"Made for AdSense" sites--good for advertisers?

[europeforvisitors]

There's a thread on the AdSense forum titled "Made for AdSense sites," which was started after the URL of a keyword-rich junk site was posted earlier today.

Some AdSense publishers believe that advertisers don't care where their ads appear; others (I'm among them) disagree with that premise. Feel free to share your own advertiser viewpoint at:

[webmasterworld.com...]

[shinyblue]

It seems to me that it's not whether the sites are "made for adsense" as whether they are complete schlock or not. We all know a lot of the sites that are developed that are GOOD, relevent, informative sites would simply not have been developed if it weren't for Adsense or affiliate marketing. But there are a lot of other sites that are completely useless that are also just developed for adsense.

[FromRocky]

There are some search/premium content partners' sites which are paid on a CPM basis, instead of CPC. These sites are useless for my AdWords campaigns. They're generating in millions of page impressions a day but producing no conversion with CTR of almost nil. These sites cost Google a lot of money due to their pre-arrangements and should be dropped from the content sites.

Some of the sites, as you labeled them as "Made for AdSense" at least produced some conversions and gave a decent ROI.

For me, I don't need a research but go after a good return on my investment.

[mquarles]

I appreciate EFV's advocacy in starting multiple threads on this exact same subject in the AdSense forum and then in link spamming the AdWords forum with it, but can we please keep it limited before I started seeing the same thread in a dozen other forums?

MQ

[europeforvisitors]

mquaries, this wasn't intended to be part of a "multiple thread"; it was intended to be a pointer to an existing thread in another forum. (See the initial post.) If you're genuinely concerned about duplication, why not discuss the topic in the appropriate thread?