europeforvisitors - 4:01 pm on Jun 16, 2004 (gmt 0)

My hunch is that these sites actually convert well - probably better than an average true site.

Maybe, maybe not. I think it depends on:

1) The product and its target audience;

2) What kind of "true site" (or "true page") you're talking about;

3) How the user reached the page (e.g., through search or through casual browsing).

If a user got to the sitescraper directory page while searching for "Widgetco WX-1" with the intention of buying, the sitescraper's ad may convert well. If, on the other hand, the user is interested in a $10,000 Platinum Cruise of the Adriatic and is looking for reviews and other information, the ad click may go to waste if (as is likely) the ad is for a travel agency rather than for Platinum Cruises.

I'd assume that "smart pricing" is designed to account for such differences, but it probably doesn't work very well unless conversion data is available for the specific advertiser and the site/page where the ad is appearing. Presumably it will get better over time.

This is what is really concerning me - if it is the case and google and advertisers are happy to have this type of site in the program - then we'll all forget producing our own content, highly optimised, highly dubious, random content sites are the profitable way forward.

Google isn't a company that's known for hiring stupid people, and it's unlikely that it would get sucked into that kind of short-term thinking. Over the long haul, Google's core product--the search engine--is useful only if users can find the information they're looking for. If Google allows its search engine to be taken over by sitescrapers and other "content spammers," users will migrate to better search engines--and AdSense ads on those "highly optimised, highly dubious, random content sites" will no longer be profitable for Google simply because users won't find them.