Forum Moderators: open
Dave
If the company is in violation of Overture's rules then they'll get all the spanking and discipline that's coming to them.
[edited by: martinibuster at 8:28 pm (utc) on June 23, 2003]
dave
What does GB spam have to do with someone paying to dominate the results of a PPC engine?
Nothing. It's just a comparative statement, like, "Beats digging ditches."
Relax. Your campaign manager is on top of it, and all this domination business will come to an end if Overture determines that your competitor has been behaving badly.
What constitutes an affiliate and what constitutes a DBA? I could, in theory, sign up for my own affiliate plan, create 500 sites, all bidding a penny higher then the last, and dominate the entire PPC serps.
No, or at least until someone blows the whistle on you.
Affiliates are allowed to bid, however they must clearly state in the creative or on the web site that they are an affiliate and not the company itself.
Additionally, if the industry is broken down by regions or franchise locales, then the affiliates/franchisees representing said geographic locale are not supposed to bid on broad terms but rather are required to bid on geographically specific terms.
One company monopolizing the bid terms is a violation of Overture's rules.
Trust the system. Unlike normal SERPS every click costs money and will affect the ROI.
We've seen very few companies try this model with any degree of success, I'd suggest your "competitor" hasn't got a clue on how best to work PPC's trying to spoof your way to the top 3,5 or 10 is bound to lead to loss in ROI, even on bigger ticket items, and at $15 a click, I shudder to think what the CPA must be.
Overture will sort it out, it might just take time to follow the trail, if they want to eardicate the problem, then to need to cut out all the cells, not just the ones that are visible.
Suddenly, you have 5-10 llc companies owned by 5-10 different people but advertise the exact same websites, and then try to dominate the ppc results and no matter which of these advertisers you click on, eventually you end up on one of only a handful of websites.
Because they are all seperate companies owned by different people, OV and GG have so far not done anything about it, and doesn't seem likely to because there are so many different companies involved.
Because we're the 2nd largest company in our industry, no one wants to include us in any of these deals as we're competition fo 40% of the US, yet once these small deals are made, their combined bugets actually sent us out of the top 10 online.
Has anyone seen this type of ppc spamming yet, or heard of anyone who's been able to get these type of advertisers removed?
isn't that,frankly, perfectly "legal" or within the rules of free competition and thus OV?
Besides the fact that it just sucks to out of the loop, isn't that just business? (not talking sides, I am really just asking).
The first example of one company with many sites that end up selling the exact same product, from the exact same source, is much more arguable. But if that company creates one web site for each of its different products and bid on general keywords related to those products (not geographically constrained)......what is ACTUALLY wrong with that?
Here's a made up example: one site specificaly selling "car dice", one site selling "car seat covers," and one site selling "car stick shift nobs", but all the same company and getting top three spots for keyword "car accessories". (I just made that up, so don't nickpick...I think you get the idea). Is that spamming? is that wrong? I don't get it. Just sounds like common sense and fair market competition to me. Or am I missing something?
Seriously, I am not making judgement, nor do I use this method (I don't even use OV right now), but I really just want to understand or at least know what the general opionion is.
the same company... getting top three spots for keyword "car accessories".
One company monopolizing the bid terms is a violation of Overture's rules.
That question has already been answered. ;)
But I find that surprising. Do you have a link to where in the rules it says that's a violation? Just wondering how its worded.
For example, what if it happens by 'accident', so to speak? (ie. other top spots drop out 'naturally' and you end up with top spots) That hardly is what is meant by "monopolizing". That implies that you can't even advertise more than one site if you are the same company regardless of whether you are top spot or not.
OV has removed several advertisers in my area for creating multiple sites that sell the same product just so they can have multiple bids for key search terms.
There are approximately 17 companies that actively bid in my area, one made 25 sites and suddenly there were 42 bidders, although the majority of them were a single company that was just trying to dominate through sheer volume of results and not by making good descriptive ads or even overly relevant information, just mirrors of the origional site. This company was quickly purged from OV once it was brought to their attention what was going on. I don't know if it's in their TOS, but all ppc companies reserve the right to not list you through their own discretion.
I complained to two of the pay per clicks
where he is doing this...
Was Overture one of them?
If you are the same company - why would you have multiple sites with the exact same product? If you are a large company with a diverse set of products, then by all means, one site per product is acceptible, but if you only have one product, and have 10 sites advertising the same product - that is considered spamming by most search engines and ppc spots.
I agree totally. My example was for different products but under the same general keyword (in addition to the specific keyword). Since you agree that its ok if they are different PRODUCT sites but same "parent company", then we are in agreement.
I still wondering from martinibuster whether THAT senario still violates OVER's policy (I still am skeptical that it does).
I'm still wondering from martinibuster whether THAT senario still violates OVER's policy...
I don't presume to speak for Overture, I only know many of the ground rules from reading their rules and discussing it with the Overture reps and editors, etc.
I think what will ultimately decide if your listing scheme stands or falls is, as the competition, how compelling your argument against a cheater is.
Anybody who's ever participated in court proceedings can tell you that the judge sides with those who present the most compelling evidence and not neccessarily with the party who is right.
You bring up some interesting scenarios and I thank you for being creative enough to not bring up specifics, as specifics can really kill a discussion.
They will also act quickly against affiliate sites which do not represent themselves as such. The trick is, in both cases, you should phone the complaint in for immediate action.
Personally, I would never turn anyone in for doing something against the rules in a non-pay listing, and I wouldn't turn in an affiliate site that was not attempting the PPC squeeze-play, but let's face it, when the competition cheats at PPC, it can cost tons of hard-earned $$$, and I have no problem keeping a close eye on these types, and promptly reporting them.
I believe from your desciption that I am in the same business lol pretty obvious!). It urns out that i had also noticed this same situation on many of the PPC's I use including Overture, Adwords and others. I promptly sent them all e-mails, and have gotten replies from Google and others that they will investigate:
-------
Thank you for your email. We appreciate the information you have provided, and we will identify and contact the advertiser(s) in question. To maintain the quality and diversity of ads running on Google, we do not permit advertisers to run multiple ads on the same page. Please note that it may take up to two to three weeks to investigate and resolve this issue with the advertiser(s) in question.
We appreciate your assistance and patience in this matter.
Please feel free to email us at adwords-support@google.com if you have
additional questions or concerns.
We look forward to providing you with the most effective advertising
available.
Sincerely,
Bradley
The Google Adwords Team
Original Message Follows:
------------------------
From: don@xxx.com
Subject: Search Results / xxx xxx
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 18:55:08 -0700
User ID: 866834
Category: quality
--------------------------
Dear Sirs:
It has come to my attention that 4 out
of then top 5 AdWords ads on the
results page for a search for "xxx
xxx" are links to the same company.
(Same county xxx in Delaware). This is
also confirmed in 2 of the cases having
the same PO Box address in PA.
I realize this violates your Terms of
Service, and also provides an unfair
competitive environment for the company
I work for (xxx.com, Inc.) and who
has found your service to be the best
web-based marketing venue available.
Regards,
Don xxx
xxx.COM
--------------
Overture has yet to reply...
: (
