homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.161.246.212
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 139 message thread spans 5 pages: < < 139 ( 1 2 3 [4] 5 > >     
Google Shuts Down $Million Affiliate Account
No humans involved in the decision
SuperF

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 1:04 am on Nov 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

This is how Google is currently treating some Adwords customers, and has destroyed our business (amongst many, many others) and the livelihood of many people:

1. Has a long-running policy of causing high click costs when customers promote sites with poor landing page quality - otherwise known as a the Google Slap.

2. Adds to this policy by deciding that the promotion of poor landing page quality sites is sufficient to terminate accounts without warning. The landing page quality is determined by "the AdWords system" using secret "specific filtration methods". No humans required.

3. Many accounts are shut down without warning, without any notification anywhere of this new policy. Typically affiliate marketers are those affected.

4. Many more accounts received a final warning, and then subsequently were shut down.

The chief complaint I think everyone has is that the process is automated, and there is no way to seek recourse, no matter how large you account is. Almost as bad is that system is unfairly biased towards super affiliates. A raw number of poor quality violations is used, irrespective of the size of an account. AdwordsAdvisor, correct me if I am wrong...

Our experience went like this:

1. First we ever knew about the policy was receiving a final warning.
2. We promote thousands of merchants - so it took about a week to remove every ad group that even has a remote chance of breaking landing page quidelines.
3. We ceased creating new ads or ad groups, so that we could not possibly lose our account.
4. One month later, after 12 hours of wondering why none of our ads are showing, we get the automated email saying our account is disabled.

Despite our very best efforts to do everything possible to please Google, it was all in vain. If we have caused bad user experiences in the past, it was minor (relative to thousands of merchants we promote), unintentional, and immediately rectified upon finding out about the new policy.

Our background:
Multiple millions spent on Google Adwords
Exclusive deals with many major online merchants
We don't even have landing pages - we direct link to merchants.

Please, no replies bashing Google in general. I just wish to discuss this specific policy, and I'm hoping AWA can pass on that the current process is faulty and needs addressing by Google.

 

callivert

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 3:21 am on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

If your business cannot survive without Google, then YOU have destroyed your business

Yeah, I don't agree with this position either. Try substituting Google for other corporations. Imagine that Fedex or Toyota cancelled a $million a year contract by email. Or Microsoft.
Then someone tells you about UPS or Linux, depending on the situation, and says "If your business cannot survive without Fedex (or Microsoft), then you have destroyed your business."
It wouldn't happen.

Affiliates seem to be playing a role in the online ecosystem, facilitating transactions between merchants and publishers. That is their business.

netmeg

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 4:20 am on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

Google has NOT destroyed your business. If your business cannot survive without Google, then YOU have destroyed your business.

Every response only serves to convince me even more.

Petrogold

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 7:19 am on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

@tchale430
Well written. We do not know so much insights except adcenter. We follow AW tools to get kw. However, someone says too many kw will ban the account. G AW may ban the sites instead of penalizing the accounts for good. We learn from experiments. And experiment does not mean fraud or scam. I mean while setting a campaign AW system immediately shows QS 5 & good, then why later change their minds. They cannot win H&M. One day they will see their downfall if not corrected soon!

Petrogold

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 7:29 am on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

Well said by Tchale430.
We use adcenter. Except using multiple kw we do not see any scam is made. And without experiments how to learn or improve QS? My Q why the AW KW Qs=5 while setting the first campaign if the same SW says QS=landing page=poor?

James_WV

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 9:22 am on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

@tchale430 - some very good points.

I think probably the worst thing to come out of this is a thread by sportsnut where he said his account was banned as it used to be run by an adwords management company who were doing bad things - so guilt by association - I think that's the worst problem in all of this.

However, I still think what they've done is for the 'greater good'. I don't think affiliates make up a huge % of their business and their will be more people who benefit from this than lose out.

Having said that though, I don't know anyone personally who's been hit with a ban, so I'm coming at it from a different perspective.

I do think that Google underestimated how much collateral damage would be caused, and AWA's post does indicate this - because, at the end of the day, they're not doing this to be evil but to get rid of the dross, so I'm sure they must want to take back on the good advertisers who got caught inadvertently.

BTW - hadn't seen this post before, but here's anexerpt from a page in response to the banned accounts:

"Google is dedicated to providing safe, relevant and high-quality experiences for all of our users - including visitors to Google sites and content publishers, as well as our valued advertisers and partners. To help us achieve this goal, we require advertisers to adhere to our Advertising Policies and to follow our Landing Page and Site Quality Guidelines. The AdWords system visits and evaluates advertiser landing pages on a regular basis to ensure this compliance. In cases where a violation has occurred, some advertisers may first receive a warning to correct the problem; however, in other cases where violations have occurred frequently, or are considered egregious, Google may choose to permanently disable the advertiser's AdWords account.

A disabled account may no longer run existing or future ads. Account access will still be available for the purposes of viewing historical data; however, no ads will be allowed to run on this or associated accounts in the future. Likewise, any new accounts opened by the disabled account-holder will also be disabled.

Google considers inappropriate or unacceptable behavior by advertisers to be a serious offense. To help avoid these problems, we strive to educate our advertisers about advertising best practices, and to provide extensive information about our policies regarding advertising policies, ad quality, and approvals. The vast majority of our advertisers try to provide good user experiences through the sites they promote. However, Google will do its best to remove from the AdWords program those advertisers who choose to ignore our policies and guidelines and instead promote websites that create poor, or even harmful, user experiences.

We cannot reveal our specific filtration methods for measuring site quality or triggering account suspension"

Full page: https://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=164786

Dlocks

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 10:25 am on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

In cases where a violation has occurred, some advertisers may first receive a warning to correct the problem

But when you get the warning they will not tell you what compaign/adgroup/ladingpage is causing the problem.

To help avoid these problems, we strive to educate our advertisers about advertising best practices, and to provide extensive information about our policies regarding advertising policies, ad quality, and approvals.

[..]

We cannot reveal our specific filtration methods for measuring site quality or triggering account suspension

Isn't that a contradiction?

Elric99

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 2:21 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

Wouldn't all this be solved with complete transparency on Google's part?

Khensu

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 3:32 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

Ha!

It's shouldn't be "Don't be Evil" but

"Smoke & Mirrors, That's Our Game"

I'll take "Guessing things about Google" for $800, whoa, the Double Jeopardy!

bryson

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 3:37 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

Wouldn't all this be solved with complete transparency on Google's part?

No. As has already been pointed out in this thread, Google and other companies like Facebook etc. cannot reveal all their cards or the spammers would use that information against them. It's not reasonable to ask them to do so.

I think it would all be solved if Google focused on banning websites instead of accounts. Once a site is entered into a blacklist, any ads pointing to that site could be automatically disapproved (no human intervention required) as soon as they're entered into AdWords by anybody (whether an affiliate or otherwise). Google could choose to keep the disapproval hidden if it wants to - the ads would just never run and never accrue any impressions. No need to disable anybody's account, and Google gets rid of all the bad sites it wants to.

Dlocks

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 4:05 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

What happens when you don't pay your invoice on time? Do you get a reminder?

I have to pay before the 30th of this month for advertising cost from last month. But since I have a ban there is no need for me to pay on time to keep my ads running. So I was thinking about keeping my money a bit longer and get some interest.

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 4:06 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

But that's all assuming that this is a conscious and final decision by Google. From what I gather, though, Google doesn't have adequate manpower to handle these situations properly.

If Google doesn't have adequate man/woman power to handle a $1,000,000 affiliate account, then I must reiterate that the stock holders become aware of this. I call it bullfoo. ;)

However, Google will do its best to remove from the AdWords program those advertisers who choose to ignore our policies and guidelines and instead promote websites that create poor, or even harmful, user experiences.

That's the bottom line. If you've been pushing the envelope and have been in violation of the guidelines once too many times, expect the hammer to drop. That sure sounds like what happened here.

Google Shuts Down $Million Affiliate Account
No humans involved in the decision

^ I'd be willing to bet that there were more than a few humans involved in the decision. Any takers?

Since you're in the affiliate space spending $1,000,000+, I would guess you've got that network replaced already and it was just a small hiccup in the process?

James_WV

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 4:10 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

>>I think it would all be solved if Google focused on banning websites instead of accounts

That wouldn't solve anything - Google did that and that's why they're saying the suspensions are for multiple Low Quality Landing pages - basically affiliates tried to get around low QS by publishing many new sites - Google had enough of this and said if you've been doing this then you're gonna be suspended (read: banned)

James_WV

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 4:14 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

@pageoneresults - depends on the terms of the bet - if it was that a human suspended this account then I'd bet against you.

If it was that humans wrote rules that led to this account being suspended then I wouldn't take the bet.

It is an algo thing, not direct human intervention in most of the cases - the adwords review / quality teams aren't that big really, definitely not big enough to handle all these shut downs (hence the poor customer service unless you have a direct rep and only big spenders get these)

Elric99

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 4:59 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I think it would all be solved if Google focused on banning websites instead of accounts. Once a site is entered into a blacklist, any ads pointing to that site could be automatically disapproved (no human intervention required) as soon as they're entered into AdWords by anybody (whether an affiliate or otherwise).

I don't think that would work. Most people would buy another domain and upload the same pages to a new domain.

Speaking as an affiliate, there are many of us who want to abide by the guidelines. If google makes money in the long term, so do we. I just need to know what exactly they don't want and I'll run a million miles from it.

There can't be many affiliates who advertise on adwords and aren't dreading checking their email each day. Not all affiliates are get rich quick or want to spam adwords with awful 'offers'. Some of us are professional business people who run real websites.

bryson

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 5:12 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I don't think that would work. Most people would buy another domain and upload the same pages to a new domain.

I agree that in those particular cases, where it is clear that the person owning the account is very likely the one creating the sites, then an account ban may indeed be merited.

I think Google could easily detect this by comparing the new and old sites - if they are very similar pages as you say, then it's a dead giveaway of malicious behavior.

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 5:12 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I really think this reference that James_WV posted applies to this topic...

https://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=164786

^ There are plenty of hints on that page, particularly the 6 bullet points at bottom which are prefaced with...

However, the unacceptable business practices and policy violations for poor-quality landing pages for which Google will disable AdWords accounts include (but are not limited to):

I'm in a betting mood today and I'm not even at PubCon Vegas! I'll extend my bet to include the guess that our OP may meet the criteria of 1 or more of those 6 bullet points. Possibly bullet points 1, 2, 3, and/or 6. ;)

Dlocks

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 5:26 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I'll extend my bet to include the guess that our OP may meet the criteria of 1 or more of those 6 bullet points.
I don't know about OP but I do know that I got a ban for low quality over night (one after 4 years promoting suddenly 1/10 QS) websites and not for promoting illigal content or anything that fits in the 6 bulletpoints.

It happened to me so my bet is that I'm not unigue and this could also happened with OP. (although my spending was only half a million per year so there is a difference between me and OP)

I understand people who did not get any warnings or do not know anyone with a ban still believe Google does not make mistakes. I was once a believer too. I defended Google in forums where people complained about Adwords (or Adsense). Unfortunately, no I know I was wrong.

vordmeister

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 5:51 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

There's a distraction in this thread.
Google Shuts Down $Million Affiliate Account

How about if it said:
Google Shuts Down Millions of Affiliate Accounts

That way it becomes more about intent than about the disrespect with which Google have treated many of their customers.

I suspect the closure of this account was very intentional.

I would further suspect that Google itself wants the affiliate money and believes it can earn more by doing it itself than by allowing affiliates to advertise using their system.

Affiliates down by £millions. But Google up by £billions.

Yes, I find it frightening too.

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 5:51 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

However, the unacceptable business practices and policy violations for poor-quality landing pages for which Google will disable AdWords accounts include (but are not limited to):

Note, those 6 bullets points referenced are not limited to, you are only seeing the ones they feel comfortable letting you know about. You know, the blatant violations that can be generalized and not give away any secrets.

I defended Google in forums where people complained about Adwords (or Adsense). Unfortunately, now I know I was wrong.

I've read this topic multiple times already. There is a virtual undertone and that is many are victims of policy changes. Many of which were/are in the guise of guidelines which are typically subject to change without notice. In Google's case, they apparently have given notice, have provided written guidelines, have smacked your hand a few times, etc.

I'm still extremely suspect of Google automatically shutting down $1,000,000 Advertising Spends. No, that is not an automated process. And, if it were, we need to have a board meeting with the stock holders. ;)

By the way, it's AdWords not Adwords. It's AdSense not Adsense. And of course it is always WebmasterWorld and not Webmasterworld. FTR.

Dlocks

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 6:36 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

Note, those 6 bullets points referenced are not limited to, you are only seeing the ones they feel comfortable letting you know about. You know, the blatant violations that can be generalized and not give away any secrets.
All I know is that the sites I promoted had absolutely nothing to do with the 6 bullets points. Nothing to do with other type of scams, illegal stuff etc. etc. Normal products, normal websites.

Perhaps there are some normal products not allowed by Google. But how could I know that if they don't tell me after the first and last warning what site is causing the problems? How could I know that one site I have been promoting for over four years suddenly over night is not allowed by Google if the product or type of website is not descriped in the guidelines?

In Google's case, they apparently have given notice, have provided written guidelines, have smacked your hand a few times, etc.
One first and last warning without telling (also not after contacting them) what was causing the problem.

They only thing they could tell me is that there is someting in my account with a low QS and a link to the guidelines. Nothing more.

As mentioned before I followed the steps below after I received the first warning.

1. First I ever knew about this new policy was receiving a final warning.
2. Contacted support and asked how to prevent this in the future. Answer: follow the guidelines.
3. Removed each adgroup that had a remote chance of breaking landing page quidelines.
4. I also stopped creating new ads or adgroups so that I could not lose my account. Also checked on a daily basis all keywords and deleted each keyword with QS lower then 5.
5. One month later (yesterday) I see no activity in my account. Via online chat with support they told me my account was suspended.

And I thought after the e-mail I received and after having contact with support about this issue and after removing the campaigns/adgroups and not adding new ones my account was clean.

No can you please explain how I could ever known there was still something in my account that was against the guidelines while the guidelines does not mention all guidelines? So perhaps there was something in my account that was against a non-published secret guideline?

netmeg

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 6:43 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

Ok, let's talk about the affiliate business for a minute.

You people who run affiliate sites (and guess what, I have a few myself) you *chose* your business model, whether it's a small site promoting a few items or a so called "super" affiliate with thousands of items and links going directly to the manufacturer of each item. And there's nothing wrong with that business model; as I mentioned, I have some small aff sites myself.

However, just because that's *your* business model doesn't mean it's Google's business model. It's a pretty safe bet that almost anything you're promoting has also got a ton of other people promoting it as well (I don't know of a whole lot of affiliate offers with just one or two affiliates) and Google doesn't see any reason to have tons and tons of ads for the exact same thing on its pages, anymore than I want them in my AdSense feed on my sites. There's nothing WRONG with affiliate sites. But Google doesn't choose to play in that field with the AdWords division; or maybe they just don't choose to have so many affiliates, and they're being selective.

Now, sure, they may have gone with it up to now. But the writing's been on the wall there for at least three years now - they've been pretty clear about it, so anyone who couldn't see this coming has just plain not been paying attention.

Some of you might have felt you were safe because of the amount of your spend. Again, I don't know where that idea comes from. Unlike pageoneresults, I wouldn't at all be surprised if AdWords booted out a million dollar affiliate. They've proven over and over that short term monetary gains don't mean as much as long term quality; when someone gets Google slapped with $10 bids, Google doesn't really expect them to pay that $10, they expect them to either conform to Google's guidelines or go away. They're not out for the short term money grab - Google takes their money grab on the back end, by cutting people and services and support. They're also sitting on twenty two *billion* dollars in cash at the moment. They can well afford to hold out for what they want.

Now let's talk about all this class action talk. Tell me, what exactly was it that put Google in this position? Do we have evidence of blatant collusion, obvious muscling out of the competition? Maybe it's there; I haven't seen it. From what I can tell, Google got to where they are by being good at what they do (and to some degree on the back of the ineptness of their competition) Most people are satisfied with Google's search, so they use Google - and most advertisers want to put their ads in front of those eyeballs.

I don't run adCenter Publishing ads on my sites because there are almost *no* advertisers that match up to my user base. I advertise for clients on adCenter, and I'm increasing the spend daily because we're getting good results (but none of my sites overlap my clients' niches for conflict-of-interest reasons) The ads there are pitiful.

So all of you who complain about the huge market share Google has in advertising - where are you putting YOUR advertising dollars? How much of your spend goes to building up adCenter (or Yahoo, back when it was actually worthwhile) or any of the other smaller networks?

No, you spend a million dollars on AdWords, and then complain that Google is too big, and has too much control over your business.

Google has a lot to answer for, and eventually they'll figure it out. But the *ultimate* responsibility lies with each of US, not Google. If you can't see that - you've already failed.

(As far as the "guilt by association" ban - that's a pretty recent development, and it is disturbing. I wouldn't be surprised at some point to see Google ease up on that, at least when they have support people again who can do manual reviews. Not much consolation to the ones kicked out now, I know. You just have to be very very careful who you hook your account to, I guess)

tchale430

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 7:24 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

If you do not manufacture the product, or provide the service, are you an affiliate?

If such is the case, I guess my banned-by-distant-association client is an affiliate. Although I have never thought of him that way.

I have thought of him as an "authorized dealer", "online distributor", etc. But by the above definition those are affiliates too.

-T

The Ex-AdWords Help Forum Top Contributor
Refused to meet the new AdWords Forum "quota" for Top Contributors due to the ongoing banned-by-distant-association policy

netmeg

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 7:49 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

It wouldn't surprise me if Google thought that way.

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 7:59 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

netmeg, that was a very eloquent reply, the long one above. I'm not used to seeing you outside your 140. ;)

Stop the Guessing

Review My Site
A place to request site reviews. Answer at least two threads before posting your own.
[WebmasterWorld.com...]

I say we put this topic to rest by reviewing the sites in question. If you are that sure that you were and/or are NOT in violation of Google's posted guidelines, then let use SEE - NOW!

I really think Site Reviews are in order before you waste any more of our time. I'm not going for 95% of what I read in this topic so far. Nope, not me. I've participated for years at WebmasterWorld and I've seen the trends. Business models come and go, they usually have a short shelf life when they are reliant on Google and/or Search/Advertising traffic in general.

Step up to the plate and show us! I'll personally do a Site Review. I'll spend the hour or two required to investigate your woes. Is it possible some of you have fallen prey to underhanded third party activity? It happens every day you know.

netmeg

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 8:12 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I was ranting here a long time before I started ranting on twitter

You forgot to mention you must be a WebmasterWorld supporter to see that forum.

Dlocks

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 9:24 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I say we put this topic to rest by reviewing the sites in question. If you are that sure that you were and/or are NOT in violation of Google's posted guidelines, then let use SEE - NOW!
There problem is that advertisers don't know for what website they got the ban. I received the first and final warning about two months ago. Back then I could see that a website got 1/10 QS for all keywords.

Last week I got the ban. I still have access to my account but all quality scores are fine. So I don't know what campaign/adgroup/website made Google decide to ban me. Perhaps they banned me because Google did not like an adgroup that I deleted after the first warning but just ignored the fact that is was deleted.

As you might know a couple of months ago Google have send out disaproval emails for ads in campaigns/adgroups that had been deleted a long time ago.

Now perhaps you are thinking why I don't submit the websites that got 1/10 QS in the past. I will not do this because I'm still promoting them via other sources. I don't want to give competion information about the products and websites I'm promoting.

smallcompany

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 9:57 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

You people who run affiliate sites

Review My Site

But folks that got their accounts terminated seemed not to run their own sites!
And they only said there was nothing wrong with companies they've been promoting. That's all what responders know - if they believe it.

There is no enough information in regards of this, even after over 450 posts in two threads.

SuperF

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 10:47 pm on Nov 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I'll extend my bet to include the guess that our OP may meet the criteria of 1 or more of those 6 bullet points.

At the time of our final warning that page also listed ebooks. Checking the quality score for our ads (something we had never heard of until now) we found that a few Clickbank merchants seemed to be the problem. We immediately ceased promoting hundreds of Clickbank ads. Delete, delete, delete. Over the following week (thousands of sites to check) we deleted anything that could conceivably be against Adwords guidelines. We then ceased adding anything new to the account. A month later we were disabled.

Some of these were "Get-rich quick" sites, as is the nature of many Clickbank products. The ads were made years ago. We failed to profit from them so we paused them - years ago. Pre-landing page quality score. We have been told on several occasions that paused ads cannot be disapproved. Until last month, the only punishment we were aware of was the Google Slap. In retrospect we should have deleted them, not paused them (even though ad groups can be undeleted as easily as unpaused, to Google it makes a difference, it seems).

Meanwhile the mention of ebooks has disappeared from the guidelines. That's one of the problems - the guidelines can change on a whim, and they don't care to tell anyone. In case the spammers find out...

Last week I got the ban. I still have access to my account but all quality scores are fine.

Likewise, there has been no change to the quality score of any of our ads. It appears a decision was made to remove us due to the final warning, not due to anything we have done wrong since. We have wracked our brains and cannot find anything that could have caused our account to be disabled.

smallcompany

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 2:52 am on Nov 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

This goes back to Rhinofish, Rehan, and Netmeg.

They all commented in their own way, but similar, too.

Crap being suppressed. And obviously, hard task as the definition is not clear.

Five (5) years ago, I created one or two ads for an offer from Clickbank, and never again. I even re-visited CB couple of times, but was never able to pick anything. Didn't like it. Didn't feel good about being part of most of its campaigns available.

As the godson said - scam. Not that it is, but feels like for sure.

I also tried to find my way to many other networks, and found very few that I would stick with.
Even some that are quite well known and belong to the groups of big, are "a nest" for those redirectors running ugly like coupon sites that have no visit except through their automated redirections.

Not that I put the initiator of this post into the same pocket with those guys - no way - but mention them here and now because Google has been pissed off at them for sure - regardless if they were a real cause for this or not.
Bid jammers/trappers, policy breakers, those that network quality teams of some good networks went after in order to keep their networks clean, as much as they could.

Furthermore, something that has not been mentioned here, Google has its own affiliate network that it used to get the best possible insight into this part of anyone's online business. Not that they purchased it for that reason, but they certainly had a chance to see it inside.
And what is more, of the several big famous networks, my impression was that same Google's affiliate network was second to the worst one (among big ones) - when about bottom of affiliate business - those that do everything to conceal the traffic source - not to protect, but to hide. I'm not sure how its publisher list looks today - as I distanced my business from it.

Four years ago I asked Google to start recognizing dishonest behaviors that would not fall under their direct policy - based on the belief that if someone was ready to cheat on networks and do things like bid jamming, ad stealing, make real mess sometimes - that same someone would cheat on Google as well - only if he could. Why bother about such folks? Mark them. Be aware of them.

But be careful not to harm innocent!

James_WV

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 10:14 am on Nov 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

@netmeg,@pageoneresults - I'm with you, I think that the vast majority of people on this thread will have broke the guidelines in some way.

Although I'm fairly certain that, as netmeg says, Google couldn't really care less about $1million - it was done by a bot and size of the account probably didn't factor in - unless maybe it was in the tens of $millions.

Unfortunately you have to be a paid member to access the review post that page1 posted - but if anyone really wants to get their site reviewed and not pay then head over to the Adwords Support Forum and post your site there - you'll get an answer and then it's up to you whether you post your answer in here or not...

DilipShaw

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4020049 posted 10:43 am on Nov 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

There may be a bug in software created to dismiss accounts with *** QS and *** Low value landing page etc.

This 139 message thread spans 5 pages: < < 139 ( 1 2 3 [4] 5 > >
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