Forum Moderators: open
I've started to notice that almost by coincidence a big chunk of the keywords we submit on a Friday routinely get rejected, for us to appeal and get the decision over-turned because we have had the opportunity to put forward some supporting information.
We submitted 20 keywords yesterday for a client, today 19 got declined. The one that got approved was identical in terms of the landing page and the contextual relevancy to the other 19, but we now need to appeal the decision and probably wait until Monday or Tuesday for it to be looked at.
I'm all for advertising standards, and relevancy rules, but within this client account not only do they spend a lot of money they have a lot of keywords with double digit CTR.
Some times the "content" will be thin, because you can't fluff it up that much, not because you don't want to, it's just you can't.
Before getting involved in search marketing I worked in financial services and we had the underwriters and we called them the BPU (Business Prevention Unit). I get the feeling that some serious flexing is going on (I'm sure in part to please the search partners), but unless advertisers spend money.......
Thus ends my Friday night rant!
I have just smoked about 3 cigarettes in a row over this.
Getting absolutely SICK of the Editorial attitude, to the extent that I have threatened to close my acount with (u know who), unless it gets sorted quicktime.
I explained to them, that their Editorial team was costing them £1000s a day, but while sales people try and push, Editorial have their own ideas.
Shak
The exact same thing happened to me last week with my newest submission of terms. All of them were the same general idea, went to the same landing page and had the same amount of content devoted to each, however one was accepted and the rest went back into the reject line.
My arguement (which has worked half of the time when I get vocal) is that I do not run a content driven site and when my users type in the search term, they are not looking for pages of content regarding the term. (Ex: someone types in widget because the want to find a widget, not read about what it is)
Good luck and try and enjoy the rest of your Friday night :)
you gotta roll with the punches
I'm real happy to roll with punches, but inconsistency is a nightmare.
I don't really want to vote with my credit card, ultimately my clients will lose out, but when you price the work based on doing something once only to have to then go up a chain to get keywords approved it's more time, which hasn't been built into quotations. The other sad thing is it's a universal problem, not isolated to one PPC alone.
This latest batch of rejections is really annoying me, it's a time sensitive event and because of pedantic editorial reviews we will lose 3 or 4 days traffic, so we will lose 3 or 4 days revenue, the client will lose 3 or 4 days of sales enquiries, the PPC provider will lose 3 or 4 days revenue and face, the PPC partners will lose the opportunity for increased revenue.
We all fly by the seat of our pants some time, but these keywords were no brainers from an editorial point of view (or at least they would have been if the editors were based in the UK and understood the sporting calendar over here.)
What's wrong with sending an e-mail asking for clarification if they are unsure? Or a phone call?
I had someone on the phone yesterday (Friday) when a major data entry mistake was brought to light, so it can be done when it needs to be.
I'm finding a lot of power seems to have shifted to the editorial teams within the major PPC providers.
I'm all for advertising standards, and relevancy rules, but within this client account not only do they spend a lot of money they have a lot of keywords with double digit CTR
The editorial teams at some of the PPC engines are MUCH more strict than the crawlers....Just gotta roll with the punches.
Even different editors within the same company seem to be more strict than others. Although this may spin off on it's own thread... if we could suggest a few ideas to create a standard ... what powers should be given to an editor's discretion and what should be common policy? I like the following idea.
What's wrong with sending an e-mail asking for clarification if they are unsure? Or a phone call?
Maybe someone is reading who has some influence.
I know that many of the PPC providers and search engines have staff members that read the threads, but there is an inherent danger in them replying, because the opinions are often just pesonal rather than corporate.
It's great that we have GoogleGuy here taking stuff back to base and putting forward Google's point of view. This is one of the benefits of being a private company.
One of the things I'd love to see is regional editorial staff. We operate a lot of UK campaigns and the decision on relevancy is made in the US by Overture. In some instances if they understood the topical or localised keywords we wouldn't be having to appeal as often as need be.
I know that e-mail and telephone support would make the delay in keywords being approved even longer.
Overture [a public company] employees have a clause in their contract that precludes them from commenting in public fora.
That is why GoToGuy is such a j...
That is why GoToGuy is such a j...
I may be mistaken, but I don't think GoToGuy is actually an employee of Overture.
One of the things I'd love to see is regional editorial staff. We operate a lot of UK campaigns and the decision on relevancy is made in the US by Overture. In some instances if they understood the topical or localised keywords we wouldn't be having to appeal as often as need be.
I know that e-mail and telephone support would make the delay in keywords being approved even longer
SEO/SEM consultants spend a lot of time educating clients about the overall importance of ROI; why can't the SE PPC providers look at the long term ROI of customer retention, and determine a middle ground that is cost effective for them, but also satisfies some of our suggestions.
Overture [a public company] employees have a clause in their contract that precludes them from commenting in public fora.
Anyway, this gives us two possible suggestions. Anyone have some other ideas for common standards?
One thing I did eventually find out (from the job pages on PPC engine sites to be honest) was that Mirago and Espotting both have UK Editorial teams in the UK. Their editors are all native speakers of their European langages for different territories too. Google recruit for Editorial-type positions in the UK too.
I think we can all spot the name missing from that list...wake up Overture UK!
They wouldn't need to all have the same standards, as long as they were consistent with themselves.
When I first started using GoTo, there was a box where you could add comments along with your listings submission. That might help a great deal in some cases if we could explain some things up front.
I had a hugely frustrating battle a while back because O. rejected the term "fake book". Most non-classical working musicians would know precisely what a fake book is, but the Overture editor would not believe it was a specific term referring to a specific type of product. I reeeeeally wonder what they smoke over there sometimes.
They wouldn't need to all have the same standards...
I agree that each PPC provider needs to have their own unique standards to help set them apart from all the others. I also think that they could make some basic standards common.
...as long as they were consistent with themselves.
This should be PPC providers big focus.
When I first started using GoTo, there was a box where you could add comments along with your listings submission. That might help a great deal in some cases if we could explain some things up front.
This is a great idea! I think an optional comments box would help editors in many situations, and you gave a good example of one.
So that gives us three ideas.
Last summer I went though these issues Overture US, now it looks like it is Overture UK's turn.
When they accept "red widgets" than a few days later reject "blue widgets" as a "clear path" violation even though both point to the same landing page that has a drop-down containing both "blue widgets" and "red widgets" there is a problem.
Anyone know if any PPC Providers have editors go through a checklist for specific items to look for, with each answer having a score, or do most editors just make a decision based on how they feel at the time they reviewed a submission?
My listings got bumped to a senior editor and were all approved. In addition, I was told the initial editor would be undergoing more training.
I submitted some ads to Google today and foolishly put "click here for more detail", it's a simple mistake and one I am sure many people make, but sometimes in your rush to get things done, you don't do them right, which is probably a lesson for any editors that find themselves reading this.
Less haste more accuracy to start with then more haste same accurancy.
