Forum Moderators: martinibuster
The CPM number is generally incorrect, since alternate ads/PSA must be subtracted out first.
Yeah they are sweeping the PSA ad numbers under the carpet.
Really why do you need ECPM that number is useless. I tells me nothing. EPC would be better.
Are you kidding? Effective CPM and total revenues are the only numbers that really matter: effective CPM because it lets you see how AdSense compares to other revenue sources, and total revenues because they're what pay the bills.
I use effective CPM when deciding whether to display AdSense, affiliate links or some combination on sections of my sites. It doesn't matter to me whether I'm being paid per click or per sale, but if one revenue stream significantly outperforms another in the same place based on effective CPM then I tend to favor it.
For anyone that doesn't understand the significance of Google's reported effective CPM including PSA/AAs in the denominator consider a section of my site (numbers rounded to make the math simpler).
Impressions: 5,000
AdSense Impressions: 4,000
Alternate Ad Impressions (affiliate blurbs): 1,000
AdSense Earnings: $20
Alternate Ad Earnings: $12 (2 sales @ $6 commission each)
AdSense reported Effective CPM: $4.00 ($20 / 5,000 * 1,000)
True AdSense Effective CPM: $5.00 ($20 / 4,000 * 1,000)
Affiliate Ad Effective CPM: $12.00 ($12 / 1,000 * 1,000)
Site Section Effective CPM: $6.40 ($32 / 5,000 * 1,000)
CPM is earnings/(impressions * .001)
Very different numbers
Do you really have 20% PSA ads showing? Mine are probably less than 1%.
Same here. I've never seen PSAs on my site except for a couple of brief occasions when the AdSense servers were acting up and PSAs were being served en masse.
Maybe they are now worried that they should care about us too. Earlier they were only thinking of advertisers and their own intrests.
But one thing i must say is that google support i really great and helpfull
well i think google team is now more concerned about providing more features to publishers. Maybe they are now worried that they should care about us too. Earlier they were only thinking of advertisers and their own intrests.
There's nothing new about new features being introduced. That's been happening since the early months of the network (which started out with only a couple of ad formats, no color choices, and much simpler reports than the ones we have now).
Do you really have 20% PSA ads showing? Mine are probably less than 1%.
I show AAs, but yes, unfortunately only about 80% of my impressions are ad units containing AdWords ads. This winter I went weeks with only 4-6% of daily impressions being AAs and I was content. The bulk of my impressions come from a content site that deals with crime. The negative content filters have caused the site fits, including several multi-week periods where 99-100% of the 4-figure daily impressions were AAs. That is not a typo. I've posted about the problems I've had at least a few dozen times in this forum in case you're interested in reading more. And it's taken tons of testing and research to hit the 80% level which is sad b/c I know what I'm doing.
Google search site:webmasterworld.com forum89 richmondsteve "negative content" or similar should turn up some of my posts.
Same here. I've never seen PSAs on my site except for a couple of brief occasions when the AdSense servers were acting up and PSAs were being served en masse.
EFV, I've visited your site a number of times. I haven't seen anything close to a potential negative content filter issue on your pages. Ah, the advantages of a site about travel over that of a site about crime. And no doubt the EPC is several magnitudes higher too - not that I'm complaining with the effective CPM on my crime site when AdWords ads actually are displayed (the ads are *extremely* relevant).
EFV, I've visited your site a number of times. I haven't seen anything close to a potential negative content filter issue on your pages.
I've got some pages that have a chronic problem with mismatching, usually because the Mediapartnerbot can't judge context (e.g., whether an ATM article is written for bankers or tourists) or because it plucks one keyword out of a 500-word page and draws the wrong conclusion ("St. Martin hotels" on a page that mentions Martin Luther).
Ah, the advantages of a site about travel over that of a site about crime. And no doubt the EPC is several magnitudes higher too -
I can't complain, but I'm sure my average EPC is a lot lower than it would be if the site were about credit cards or some other high-$$$ topic.
