homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
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

LPQ score has always been foobar

 12:48 am on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

I don't care what any of you say. Especially google. The LPQ is and has always been a pile garbage.

I have a landing page about Blue Widgets and I have an adwords broad match phrase of Blue Widgets and another one Blue Widget (singular). The LPQ of the singular is 9/10 and the plural is 5/10.

And, not that this matters, the page ranks #1 for blue widgets.

And, if you ask why the heck I am advertising for a term that I'm #1 on? Don't ask - I like to.



 12:57 am on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

You can have a QS between 4 and 10 with a good quality landing page, which is what I assume LPQ to be. Same for keyword relevancy. It can be good (no problems as Google puts it) but a QS of 4 or 5.


 1:30 am on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

What you are seeing is Keyword Quality Score.

The only way to see the Landing Page Quality Score is by running a report on your ads and checking the optional box to display Quality Score.


 2:54 am on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

checking the optional box to display Quality Score

...which is still a keyword quality score. Ads don't have QS that could be seen in any report. I have posted the link below in $1M post already.


There is no ad or landing page quality score that you can see. Or, you can take it that a landing page has a QS, for each keyword.

Anyway, I wish QS engineer explains why singular/plural has difference.

Don't ask - I like to

No need to ask. Anyone doing PPC knows what percentage can be taken with paid #1. Anywhere from 20-70%, depending on how many ads is around, other organic results, etc. But, a good chunk of traffic, for sure.


 3:02 am on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

I stand corrected. The keyword quality score is nearly worthless


 6:49 am on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

Of Course we know that.. It is Google FUD.

Always has been. A way to manipulate ( so called, auctions)to maximize revenue.

It fails most logical reasoning and is terribly flawed and is easily manipulated by Google employees, the so called QS review team.


 9:28 am on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

"I don't care what any of you say. Especially google."

Then why bother to post? Why not just sit at home witha poorly performing ad, never take any advice, and never improve it?


 12:54 pm on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

James, Thanks.. you fell for the bait. I've spent years tinkering with landing pages, ads and keywords. But when the singular vs plural of a two words phrase have such drastic QS differences it makes me want to through up my hands (amoung other things).

If you have something intelligent to say about the plural/singular issue then spill it


 3:15 pm on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)


sure, seeing as you ask so nicely ;-)

You're not looking at LPQS if you're getting a number - Landing Page Quality Score is only rated as Poor or No Problems (well, as much as we can see anyway).

What you're describing is the overall Quality Score of two individual keywords.

The most likely reason for your differing QS between the KWs will be that your singular has a CTR which is quite high when compared to your competitors, and your plural has a CTR which is quite low when compared to your competitors.

It doesn't matter if the 2 CTRs are almost the same as each other as the key here is that the CTRs are comparable to competitors bidding on the same keyword.

On top of this, other matters such as historical performance of the two different KWs can affect things - i.e. sometimes when first starting out with a new KW you can get different QS for the singular and plural versions right at the beginning - this is because historically they have different CTR / QS levels for other bidders as they are two separate KWs

>>And, if you ask why the heck I am advertising for a term that I'm #1 on? Don't ask - I like to.

Agree with you on this one though, I always advertise on KWs that I'm also #1 for organics


 10:27 pm on Nov 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

James, thanks for the info.

Its funny that I grew up with adwords (I'm 58 now) and I've forgotten much more than I ever new.


 11:06 pm on Nov 22, 2009 (gmt 0)

You must understand that Adwords is not a black box [en.wikipedia.org].

You just need to work at Google to see into it.



 11:44 am on Nov 23, 2009 (gmt 0)

No probs sailor

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