are, this client who is the government will probably pass on doing MUCH more google business...this is a test campaign started off BAD

adrianTNT




msg:3365486
 4:05 pm on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

I must be really stupid because after so many years of working with forums I cannot seem to find the "unsubscribe" link for this topic.
As I knew I should see an unsubscribe link in the emails I get from this forum :(

[edited by: adrianTNT at 4:05 pm (utc) on June 12, 2007]

soona99




msg:3365560
 5:21 pm on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

My content network totally stopped as of last night. Usually Google allows the content to go on for a while before they slow or stop it once they hit a website with quality score. This is getting more and more difficult...though not impossible to work around. If they weren't still the best game in town, I would call it quits.

thecleaner




msg:3365724
 7:48 pm on Jun 12, 2007 (gmt 0)

Do you guys think yahoo will one day be as complicated as google? I ask because the seem to be following google closely. Is it only a mater of time?

trinorthlighting




msg:3365921
 1:07 am on Jun 13, 2007 (gmt 0)

Remember, a lot of MFA and garbitrage publishers were tossed off the network June 1st and 8th. So some of the content impressions might be down. Most of the MFA and garbitrage sites were driving advertising costs up. This is a good move.

ember




msg:3365987
 2:58 am on Jun 13, 2007 (gmt 0)

Does the quality score just affect the landing page? If the landing page is cleaned up, then does Google care what is on the inside of the site?

pexcornel




msg:3366120
 8:03 am on Jun 13, 2007 (gmt 0)

After some tests this is my conclusion:
-the domains are manually flagged. Attention: the domain, not the landing page.
-there is an automatic algorithm for the landing page quality that executes every 5 minutes or so, but this is only affecting the position of the add, relative to the other adds, it's not triggering minimum bids of 1, 5, 10 $.

What we can do:
-if the domains are manually flagged, you can improve the sites content and you must contact Adwords rep. to reevaluate the domain. As there is no algorithm for this flag, a slapped domain will never recover unless manually reviewed.
-you can create other domain and do the same until someone is manually reviewing the new site (I don't know for how many days it will work).

eljefe3




msg:3366129
 8:09 am on Jun 13, 2007 (gmt 0)

Interesting theory, but how would so many domains be manually flagged? How did you come to these conclusions? I'm sure all of us who have been slapped would like to remove this penalty if possible.

pexcornel




msg:3366133
 8:24 am on Jun 13, 2007 (gmt 0)

The flagging of the domain was a lengthly process. When they were finished they triggered the changes.
This is what i think, I have no inside info.

This 239 message thread spans 8 pages: < < 239 ( 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdWords
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