Forum Moderators: martinibuster
I did not believe them, I thought that I was smart and my ads were in the right place. I changed my pages to put one 300x250 ad in the content and it is crazy how much my earnings went up.
I figures that just one one site alone, I have been missing out on about mid five figures a year.
But I wondered then, and still do, if everyone begins using the "hotspots" will the public eventually learn that these are ads on all the sites like a uniform and begin ignoring those spaces?
It hasn't happened yet but I'll bet that these spots will "wear" eventually. I suspect Google has already thought of this and is continually testing...
Yes, they do work extremely well. Also check out premium publishers ad placements on their sites as they have account managers helping them ;)
I've seen some premium publishers with AdSense blocks down at the bottom of the page, where most visitors won't even see them. (But then, if you're a newspaper using AdSense in stories about roadside bombs in Iraq or hurricanes in New Orleans, you probably can't expect much in the way of targeted ads or shopping-minded readers.)
Freq--
You need to use it in the process of finding what works best for your site, not follow it blindly.
Apparently they are getting next to nothing so why should I keep them there.
Now my challenge is finding a better spot where they will get clicked but the 'heat map' is only so large.
If any of you have your own placement tips that aren't mentioned on the optimization page, sticky mail them to me. I'd be interested in learning more about your AdSense experiences -- particularly with regard to specialty sites like forums, estores, blogs, news sites, etc.
I did not believe them, I thought that I was smart and my ads were in the right place.
Probably because you think like me and thousands of others, believing that the ads blend in and look better on certain parts of your site. The 120x600 skycrapers on the right look best on my site, but aren't converting very well. I'll probably add more 300x250 rectangles in the middle of my articles.
But I wondered then, and still do, if everyone begins using the "hotspots" will the public eventually learn that these are ads on all the sites like a uniform and begin ignoring those spaces?
Ouch! "Ad-blindness" is always a scary thought. If users start ignoring those 300x250 ads in the middle-left of the page, some of us are in big trouble!
This sort of, "blindness" has already happened to the poor 468x60 banner in the top-right corner of the screen.
I've found that blocks at the bottom of the page can be very effective on article type sites such as news, blogs, etc.
Almost 90% of my site is articles, and a few Adsense links right below the end of the article, works pretty well. This follows the idea that when someone finishes reading an article, their thoughts are usually...."Okay, what can I click on next?"
Sure it's great to increase your CTR... but for me it almost ALWAYS costs me in terms of EPC.
Focus on the bottom line and fine tune based on that.
Ouch! "Ad-blindness" is always a scary thought. If users start ignoring those 300x250 ads in the middle-left of the page, some of us are in big trouble!
I think "ad blindness" is often determined by the user's mindset. If users are researching ways to spend money, they'll be less "ad-blind" than casual surfers are. That's why mail-order advertisers can profit from ugly ads with 9-point text in the backs of magazines such as POPULAR PHOTOGRAPHY, and it's why classified ads are a cash cow for newspapers.
The best way to avoid "ad blindness" is to have an audience that's interested in what the ads are selling.
Just hope your new phenominal CTR is resulting in conversions for advertisers - or you'll be sad later.
Our CTR increased by 40% but our eCPM increase is more than double that. It appears that there is huge difference if visitors click on ads simply because the publisher "tricked" them, as against visitors who clicked on ads that they are actually interested in. More so if these ads are now more visible in their line of sight.
google are doing themselves a disservice by promoting butt-ugly ads in the middle of content. getting people to click on ads isn't the idea; the idea is to connect advertisers with surfers who are interested in their products.
personally, i'm happy with tasteful ads that don't ruin the experience for most users, and a modest CTR.
chasing CTR and earnings per page, it's a slippery slope. you will find yourself watering down your content (so that users don't get what they are looking for and are more inclined to go elswhere, namely your ads) and ending up with little more than a scraper site.
Look at big sites with ads all over the place. Users are already familiar with ads and used to seeing them together with content. So why don't we do the same?
Big sites have recognizable brand names attached to them. If Washingtonpost.com has ads for dating services on its home page (as I've often seen in the past), that probably won't change readers' perceptions of THE WASHINGTON POST. But if youve-never-heard-of-my-site.com has the same ads, readers might react differently. My own attitude is that the big corporate sites tend to think short-term and go for every buck they can, so part of my competitive advantage is offering a better user environment (e.g., one that doesn't have an overwhelming number of ads and doesn't use interstitials or other annoying ad formats).
Also, it's important to remember that a site may have different constituencies beyond Joe and Jane User. For example, I want my site to make a good impression on:
- Editors of magazines, newspapers, guidebooks, academic and library sites, directories, and other travel sites who may give my site favorable publicity, links, and traffic;
- Media buyers for national tourist offices, travel vendors, and other advertisers who are pitched by the firm that sells my display ads;
- PR people who supply me with useful information, photos, and press-trip invitations.
Ultimately, Web publishers need to use their own judgment when deciding how to strike a balance between content and commercial considerations, but I do tend to believe that unrestrained greed can be dangerous to a publisher's long-term success.
I'm in the midst of contacting larger magazine sites and seeking IBL's, so I do need to make an impression.
A big rectangle advertising the latest dating site is good for CTR, but doesn't look to hot when a reviewer is deciding whether or not to add my link to their website.
If you have been using large rectangles in the middle of the content -- per Google's heatmap -- when the program started 3 years ago and you're still here with income continually increasing, traffic increasing, positive customer feedback growing -- then it simply means that your ad positioning decisions have not adversely affected customer loyalty. And you're definitely here for the long run.
If you have been using large rectangles in the middle of the content -- per Google's heatmap -- when the program started 3 years ago
I hate to sound pedantic, but did AdSense even have large rectangles when the program started back in June of 2003?
Also, no one's saying that you shouldn't do what works for you, if it's legitimate and performs well for you and advertisers. We're simply pointing out that clickthrough rates may not be the only factor that needs to be taken into account when determining how AdSense should be used on a given site.
