| 6:02 pm on Dec 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Maybe your competitor is bidding higher.
Maybe their account is better optimized than yours.
Maybe their quality score is higher because target users are more likely to recognize and respond to their name.
I have to ask ... what do you hope to achieve by being a copycat instead of being original?
| 6:11 pm on Dec 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|How can this be other than Google appeasing the trademark holder? |
Just to clarify something...
Do your competitors (from whom you have copied the ad content) hold the trademark for those items?
Also, I have to ask; How effective can it be having the same ad copy as a competitor whose ads are shown more frequently than yours?
Wouldn't it be better to state in your ad the advantages are of shopping on your site versus your competitors? (i.e., cheaper prices, better customer service, etc.,)
| 6:41 pm on Dec 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
> copycat instead of being original
I only copied their text ad as an experiment do see if that would help show my ads. It did not work.
There are several original ads running in this campaign which also do not show.
I am bidding very high
Competitors do not hold the trademark. No one is allowed to use the mark in the ad without permission from the holder, which they will not do.
> Wouldn't it be better to state in your ad the advantages are of shopping on your site versus your competitors?
I do have several ad copies with that type language.
| 7:05 pm on Dec 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|copied ... as an experiment ... see if that would help |
Okay, I'll withdraw the label of copycat. :-)
My guess would be that there are some optimization weaknesses in your account that are making you less competitive.
What kind of match types are you using, to start with?
Also, are you running ads on the search network, the display network, or both?
| 8:26 pm on Dec 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Thank you for withdrawing that label -:)
> What kind of match types are you using, to start with?
Over the weeks, i have tried exact match, broad and phrase.
Ads are running on Google and search network only.
| 5:20 pm on Dec 7, 2011 (gmt 0)|
It might be more of a case that Google is appeasing the big spenders..
| 5:19 pm on Dec 8, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I wouldn't retract that label. Use your own ides period. Don't test on what other have created. Doing anything someone else is doing makes you a copycat. Avoid plagiarizing trademarked sites at all cost.
| 4:44 pm on Dec 9, 2011 (gmt 0)|
if thousands of buyer manuals in corporate office and Gov agencies reference a product: "Buy Trademark name, SKU # or its equivalent" how is it plagiarizing the trademark if one references the trademark and thier sku number?
| 12:24 am on Dec 10, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I ain't no lawyer, but...
I think if it is being used in a commercial setting, then the trademark notification needs to be used.
For instance, newspapers can refer to a prescription drug but don't need to use the trademark.
but if lawyers are advertising their services and saying something like, do you take drug XYZ? If so you can join this class action lawsuit.
In that case (the lawyers commercial), I think that they are required to use a trademark, since it is an advertisement.
But that is just a recollection and it could be totally wrong.
| 3:28 am on Dec 10, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I'll back this up a bit... who came first on the web? You or the competitor?
You can both sell the same thing, but which site has more traction/longevity? New kids on the block, for example, must have more pizazz than the original. And if doing the same thing might suffer the same way that Hollowood (sic) movie sequels do... where the sequel does not do any where near as well as the original.
Forget the analogies above. What you should concentrate on is delivering a better user experience than your competitors. Period.
And to figure out how to do that, you'll have to invest in marketing tests.
Look that up and go from there.