A lot of competitive keywords, which I couldn't afford before due to their multi-dollar cost, were showing up in the below .50 range, same as cheap as the minimum 0.05; with avg. position ratings in the top slots (1.0 - 3.0)
But then I noticed that the estimated traffic for these keywords has much lower then I remember seeing them before; like less than 10 per day when they used to be in the hundreds.
Has anybody else noticed this?
Note: I am not talking about the "zeroes" problem mentioned on the other thread. There are estimates showing for traffic, not zeroes, just _really_ low figures.
Thanks.
I don't frequent Adwords forum regularly, but only when there is a specific issue. This is the very reason I came to this forum. Seeing a lot low figures for pretty competitive phrases.
Mc
Thanks.
Any guesses/anecdotes as to why this might be the case?
May be purely techical reasons. Just a day before they had few problems and all keywords returned with 0 clicks. AWA was quick in getting that fixed.
Any guesses/anecdotes as to why this might be the case?
shorebreak, I've pinged the tech team regarding this - and, so far at least, we are not hearing of any new issues associated with the Traffic Estimator.
Looking into this issue in any depth would require details about the set of keywords, language and country targeting, Max CPC, and so forth. So, if you decide to contact AdWords support about this, please provide as much detail as you are able to.
In any case, I'll keep my ear to the ground, and post again if I learn more.
In the meantime, I'd suggest using the keywords with a Max CPC that you're comfortable with, letting them run for a bit, and then adjusting as appropriate based on your actual stats.
AWA
Ok, sorry, dreaming again.
I've been using the estimator ever since I opened my first account and I can say I've developed some kind of intuition toward the costs of keywords. Some are suspiciously low when looking at the estimates.
By lower estimates I mean under the same condition, geo, content/network search, and language.
I ran the exact same paramaters in the estimator as the previous month, and can confirm that the estimated traffic seems cheaper (and lower overall) than before.
However, when looking at the actual stats for those groups, nothing has actually changed.
What seems to have changed is that the estimator is being more exact as you add more matching options for keywords in the traffic options.
What's interesting is the exactness of the CPC. I'm already position 1 for every one of these keywords. I can duplicate this for several adgroups, but one example should suffice.
My average CTR is 13.7% (6.85x higher than the 2% used to calculate). The estimator is telling me cost will be $3.12 per click. My actual paid CPC is $0.45/click. $0.45 x 6.85 = $3.08. That's a much more accurate number than I've ever seen in the past.
As far as the actual traffic, even taking into account multiplying the traffic by 6.85, it's estimating 25-35% lower than actual traffic (content is off).
Last Month Estimator:
28 clicks/day, $5.41 CPC
This Morning's Estimator:
16.6 clicks/day, $3.12 CPC
Actual:
37 clicks/day, $0.45 CPC
Thanks for the stats! There's nothing like real data.
--
eWhisper, you mean the estimates are still lower than actual traffic, although the estimator is more exact than before?
>6.85x higher than the 2% used to calculate
You can manually set the CTR? How did you do that?
