Forum Moderators: martinibuster
in Adwords:
Content bids - New! [?]
Let me set separate prices for content clicks
To me - this changes EVERYTHING
*** What do Publishers think?
I am also starting a thread to hear from the Advertisers point of view
"What are content bids?"
Content bids let AdWords advertisers set one price when their ads run on search sites and a separate price when their ads run on content sites. If you find that you receive better business leads or a higher ROI from ads on content sites than on search sites (or vice versa), you can now bid more for one kind of site and less for the other. Content bids let you set the prices that are best for your own business.
You can set content bids for any campaign running on content sites in the Google Network. Content bids are set on the Ad Group level within each campaign."
Obviously, with separate bids, the price per click paid for ads on content sites could drop; but then again, there are currently a lot of advertisers who refuse to run ads on the content network. If these advertisers enter the market, it could have the opposite impact -- increasing demand for adspace on content sites.
And not because they want to spend more money -
Google, one presumes, is counting on publishers who currently opt out of content trying it out with lower CPC. This is unlikely to help most publishers as unless inventory is already low in your area, low CPC ads won't get shown much anyway.
The danger is clearly if existing content network advertisers reduce their bids now they have the chance.
There is a further danger that this extra highlighting of the content / search network distinction will cause some advertisers who hadn't really realised they could avoid the content network doing so.
[edited by: mack at 2:47 pm (utc) on Nov. 16, 2005]
[edit reason] No URL signitures please ;-) [/edit]
Google being Google, they must surely have calculated that this change will not have a negative effect on their earnings.
There is a further danger that this extra highlighting of the content / search network distinction will cause some advertisers who hadn't really realised they could avoid the content network doing so.
there has always been a very clear distinction between content and search for advertisers. they could turn content on or off, and still can. furthermore, stats are provided separately for content and search.
the only new thing is that advertisers can bid different amounts for content and search.
the only question for publishers is whether the influx of new advertisers for the content network will outweigh lowered bids.
dont forget that smart pricing also discounted prices on the content network for the advertisers - so, in a sense, google is giving more power to the advertiser to determine the value of a click and relying less on the smartpricing black box to do so.
lastly, keep in mind that there was a well-known hack to accomplish content bids... advertisers could just create two parallel campaigns, one for search, and the other for content thereby allowing separate bids. this change effectively integrates this functionality into the interface.
for most publishers, i dont think that this will have a major impact (but it could be moderate), one way or another.
It may well be I will increase my overall budget
When all is said and done advertisers will only spend long term where they can make a profit and if this allows advertisers to make a profit then we all gain long term
Just 1 request to G please allow publishers to opt out of adds paying less than xx it is after all our advertising space that is being used I would rather show 1 add from advertiser that provides him a ROI and me a decent amount for my advertising space than 4 adds that are poor paying and Adwords - MFA sites
just my 2 cents
steve
I think it's good as a publisher and adwords user I was forced to drop out of content due to poor ROI i am sure i was not the only one , this should allow more pure market forces to come into play on content
The only way they could allow "pure market forces" to dictate pricing would be to have individual bidding for each site, and that clearly isn't practical--especially with AdSense CPC ads being page-targeted and not site-targeted.
Just 1 request to G please allow publishers to opt out of adds paying less than xx...
What happened to "pure market forces"? :-)
I think it's good as a publisher and adwords user I was forced to drop out of content due to poor ROI i am sure i was not the only one , this should allow more pure market forces to come into play on contentThe only way they could allow "pure market forces" to dictate pricing would be to have individual bidding for each site, and that clearly isn't practical--especially with AdSense CPC ads being page-targeted and not site-targeted.
Just 1 request to G please allow publishers to opt out of adds paying less than xx...
What happened to "pure market forces"? :-)
And what you have to say about this :-( [webmasterworld.com...]
Contrary to popular opinion, you can't decimate someone's earnings by bidding twenty five cents. I've noticed my quarter bids don't bring in nearly as much traffic as my two dollar bids, which somewhat confirms what Google advises, which is that the ads are optimized.
However, I got site targeted by someone once and there was no way people were going to make that worthwhile to me. Hope they've improved that in the last couple months.
One note, if YPN, Chitika, etc. was negatively impacting the adsense revenue stream before...just wait. The next couple of weeks will see a huge switch-over as publishers
further diversify. Competition is going to get crazy.
Freq---
this just made this impossible to figure out the value of new market - as advertisers can set content clicks to nickels . . .
It was hard to figure out what you should be earning when looking at Max bids because of smart pricing . .
Smart pricing won't go away just because of separate bids for the search and content networks. It's still needed, because not all "content clicks" are worth the same.
this just made this impossible to figure out the value of new market - as advertisers can set content clicks to nickels . . .
Yes, but for many keywords and keyphrases, they won't get impressions or clicks if that's all they're willing to pay.
Those small to medium advertisers who left their content advertising on just want the clicks/visitors and don't have the time or iniative to manage it down to pennies.
The majority of advertisers who turned off their content network will find a lot of work cut out for themselves just to save a few dollars in the hopes of increasing their content ROI.
BUt that's just a guess.
And then again this move could be another way of Google trying to rectify their fast and loose acceptance policy of letting crap sites run adsense ads.
A policy that seems driven by their Wall Street like approach to getting as much publisher market share as possible before YPN is cut loose and MSN let's go with their own content network (which is reportedly in the early stages of development).
If they want to help advertisers increase content advertising ROI - there are better ways to do it then penny pinching publishers who are already disenchanted from smart pricing. (I'm an advertiser too and my content clicks cost more then my search clicks, so where's the money going that the publisher is not getting because of "Smart Pricing?")
It's good they give advertisers "what they want" - but when was the last time they gave publishers what they wanted besides direct deposit? Most professional webmaster/publishers here at WebmasterWorld would agree that scrapers and Made For Adsense (MFA) sites have to go - but nothing's been done about that.
Most publishers agree the "Adsense Gravy Train" won't last forever. From the looks of it, Google will keep micromanaging it down until it's like a 2001 banner ad program. I give the program another 2 years maximum.
Entropy is trickling in.
I perceive it simply as a convenience for advertisers, becasue before Content Bids, savvy advertisers had to clone an existing campaign (targeted at SERPs) into a new campaign with far lower bids targeted at Content. We did this for a while but results were so poor (and expensive!) that we quickly halted all Content advertising. Content Bids seems to just be an easy way for G to lure AW users back into trying the Content side of AW now that Smart Pricing is in effect.
I really wonder which "business professional" in G thought it was a smashing idea to invent 3 million new services at the same time.. and deliver them in the period of flies life.
When GMail came I still welcomed it .. and I don't give a damn if they scan my mail .. but it's getting too confusing, too much, server load gets underestimated, an everflux SE update .. new referral programs .. new services left right and center.
Even if they succeed for the next profit report they gonna burn out fast. If you push your profit people tend to expect it. :\
Maybe I am missing the wisdom in this but the elephant in a china shop method is scary to say the least. :\
her answer was that they performed extensive research in this area, and all markers point to an increase in publisher revenue. so apparently, the increase in advertisers in the content network will outweigh any attempts to decrease bids.
she added that there might be some bumpiness for 3-4 weeks, until everything settles down.
True content adds value -- it entertains, enlightens or enrages the reader, motivating him or her to take action, said action being offered by the AdSense ads. OK, maybe this isn't true of scraper and MFA sites but they don't really have any content, do they?
Do you notice that now and then an EFV or someone similar will note that his EPC has remained relatively constant despite SmartPricing and other innovations? What does this tell us? Sites that actually have some legitimate content perform well for their advertisers and have not been penalized by Google's attempts to scrape off the huckster-generated spume.
Yes, the days of easy money probably are ending. That's fine. The money's never easy for those who run good sites packed with original, compelling (and, yes, expensive) copy that puts their readers' interests first. Sorry, it's not as easy as pasting any old thing up there, fiddling with the meta tags and waiting for Google to send you a check. Good riddance to those who don't know this and are too lazy or greedy to learn it.
Do you find it odd that so many publishers are convinced that advertising on "content" sites is less effective than search ads and that letting advertisers decide where to place their ads will hurt content sites? Not very good salespeople, are we?
Do you find it odd that so many publishers are convinced that advertising on "content" sites is less effective than search ads...
Not me. I can give advertisers better targeted prospects in some cases than an ad displayed on a Google search results page.
In a way, it's remarkable this change was so long in coming. I remember years ago reading about American Express tracking cardholders' buying habits and then inserting custom offers in the envelope with the monthly bill. In some instances, an offer was so targeted it only went to 5 or 10 customers.
Yet here we are in late 2005 with all this technological power and in general, AdWords advertisers have a choice of two very broad categories of either "search" or "content."
Here's a scenario that would cause me to say technology is being put to good use: I could go to a page on my site and click on the AdSense Preview Tool. Up pops an inventory of possible ads for that page. Beside each ad is a check box. I check the box beside each ad I want to invite to appear on my site and input the minimum CPC I will accept. Google adds their profit margin onto my offer and sends an automated email to each advertiser with my offer - "example.com/xcfth wants to run your ad and will accept $.50 per click. Click here to accept or click here to make a one-time bid amount counteroffer"
That's flexibility and that's targeting. The MFA's can have whatever advertisers they can scrape off the bottom of the barrel.
If you guys will elect me President of Google for a day or two, I'll see that it gets implemented.
FarmBoy
