|Content network - automatic & managed placements|
| 9:36 am on Jul 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I'm having a lot of problems of late with regards to the no of impressions, clicks going drastically down on the content network. The placements that contributed to 10-20 conversions in feb are down with just 2-4 impressions for the last month.
Here's what we did - the placements that were converting well under 'automatic placements' were added to 'managed placements' across several ad groups. While these placements performed well under 'automatic placements' for cheap, they seem to demand quite high bids to show any significant no of impressions under 'managed placements'. Is this always the case - are managed placements too expensive?
More importantly, once I add a placement from 'automatic' to 'managed' for one particular ad group, does it stop showing impressions under the 'automatic' group for that particular ad group? Or does it stop showing impressions under the automatic group all together i.e. for all ad groups?
Just wondering then, how advisable is it then to move performing placements to 'managed' when they are converting well, at lower cpcs under the 'automatic' group itself.
Also, is it advisable to have the same placement repeated in more than one ad group? How do you guys generally go about this?
A couple of campaigns are quite messed up as the client has a lot of placements repeated across several ad groups which are really not showing too many impressions now? Should the campaign be restructured in this case?
| 2:47 pm on Jul 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
If I go to the effort of setting up specific placement targets in a campaign, it means I want to funnel *all* that traffic into that campaign. So I will typically add those sites as negative sites to the existing campaigns.
Otherwise, in my experience, the new campaign won't match up against the history in the existing campaigns, and I'll be competing with myself.
Did you run placement reports to see if the sites you broke out are still showing up in the older campaigns?
| 3:50 pm on Jul 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
In my opinion, 'automatic placements' works best for almost any campaign at the beginning stage! And, this is recommended by google.
| 4:00 pm on Jul 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Thanks so much Netmeg..was hoping to see your reply in here ;)
I totally understand what you've said about 'competing with myself'.
In this case, I don't have separate campaigns..I have several ad groups within one campaign which have both keywords and placements (many placements are duplicated across different ad groups), so each ad group has unique bids for automatic and managed placements.
I did take a placement report..the targeted placement in one ad group does show up in 'automatic placements' in the other ad group in the campaign. I think the current structure is a bit haywire as I can hardly pin point as to which my best placement is as all placements are present just about everywhere.
SO, let me know if this is how it should work ideally - you build up a content campaign with only automatic placements, choose your best placements and create a separate campaign for the same. Can I have different ad groups in this new campaign so that I can place different ads on different placements? Then I add these placements as negatives to the original campaign and turn the automatic placement OFF in the placement targeted campaign. So I have one campaign where I let Google decide the best placements for me and other campaign which would only have the placements I've targeted.
Anything that I'm missing out on?
| 2:15 pm on Jul 3, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Nope, that's about the way I'd start out.
Presumably you'd be willing to pay a little more for the placements that actually convert and give you good ROI. So it would behoove you to keep breaking those out into separate campaigns, where you can bid a little more, and in some cases, create ads that are actually targeting those placements.
Keep running the placement reports regularly; set a threshold for yourself when it makes sense to move a placement from the "general" group to a targeted campaign.
I like to set up a sort of tiered system - at the top are the campaigns that are the very best performers, and they will often only have one or two placements. And I'll actually go visit those sites, and try to get a feel for them before writing ads specifically targeted to that group (or if it's image or video ads, I'll go look at their placements and sizes and what's available and who I'm competing with. You can also use the Google Ad Planner to help with this)
The second tier are the climbers - they've shown good promise, but not quite ready for top tier. I might have one or two dozen in here. The ads are a bit more general (maybe because I haven't had time to spend on the sites)
Then I have one or two lower tiers; one for sites where I get a lot of clicks but not many conversions, and another for ones where I get a lot of impressions but not many clicks. These will run at a lower cost till I get a chance to do something about them - if I'm getting the clicks but not the conversions, I probably need to work on the landing page, and if I'm getting the impressions but not the clicks, then either they're just not a good match (and thus go into the negative pile) or else I need to write better ads for them.
There, there's your whole strategy in a nutshell.