Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Revenue from WebSearch ads may be offset at the end of the month by fees applicable to WebSearch.
How did I miss mention of fees when reading the TOS/overview?
Edit: the same clause appears in the revised TOS, with no further mention of the word fee other than for returned checks or cancelled payments. No mention in the FAQ, nor the program policies.
ASA, what fees?
google is starting this one off on the right foot.
If a publisher is generating a large amount of searches, but is getting a small number of clicks, Google will cover some of this cost with a fee to be deducted at the end of the month.
Large amount? Small number?
Actual numbers or a minimum CTR would be appreciated if possible.
Now, you might want to strongly suggest that the WebSearch faq be changed because, in fact, the words "The program is free," are, beyond misleading, factually incorrect.
And you know, that "may have an" undisclosed "amount deducted" just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. To me, it makes Google appear like one of those fly-by-night companies that I've all learned not to do business with.
A bit of transparency -- as heralded in the IPO filing -- in doing business with publishers would go a long way.
Strategically very Good Move by Google including WebSearch in Adsense.I am sure google is on the verge of becoming the gigantic Search Engine (distributed search engine) from giant standalone search engine.
However, few minor points to make this move to be win-win for all.
1.Making a rule saying that if a publisher is generating more searches then clicks we would charge you is a broad statement,a specific measurable "more" needs to be defined.
2.Charging a certain fee is good but if it could be like , a publisher falls below 0.x% CTR(like in adwords 0.5%) then warning stating that your generating more searches then clicks in adsense search performance tab may be alot more helpful.After all I am sure you also saying that it's very small percentage of people who might fall below this, then may be making this CTR obvious would be lot more better and it will atleast stop this mass speculation of "google is charging us for WebSearch".
Aravind
I say so what if Google charges for web searches? They SHOULD - by having it on your site you are providing a valuable service to your visitors. If your visitors aren't clicking any ads then why should Google be obligated to continue to provide a service to you for free? If you don't like the rules, don't use WebSearch. Pretty simple.
If you don't like the rules, don't use WebSearch. Pretty simple.
Can't argue with that at all. And, until Google fully discloses exactly what the rules are, I ain't using WebSearch.
But IMO the charge for searches is badly implemented. First of all, it should be transparent. I don't see any reason whatsoever the details can't be published. It's unfair to expect publishers to participate in a programs for up to a month before finding out how much the clawback will be.
Second, it's "bad optics" as they say to show earnings in your reports that isn't the publisher's money to keep. This charge could just as easily have been incorporated into the revenue share algorithm.
I think it's fair to say the program is free. What does it cost you to join or to use it? Zero. That's free in my book.
Must disagree as it does cost. It costs as pointed out in this thread: [webmasterworld.com...]
Plus until the actual numbers of how many searches and clicks etc are required before you start having to pay an also undeclared amount in fees - it is costing everyone.
I am amaxed to be honest by how many seemingly large sites have not had a search system on their site. We have tens of thousands of pages and even I need our search engine to find stuff, plus we frequently link from one page to a direct search page to help our users find info on a particular subject, something you cannot do at present with this system.
I would have to ask why any significant or large site has not yet implemented its own SE.
Sure seems to me this one was rushed out of the plex without a lot of preparation including the code issues.
AdSense was launched without sufficient preparation, too. That's just the nature of the Internet business. Because things can be fixed without waiting a year or two for version 2.0 to be released, there's a tendency to release products when they're only 95% ready and fix them on the fly.
What does it cost you to join or to use it? Zero. That's free in my book.
To join is free.
To use it? Nobody knows until some undisclosed fees are -- or are not -- applied. There's no way to know going in.
To use it? Nobody knows until some undisclosed fees are -- or are not -- applied. There's no way to know going in.
AdSenseAdvisor has already said that any fees charged to low-performing publishers would never exceed the search revenues of their sites. So AdSense search is free.
Granted, a few publishers won't get net revenues from AdSense search, but that doesn't mean the service isn't free.
It costs control over your own site searches and whatever fees there may well be.
Fees of any sort means it is not free.
ADDED IN
It is not that difficult for webmasters to set up a se on their site and include AdSense in that. There are no fees for that so unless this websearch facility is paying more than AdSense it could cost a lot.
