Forum Moderators: martinibuster
It looks terrible. Any ideas how to get it to show four ads?
(I have opted out of CPM and "advertise on this site".)
It looks dorky, but it pays well.
I just read this on the link you posted:
Our AdSense technology will automatically determine the optimal number of ads to display and will only show fewer ads when it improves monetization.
Well, it's not working for me. My eCPM is half of what it was for the previous four months, while pageviews and clicks are roughly the same. So, these ads take up more space (2 ads instead of 4), but pay LESS per click. I would not call this an improvement of "monetization" unless the improvement is wholly on Google's side and not mine.
Please respond in English.
That was my main point.
I find it frustrating that they've done this to help us, but it's hurt some of us. If it was really done to help us their would be a way to opt out of it.
The explanation from ASA doesn't dampen my concern that Adsense is constraining the ads shown for their benefit and not ours.
What I have seen is disheartening. If my page is about blue widgets I used to get two ads for blue widgets, one for widgets and one for orange widgets. On those same pages I have seeing two ads for orange widgets.
This isn't site specific, either. On all my sites I am seeing the same ad results. Less specific and fewer ads.
If the ad type has shown to be too successful for publishers can anyone suggest another ad type?
I assure you that we performed lots of testing before releasing this feature, and found there was a revenue benefit for publishers. If you see expanded text ads appearing on your site, it's because our technology has determined that showing fewer ads on a particular site represents a greater revenue benefit for you.
ASA, I respect your answer and intentions, expressed here. But I hope you will also respect mine/ours when asking the question Does it really increase revenue for our site?.
For example, similar things were said about CPM ads, that they represent a greater revenue benefit, but I submitted a detailed report to Adsense Support in December showing strong statistically-based evidence that CPM ads reduce revenue to my site (I can sticky references if you wish).
From a "systems-thinking" perspective, any testing you do on other sites cannot, by definition, predict how these dynamic ads will perform on, say, my site. And it is difficult for us to tell how they perform: there are so many factors affecting pricing that the introduction of a good feature could coincide, say, with a downturn in bidding rates; on the other hand, a feature could depress earnings, eg: through an indirect impact on smartpricing, but be masked by an increase in general bidding rates.
The key problem is that the reporting system doesn't provide enough information for us to be able to compare how these dynamic ads perform in relation to fixed ads. Is there any chance that you could introduce a more flexible reporting system that gives sufficient detail to compare the performance of different types of ads (CPM vs EPC; plain vs seasonal; normal vs expanded; any new feature vs not that feature, etc..)?
I am experiencing this same problem on one of my sites. Pretty much since the new year began my CTR and eCPM dropped by over 20%. I quickly discovered the reason, all of my big rectangles were showing 2 ads instead of 4. Now Google should realize this might be a problem since we are obviously going to try to fit the ad units to blend with our content. Well my ad units don't blend at all so guess what my CTR goes way way down.
The optimizer is not working. It is as simple as that. It is pretty easy to see that for the last 5 days by eEPM is down over 20%. It doesn't take a super computer to figure it out. Come on Google with with the program here.
I'm sitting tight until they change it back.
I want 4 ads in my block so it blends well into my page - end of story! Google - I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve here
I've had it with this nonsense and have fired off three emails to G Support in the past two days about this. Here's part of my last one, after getting a polite response from one of their reps, repeating the "it's good for you" mantra.
Thanks for getting back to me, but, seriously, is it not true that your fellow Googlers are just guessing when they say increasing the size of the most relevant ad and dropping one or more (while adding more white space) ads will improve my "monetization"?If this were proven fact, I'd love to see the proof. My situation is showing the opposite. Click throughs are slightly lower, and the value per click is also MUCH lower. This is damaging my revenue, not enhancing it. And I would assume it is hurting Google's revenue as well.
Someday, somebody is going to actually understand the meaning of "IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT."
In the meantime, we, the publishers, have to suffer at the whims of the whiz kids at the Googleplex. Give us a break and start paying us what our ad space is really worth. As far as I can tell, the only internet space that Google considers valuable are your own SERPs, when in reality, it is the individual web sites without which Google would be unnecessary. Google is making $Billions while abusing the heart and soul of the internet.
It's wrong, monumentally arrogant and stupid. Feel free to pass this all the way to the top. Somebody needs to get a clue at Google. The webmasters built the internet, NOT Google. I am not concerned about upsetting anybody at Google or even of being kicked out of Adsense for my opinion. There are a great many flaws to AdSense and AdWords, so don't for a minute think that everybody simply swallows the PR that is constantly being barfed up, telling us that this or that is "good for us" when the empirical data is showing that it is not.
Disgusted regards,
