I'm targeting searches on: are widgets good.
To do this, I've 2 KWs on phrase match:
"are widgets"
"widgets good"
Searches on 'are widgets good' show NO ads from anyone.
Searches on 'are widgets' & 'widgets good' show just my ads.
============
Q1: Why are my phrase match ads not showing for searches on: are widgets good?
Q2: What must I do to ensure my KW "widgets good" appears when someone searches on: are widgets good?
Q3: KWs on phrase match as per Google's 'tennis shoes' example simply don't show (as reported elsewhere) - Why?
============
Also: 'widgets' costs approx $1 on [exact] & has loads of competition.
My max CPC is 5c & my daily budget is X1000 higher than that recommended.
============
There was a mention elsewhere that only KWs on broad match with a max CPC of approx $1 - the approx cost of [widgets] - would show up for generic 'are widgets good' searches.
Indeed the only ad that does show 95% of the time for extremely weird combinations like 'AWA widgets WW' is that of a mega-rich corporation who clearly has 'widgets' on broad.
Please don't suggest targeting the phrase "are widgets good" as this won't help anyone. Obviously we could do this but I'm using a very generic example and there are millions of word combinations like it which phrase match is *supposed* to cover. It would be impossible to target them all (we've considered it) - hence the use of phrase match to increase CTRs.
TIA
J
All of your questions can be answered as following:
Your phrase match keywords have been in the first stage of matching and treated as [exact match]. There are some threads discussed about this behavior in this forum. One of them is
[webmasterworld.com...]
see post # 73
OK, so I need 1,000 impressions to show on phrase. In major areas like finance or travel, their year-old revised system seems to make sense.
Where it fails totally however is in very niche areas where most users don't search for 2-3 word combinations - instead they use very obscure long questions.
Strange but true - I've almost 500K (natural SERPs) KWs to go on so I know the kind of things that my audience wants. The problem is, the phrases are all extremely different due to the nature of the market.
So how does one target this kind of audience with phrase match acting the way it does? (ie - as exact match)
Right now, theres only 1 ad showing for many phrases that we'd love to target & I suspect its simply because of their deep pockets. Theres also many more KWs which show no ads.
I don't care if someone is beating me on SERPs. I do care if my audience isn't seeing ANY ads. Doesn't make sense.
Any clues AWA?
Any clues AWA?
Johnser and FromRocky, I've just quickly scanned the quoted thread, and things have changed a fair amount in the year since then - especially around the time of the 'keyword evaluation' changes which were introduced in November of last year. (In other words, when the keyword status designations changed to 'normal', 'in trial', and 'on hold'.)
I think we can safely say that the linked-to thread is no longer accurate.
If you'll bear with me for a bit, I'll see about getting an update for you. I'd like to confirm my own understanding before posting, because I do so hate to be incorrect in public. (Being wrong in private is not my favorite thing, either, but it's way better than public humiliation.)
More, ASAP.
AWA
I think we can safely say that the linked-to thread is no longer accurate.
I love to correct you, eWhisper and other AdWords experts in this forum. It's the best way to learn. Now, you don't give me any more chance.
I love to correct you, eWhisper and other AdWords experts in this forum. It's the best way to learn. Now, you don't give me any more chance.
FromRocky, I'm sure you'll have the chance to correct me, too, before too long - on one of my 'not enough coffee days'. I've certainly had a few of those!
And when the time comes, feel free - I'd be honored to be corrected by you!
;) AWA
Incidentally, if you could suggest a solution for the above *niche* scenario in addition to explaining what's actually happening system-wise, that would be most helpful!
I've confirmed my basic understanding, and have also learned a few nuances myself. Sorry to have taken a while in posting again: I just knew this would take a good half hour or more to write up clearly.
So, let's start with a basic statement of purpose for broad matching and phrase matching, as it exists today - and then add a few words about what it is not intended to do.
As a foundational point, please know that it is extremely important to Google to make sure that our users are being delivered relevant ads - and improvement in this area is a constant and ongoing goal.
In light of this goal, the essential intent (and function) of broad and phrase matching is to show your ads for as many variations as possible, so long as those variations deliver relevant ads to Google users.
However, broad and phrase match are not meant to be a guarantee that one will appear for any and all variations of a keyword, regardless of whether or not they'd deliver relevant ads to Google users.
So bottom line: when one uses broad or phrase matching, the ads will show for all variations that will deliver relevant results to Google users - and this is based on the advertiser's own performance on these variations in their account, and the historical CTR of the variations for all other advertisers as well.
With all of that said, the best way to ensure that you'll show for a particular phrase, is to actually enter that variation as a keyword in your keyword list - keeping in mind that if the keyword then doesn't perform well, it could still end up 'on hold' or 'disabled'.
I do understand, johnser, that this is a less than ideal situation for you in that "there are millions of word combinations like it which phrase match is "*supposed* to cover", and that you would like to appear for them all.
Still, my best advice "for the above *niche* scenario" you've mentioned, amounts to specifically adding the 'variations' for which you must show to your keyword list. And meanwhile, broad or phrase match will continue to show you for lots of variations that you did not specifically enter - but only the relevant ones.
I'm sorry that this answer is almost certainly not the one that you were hoping to hear. I do hope, however, that you'll understand the viewpoint that anything that AdWords can do to show more relevant ads to our users, over the long term, is to the advertiser's advantage. This is because an advertising program which is deeply trusted by users will be used far more often than one which has proven to deliver irrelevant ads just a few too many times.
And this, IMO, is to everyone's advantage.
AWA
While Google (to my knowledge) has not public ally admitted to theming phrase/broad matches, some employees have hinted that there are some algos like this at play (however, the algo isn't always fully known/understood by the G reps either).
I'm finding that adding a few phrase/exact matches that aren't totally relevant start to show some of my relevant phrase matched ads in searches that might cross themes.
When one first signs up for an account, one chooses b2b or b2c and an industry. If this information is being used at all, or theming is at work, it seems that maybe Google should allow us to pick more specific relevant themes (or more than one) for our accounts.
Its still very bad however that a word like "widget" which has 75 advertisers on it (according to our CSR) does not trigger ANY ads when searched for within thousands of different word combinations which no advertiser could possibly hope to cover (nor would the system allow such KW volume)
Regardless of what I'm told that the "system is designed to improve user experience first which benefits all advertisers", not displaying ANY ads across thousands of KWs where there is a clear advertiser demand and on which many users are searching does not indicate poor quality ads by advertisers.
Instead it indicates an area in which the system is absolutely not working for anyone: users, advertisers or Google itself.
You have empty ad space that's not being filled by any one of (in my case) 75 advertisers who would love to be there.
This is a bug in a system which is otherwise good. The bug may have been designed this way for 60% of searches but its still a very big bug which is costing G a fortune & not providing relevant ads to users.
Its also not a sign of the quality of the system like we're asked to believe. Au contraire!
If you need some examples of this flaw to include in your weekly report, I'd be happy to sticky you some.
Thx again for your time & help on this
J
If you need some examples of this flaw to include in your weekly report, I'd be happy to sticky you some.
Thanks for the offer johnser - any chance you could send an email using the 'Contact Us' link in an account with the keyword 'widget' in it - and in the subject line please say "ATTN: ADWORDSADVISOR - By Request"?
(Most folks around here don't actually know me as AWA, so it is best to spell it out in full.)
This way I can create a link to the entire example - since quotes pasted into the report have to be fairly short.
Many thanks!
AWA
