Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
One of my major terms is asking for a minimum 22p per click, i'm running position 1.8 out of a full set of advertisers and yet when i go below 22p it blocks it asking to increase quality.... i'm getting an excellent CTR so surely that's a quality ad!
I used to pay 17-18p per click and hang around position 4-5, now it's impossible for me to appear there unless i lower the quality of my ad...
i'm a merchant and it seems my jumps aren't so significant as others.. it's still forced our daily spend up 50%, if only there was some quality competition out there!
I've not tried MSN yet. Has anyone seen good results with them?
Over the long term this should produce more revenues to Google through high users satisfaction and a high click through rate, while in the other hand google can continue to milk those with irrelevant landing pages for money through an extremely high price per click, which should compensate for some of the lost ad revenue on the short term from the effective blockage of thousands of advertisers.
Since google is a business, any change in their algorithm is designed to boost revenues for the future, remembering this would explain a lot of google moves
They all look nice, but as a searcher, I am going to get darn frustrated to just have search engines or ebay and amazon to choose from. Plus those places spend soooo much time on crafting a quality ad, right?
If I were a merchant, I'd make sure all my shopping search engine ads were up to date. And we all know how affordable they are *rolls eyes*
As for the topic at hand, lately I have had some good success using Site Targettign rather then straight ahead cpc to bolster my campaigns and get an overall lower CPC. While search is by far the #1 way to acquire customers, when the prices start to rise, add some very carefully selected site targets, at very low CPM rates, and you might find, as I have, that it lowers the overall customer acquisition cost.
I believe this has to do with relevancy as G stated and not as much to do with increasing revenues, that as always with many G decisions is a byproduct and comes with the increase in relevancy which then increases clicks which in turn increases click happiness and blahblahblah.
As was pointed out earlier, G knows you cant afford the 5 or 10 buck clicks, it is a polite way of saying your landing page isnt what we want, please fix it so it doesnt say "Free vacation to Rome!" and then lead to a page about installing a toolbar for roman link spam.
I have a suspicion that this isn't all dependent on a single theory, but multiple ones, even though it would be much simpler to swallow.
It looks like this has been caused by a change in algo quality score of landing pages, but she has admited that my keywords and the associated text ad are relevant to my landing page so I have just to wait for some days and everything will be restored as it was last week.
Anyway she is going to address my specific problem and will call me later...
I said it earlier in this thread and I will say it again, on the adsense publisher side we are seeing extremely large ctr increases across a large network of sites and several million visitors a month.
If you are seeing increases, it's unrelated. Advertising costs on the content side seems unaffected. They don't mind letting the undesirables run on the content side because most people don't realize it's a G ad anyway. The only way this is affecting you is b/c large numbers of those affected are turning on content in an attempt to make up for the loss in traffic which translates into a better pool to match from, which traslates to better targeting.
I think the point is , is that the CPC increases only affect the search network. I don't think anyone posting in this thread has had an ad disallowed to run on the content network because of the issue being discussed. It is very very likely that any increased relevence you are seeing in ads appearing is coincidental to this problem.
Well, it has been obvious for a while that G$$gle having trouble distinguishing quality. So my other (side) theory is that they've desided to eliminate small players alltogether. No money - no traffic, you are not competing. Done. Keep searchers going circles between Google, eBay, shopping networks and whoever can pay $1-$5 per click for commercial searches.
Whoever thought it happened because "your landing pages are bad"...I am sorry my dear, our eCommerce store converts at 4%, and any ads we had are going directly to each product page. I don't know how you can get a "better landing page" than that. It is all BS, it has nothing to do with quality and everything to do with MORE MONEY TO G$$GLE.
Unfortunately, pulling the plug on Google now and moving your ad money elsewhere will not make a slightest difference. G$$gle will make so much more on increased bids, they could loose 4 out of 5 advertisers and still be ahead.
I do find it hard to believe that this is the only reason our ctr has risen so much. I can say without a doubt the ads are much more relevant since the 5th across our 2 largest multi mill uniques a month sites in almost every of the 150 verticals they cover. Like I said just my 2cents but I really do think this has more to do with exactly what Google is saying then anything.
Just a thought.
Anyhow, just a reminder, the topic is not called "G$$gle is so great", the topic is called "Sudden increase in CPC". I'd be asking moderators to delete irrelevant posts.
I am quoting from your G$$gle link:
If your keyword or Ad Group's maximum cost-per-click (CPC) meets the minimum bid, your keyword will be active and trigger ads. If it doesn't, your keyword will be inactive for search
The cost jumped 10-fold, from $0.10 to $1.00 and occasionally more. Lots of keywords got disabled. Simple logic, really simple, this is not rocket science.
reddog: I'm not surprised actually, if Google's ultimate goal is to improve user experience...
And how do you know that? Did they call you and tell you their ultimate goal? In fact, being a huge corporation, their goal is to create monopoly.
My impression is that Google is focusing on quality pretty much above all else (including revenue at the moment) and figuring that improved quality will bring in improved revenues (for everyone, but specially for Google) down the line. It's called long-range planning. I'm not saying they are necessarily going about it the right way, but I think that's what they're aiming at. I come to this conclusion by way of my own observations for my own sites, my client's sites, my AdSense accounts, my AdWords accounts, various communications with Google and the articles and interviews I've read.
And I'll even look at Pluto options with an open mind.
Im sure google are trying to improve quality of the results, but at the same time they of course would like more revenue - who wouldnt. Most of the people who read this forum would frankly shaft each other for a little more cash in their pocket (legally of course) so lets not get high and mighly about google doing the same to advertisers, whether its intentional or not. If its a mistake they will fix it, if not then we have to move on if adwords has becomes unprofitable.
The one thing that does annoy me, assuming the changes are to improve quality, is that google created the problems themselves when they let adsense run amok. The natural SERPS are full of made for adsense trash sites, and adwords is just as bad. If this update removes some of those sites from adwords then great, but its still a problem of their own making. But there you go.
Maybe Google is changing several things at once or changing one thing has broader implications?
What I think is sort of funny is nearly all that's left on the ad side now is shopping search engines, ebay and one or two megastores (amazon, taget, etc). Considering that there are, what... like 4 or 5 major shopping search engines so the block is filled.
This is not the case in our particular consumer goods space.
Ours is dominated by manufacturers selling their own brands direct, followed by online retailers selling multiple brands, followed then by Amazon and the shopping comparison engines.
Any affiliate-only and drop-shippers were priced out two or three years ago.
I'd be surprised if any of the advertisers in the space saw any changes at all in their ad costs.
Any affiliate-only and drop-shippers were priced out two or three years ago.
And this is now across the board IMHO.
So jacking up the prices in little less competitive niches is a nail in coffin of mom-and-pop eCommerce. Thank you, G$$gle, you did it, you stepped and burried webmasters that made you who you are. And how? With garbage-like "quality" of serps, millions of made-for-adsense sites and lots of spin doctors.