<email removed>
[edited by: eWhisper at 11:41 pm (utc) on April 20, 2005]
[edit reason] See TOS. No email snippets allowed. [/edit]
Nor can I see anything on promotional credits, but perhaps I am not worthy :(
Left a message with our Google support, but she's propably being bombarded by many others...
FYI, the Ireland references relate to Google's European HQ which is used in most correspondance with non US clients - its a tax thing.
I see it now...
Aye, its working now.
Heheh. Great timing zeus661 and kmander - Just as I was about to say that I was sorry for any confusion - and that if you don't see it now, you will very shortly.
PS to kmander: thanks for sending an email too!
AWA
1 Policies. Program use is subject to all applicable Google and Partner policies, including without limitation the Editorial Guidelines (adwords.google.com/select/guidelines.html), Google Privacy Policy (www.google.com/privacy.html) and Trademark Guidelines (www.google.com/permissions/trademarks.html). Policies may be modified any time. You shall direct only to Google communications regarding your ads on Partner Properties. Some Program features are identified as "Beta," "Ad Experiment," or otherwise unsupported ("Beta Features"). Beta Features are provided "as is" and at your option and risk. You shall not disclose to any third party any information from, existence of or access to Beta Features. Google may modify ads to comply with any Google Property or Partner Property policies.
Does this mean we cannot communicate even to this forum about ads on partner properties, essentially banning the people who whine about the Content Network from such forums?
About the beta features, other than the API is anything else in Beta? Or should we not even discuss that also;)
However, I found it amusing that Google likes to insist that the trademarked term Google should be used like an adjective (i.e. Google search appliance, Google search, not I'm going to google something). I noticed this week when you call google, you get 'dial the extension of the Googler you want to reach'.
Unless they have hidden something nasty in the small print :-)
Shak
I know that they have to put this in their terms but they could at least describe the procedure should this happen.
I think we should start a camapign to get at least a 12 month notice period for any changes in minimum bid as many people have clients that would require changes to terms also.
It's time to act on this because Google could go to 10p at any time they like, They are corporate money-makers now.
10p would devastate a few camapigns that I run. I hope Google are not thinking about such a change but let's cut them off at the pass if they are.
I think we should start a camapign to get at least a 12 month notice period for any changes in minimum bid as many people have clients that would require changes to terms also.It's time to act on this because Google could go to 10p at any time they like, They are corporate money-makers now.
10p would devastate a few camapigns that I run. I hope Google are not thinking about such a change but let's cut them off at the pass if they are.
Easy tiger
even though I am no longer a moderator of this forum, please can we stop the whole google is evil and becoming M4 stylee stuff.
no need for any campaigns, apart from the 1s in your account
Shak
The tone may have been a lttle strong but the point is valid.
Can you guarantee that Google will not go to 10p next week/month? Thought not.
I have just started a 14,000 term minimum-bid campaign (CTR of 3.2%) that a change to 10p would costs us around £9,000 a year in additional charges. This is for a client so any change would have to be passed on to them.
I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for some stability of pricing that you can build a business on.
just means time to look at other traffic sources
shak
Having studied economics at University as part of an Accountancy degree I understand supply and demand. Your use of the mechanism misses vital factors such as the fact that minimum bid adverts are working on many phrases so that is a vindication of keeping the bids at their current level.
Supply and demand comes into play on more competitive phrases and works well. When minimum bids are raised it is an accross-the-board measure that does not effect the demand-driven costlier keywords. It simply artificially inflates the cost of bids that do not naturally justify that level.
I'm not going to say this would be a monopolistic infringement as there are many advertising avenues but if supply and demand shows that phrases can only support say 4p then you have to question the motive of raising minimum bids to any level above this.
I don't believe that Google will raise it's minimum bid, but we live in a world where shareholders demand results and Google is now playing that game. We need to think of the consequences of what MIGHT happen and position ourselves so that there is time to react to such a move.
A gentle push for this may work well rather than a stampede. I'm sure Google will want to see their larger customers feel secure so I don't see an issue with asking for notice of important changes.
There is a strange clause in there which says that advertisers have to submit their ads to Google and google gives feedback on whether they can be placed. Of course this is the way it works today but the way it was written leaves room for the "Overture" approach with a review before publication.
I did have some work to do on agreeing on all terms for all accounts this morning.
Charges are solely based on Google's click measurements. Refunds (if any) are at the discretion of Google and only in the form of advertising credit for Google Properties.
No more charge-backs for documented fraud they didn't catch? I wonder ...
