I am operating at less than half the recommended daily budget.
Overall ctr is 1+
Clicks are costing a bit more than half my current bid.
What are the best ways to maximize the number of clicks?
Up the budget?
Up the bid?
Eliminate high ticket countries?
Other?
What are the best ways to maximize the number of clicks?
steverose, one thing that immediately comes to mind is to 'expand' your keyword list - but only with excellent keywords.
In my opinion: More (quality) keywords = more impressions = more clicks.
I am decidedly not advising that you load your account with hundreds or thousands of untargeted keywords. Instead I am advising that you see how many really excellent, highly targeted, and very specific keywords you can think of that describe your products or services.
A few thoughts to get you started on this path:
* Think of who your customers are likely to be. Are they of various levels of sophistication? What would customers across this range search on to find what you offer?
* Really dig deep to find less obvious keywords, as they will often be cheaper to use (since you are likely to have fewer competitors).
* You may wish to include both singular and plural forms of the words, especially when creating the plural requires more than adding an 's', as for example: 'handmade wicker aviary' and 'handmade wicker aviaries'.
* Some words are often used in two ways - as one word, and seperated into two words, as for example: 'handmade wicker aviaries' 'hand made wicker aviaries'. You may want to use them both.
* I'd at least consider using common misspellings (in the keywords list only, not in the ad!) especially if what you are advertising is spelled in a difficult or tricky way. (As an example, I recall someone on this Forum who was advertising holidays on Mauritius for example....)
* Wherever possible, ask your customers what they'd search on to find you.
* Be sure to use negatives to 'protect' your keywords if you are using broad or phrase match.
I hope others will jump in with other suggestions, but I thought I'd add my two cents. ;)
AWA
Apart from all of the above, I've had some success at targeting based on location.
i.e. UK specific ads for UK residents
US specific ads for US residents
That ups my CTR quite significantly.
Hope that helps.
steverose, one thing that immediately comes to mind is to 'expand' your keyword list - but only with excellent keywords.In my opinion: More (quality) keywords = more impressions = more clicks.
AWA - for me the jury is still out on this suggested strategy. The reason is that adding more targeted keywords to an already successful campaign based on more general keywords with a good list of negatives will most likely increase your CPC significantly. The following example demonstrates how this has happened to me:
I ran a campaign based on the keyword phrase "widgets" using a lot of negative keywords and achieved a 8% CTR and averange bidrank of 2 with a low average CPC becuase my competitors were not using negatives effectively and so had CTR's of about 2%.
I then took your suggestions and added lots of more targeted keyword phrases such as:
"UK widget suppliers"
"bespoke widgets"
etc.
The problem is that all these new phrases wre given a default CTR of 1-2% by Adwords for the purposes of calculating BidRank. The result is that my average CPC for the new keyword phrases is 3 times what it is for my original "widgets" phrase. And if I did not have the new phrases people searching for those terms would still be matced to my original more general phrase and I would pay a lower CPC.
Further because I am in a niche market in just one country there is no chance of my new targeted keyword phrases ever getting to 1000 impressions or whatever Adwords require for the actual CTR to be used for BidRank.
So I believe if you have developed a successful campaign using general keywords and worked up a high CTR by developing a comprehensive list of negative keywords it is a mistake to start adding more targeted keywords which would have been matched to your more general keywords.
Does this make sense? I would really appreciated your input on this one AWA.
realgames points to a real problem. Exact matches pulled out of an existing successful broadmatch suffer a terrible startup penalty due to being set at the default CTR.
Glad someone agrees with me Cline. But try getting Google to comment on it (AWA?) They encourage everyone to add lots of more targetted keywords but the real beneficiary of this is often Google in the form of higher CPC. If they want to be fair about it new specific keywords which are 'pulled out' of an existing more general keyword should be given the same default CTR as the existing keyword. For example if you have a keyword phrase match "widget" and then add a new keyword phrase "bespoke widget suppliers" then your new keyword should be given the same initial CTR as the existing "widget" keyword.
Come on AWA. Are you deliberately ignoring my posts on this subject?
Come on AWA. Are you deliberately ignoring my posts on this subject?
No, realgames, I'm not ignoring your posts. ;) It actually has a lot more to do with the fact that I haven't been at my desk long enough to post on WebmasterWorld, since my earlier post in this same thread, almost 24 hours ago.
This may be a good time to say that, on a very good day, I probably get to spend a combined max of three hours on WebmasterWorld, and the other forum in which I also post, out of my day at AdWords. So, please know that despite the fact that Shak once said my full time job is following WebmasterWorld (Heheh. Thanks Shak!), that this is not really the case. Also, I'm not always in the office. I was gone for half the day yesterday, and I'll be away all day next Monday, 10/25, and won't be posting at all.
AWA - for me the jury is still out on this suggested strategy. The reason is that adding more targeted keywords to an already successful campaign based on more general keywords with a good list of negatives will most likely increase your CPC significantly.
realgames, I'm not really in the business of making 'pronouncements' that always apply. Instead I'm in the business of making suggestions, based on limited information, that may apply to an individual account. Or may not.
There was not a lot of information to go on, but my read of steverose's initial post did not indicate that the account was particularly developed. And a really good way to get more clicks is to use more (excellent) keywords. Just that simple. No hidden agenda, no thought for Google's bottom line.
So I believe if you have developed a successful campaign using general keywords and worked up a high CTR by developing a comprehensive list of negative keywords it is a mistake to start adding more targeted keywords which would have been matched to your more general keywords.Does this make sense? I would really appreciated your input on this one AWA.
Does it make sense? Absolutely, yes. I think that whatever works for you, in your very individual case, is what you should be doing.
But try getting Google to comment on it (AWA?) They encourage everyone to add lots of more targetted keywords but the real beneficiary of this is often Google in the form of higher CPC.
Realgames, honestly, the 'agenda' of trying to cause advertisers to have a higher CPC never even crossed my mind. My agenda, every day, for the past two plus years has been to help advertisers to get better results from AdWords, as measured by the advertiser, in what ever way is meaningful to them. And, if anyone in this Forum ever feels that a suggestion that I've made is counter-productive to their success, however defined, then I'd ask you to please ignore my post.
Bottom line, I really love AdWords and fully believe in the program. And in line with that belief, my goal is not to get advertisers to spend more. Rather, my goal is for advertisers to have a great ROI, so that they'll continue to profit, and therefore continue to use AdWords.
Uh Oh. Looks as if I've written another essay. Thanks, and kudos, to anyone who has read this far. ;)
AWA
Since I have been working on this campaign, and did not come back here til today, I have done exactly as I interpret AWA's advice to me to be.
The result is NOT "nested" terms if I can call them that -- big term and derivatives of the same keyword.
It is discrete terms that all point to the same thing,
drawn from huge lists I compiled before I found a program that works. By going through the lists, I can yank out (or create) one or two word entries that essentially are widget1 widget2, and so forth. Different terms for the same thing.
Since I am going for max clicks, because of the constancy of signups to clicks, some of these new terms estimate out to much less cpc than some of my original terms. So I would argue the process reduces expense.
It is too early to say I've doubled the clicks well below my original cpcs but I am hoping that will be the result.
I must add that I had a very helpful note from aw support on the same subject.
Disclosure -- I am not employed by Google! This was an instance of timely help and I am grateful.
realgames points to a real problem. Exact matches pulled out of an existing successful broadmatch suffer a terrible startup penalty due to being set at the default CTR.
No, realgames, I'm not ignoring your posts. ;) It actually has a lot more to do with the fact that I haven't been at my desk long enough to post on WebmasterWorld, since my earlier post in this same thread, almost 24 hours ago.
Sorry AWA I did not make myself clear. I did not mean you should answer within hours. I meant I have been asking this question on this and other forums and to Adwords support for around 4 weeks without an answer from you or support so I thought the question was deliberately being ignored. I would still like Google to answer why they think it is right that a customer with an existing successful campaign and high CTR is penalised financially when they add new more targeted keywords to an adgroup. My case (but using widget style keywords) is:
Original Keyword Phrase "Fine Widgets" has a Google CTR of 8%, about 6000 impressions per month and I get position 2 for 30p CPC.
I add a keyword phrase "UK fine widget suppliers". I add it because the term "fine widgets" has a double meaning and most searchers on it are looking for information on (rather than to buy) something completely unrelated. So I am following Google's preaching to be more relevant. It gets 10 impressions per month with a real CTR of 50%. But it costs me 90p CPC to get position 7 and this is because Adwords is giving me a CTR of 1-2% for this keyword. And at the current rate of impressions it will be 10 years before it hits 1,000 impressions and the real CTR is used for BidRank. How does Google justify this?
Realgames
You had two terms, the "fine widget" with CTR of 8% and "UK fine widget suppliers" with default CTR (2%), they compete with each other. The later term wins. That means your "fine widget" even with CTR of 8% may not show up for these highly specific terms or you never get it with the generic term. Others may pay more than 90p to get this specific term. Now, it is your decision:
1. 90p/click gives you a good ROI. Keep it.
2. If not. Drop it or
3. Control Max. CPC=30p for this term
You can not expect a generic term can cover all the specific and highly competitive terms. You can test them by pausing the specific terms and using the generic term to search for the ad.
You had two terms, the "fine widget" with CTR of 8% and "UK fine widget suppliers" with default CTR (2%), they compete with each other. The later term wins. That means your "fine widget" even with CTR of 8% may not show up for these highly specific terms or you never get it with the generic term. Others may pay more than 90p to get this specific term. Now, it is your decision:
1. 90p/click gives you a good ROI. Keep it.
2. If not. Drop it or
3. Control Max. CPC=30p for this termYou can not expect a generic term can cover all the specific and highly competitive terms. You can test them by pausing the specific terms and using the generic term to search for the ad.
Hi Rocky - not sure I agree. I am giving a particular example from my campaign here and not talking in general terms. When I had the keyword "fine widget" as phrase match then it would show up when someone searched for "UK fine widget suppliers" in position 2 at 30p average CPC. But when I added the keyword phrase "UK fine widget suppliers" this is matched to the search instead as it is a better match and I get a lower position and higher CPC just because Adwords allocates an artificially low CTR to this new keyword. I am not making a point about strategies but rather asking Google why such a low CTR is given when you add a new keyword and why it needs so many impressions before the real CTR is used for the BidRank calculation. I cannot see the logic in it and my forensic mind wants to know why.
I would still like Google to answer why they think it is right that a customer with an existing successful campaign and high CTR is penalised financially when they add new more targeted keywords to an adgroup.
This is not our intent at all. The CTR assigned to a keyword with no history of it's own is essentially the average CTR for the keyword as used by others when you started using it. So, it is actually a better CTR than the keyword is likely to earn on its own in many cases - keeping in mind what 'average' literally means.
...this is because Adwords is giving me a CTR of 1-2% for this keyword. And at the current rate of impressions it will be 10 years before it hits 1,000 impressions and the real CTR is used for BidRank. How does Google justify this?
As mentioned above, it is not 1-2% at all. Rather, it is the present average for that keyword - which could easily be much higher than the 1-2% mentioned. With all said and done, though, a keyword with no history of it's own is far better off starting off at a 'average' CTR, than at 0% IMO.
With all that said, I'll certainly pass your comments about the present system on to the right folks later this evening.
AWA
I am not making a point about strategies but rather asking Google why such a low CTR is given when you add a new keyword and why it needs so many impressions before the real CTR is used for the BidRank calculation. I cannot see the logic in it and my forensic mind wants to know why.
realgames, I hadn't seen your most recent post, while I was writing mine, above.
I really am not able to comment on why the system was designed the way it is, as I was not a part of that process. But as I mentioned above, the intent was to get new words off to a fair start. I'll add a guess that 1000 impressions was probably seen as a statistically valid 'watermark'.
And, also as mentioned, I'll pass your comments on.
AWA
