Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Let's say, just for the sake of discussion, that our site has an AdSense clickthrough rate of 2%. If only 1 in 50 ads results in a click, why should we assume that "related searches" links will be more popular? And if only 1 in 50 of those "related searches" links sends a user to Google, how big a deal is that?
Disclaimer: My clickthrough rate is lower tonight by a tenth of a percentage point than it's ever been, and this new change may be the culprit. It's just too early to tell.
Dave.
Plus I have seen it on a few other pages where presumably a PSA ad would have appeared in the past.
This really has to change.
The point is google is making money out of that click. Not on the first click. But on subsequent clicks on the result pages.
You are the reason google makes that money. Now it is only fair that you get something out of it as well, isnt it?
Otherwise, it will be like selling an amazon product and not getting the commission for it. Do you think that is fair?
It appears that these "related searches" links are not appearing on my skyscraper ads...
There seem to be two types of "related searches" links: related search links where AdSense ads should be, and a tiny "related searches" link in the bottom margin of the AdSense box. Aren't you seeing the latter? (I haven't been able to find any of the larger ones on my site, but my skyscrapers are definitely showing the tiny ones in the border.)
The point is google is making money out of that click. Not on the first click. But on subsequent clicks on the result pages. You are the reason google makes that money. Now it is only fair that you get something out of it as well, isnt it?
In principle, I agree completely. In practice, whether any given publisher stays with the AdSense network is likely to be determined by whether AdSense continues to be a worthwhile source of revenue.
In practice, whether any given publisher stays with the AdSense network is likely to be determined by whether AdSense continues to be a worthwhile source of revenue.
Also.. there is another major problem with related search.
Lets say my site is about widgets.. and using AdSense interface I am blocking few of my major competitors.. now when google puts links like "Related Searches: • widgets" what they are doing is exposing my site users to my competitor sites.. as I have no control of Google Search result page and hence.. I am also risking my sites existance on a long run.. (I don't mind competition.. but why to work hard on giving away the users you already have.)I hope google reconsiders the use of this feature.. before publishers start having second thoughts about using Adsense.
I am sure... that no publisher would rather take few bucks right now to kill or at least hurt their site on long run.
NS
I haven't actually seen the "blank space" ad
I suggested to your AdSense folks last week that they should allow publishers to choose a "default" keyword (subject to Google approval for relevancy) to use sitewide whenever ad inventory falls (or the bot can't figure out what the page is about). That would solve all of these problems (related searches, white boxes, *and* PSAs).
I like the Google AdSense program, but right now I'm in the middle of a battle trying to increase my traffic in 50%. And I've just started targeting another type of users in the area I work.
If the "related" searches show up, and my new visitor is not a usual member, I risk losing this user to another site - and I actually want she/he to browse more of my site.
Isnt this what their their ads in the google SERPS are? Why are adsense links worse? In fact google SERPS are even "worse" as they are displaying direct links to their competitors, not just search links that MAY contain their competitors.
My only concern is the replacing of previously well targeted ads with lists of 6 to 10 related links... this has occured in several pages. I also think displaying one ad with a list of 6 to 10 related links under it is a bit over the top, and makes the page look unbalanced in that it now far more outgoing links could be seen as suggesting that the page is about directing people elsehwere, than for the original content on it. To some extent that "devalues" our content. One or two links would be fine. 4 to 10 is over the top.
My disclaimer... My ctr actually seems to be going up in the past few hours, compared to the first 12 to 15 hours today. revenue per click has reduced badly, (not sure why but maybe there are a few changes taking place at the same time) ... small sample, but interesting to see if the trend establishes itself tomorrow.
The blank space simply looks silly and as if the page was designed by an undergraduate trying to be clever rather than someone who is seriously providing an info resource. Im not worried. Obviously this is a poorly silly undergraduate joke from Monty Python cast drop-outs that will be replaced by more useful content as soon as the thing gets working right....
[edited by: chiyo at 6:21 am (utc) on Aug. 7, 2003]
I like the fact that the sites I run are associated with the Google brand.
More excited about working on colour schemes to match the sites I run.
Perhaps Google could pay (1c?) a click for people who select related search ;)
Perhaps Google could pay (1c?) a click for people who select related search ;)
Not enough...
I guess. if google wants to keep that "related search" and pay web master money.. then also publisher should have an option if they want "related search" or not.. cuz.. I am no way in any mood of promoting my competitors sites by giving straight link to google search results.
NS
1. Advertising themselves (Ads by Google)
2. PSAs (Personally I like PSAs, but don't like having specific ones forced on me with no control)
3. Not being told upfront how much revenue sharing is being done. IOW, no accountability by Google. They say clicks went down. Maybe they are just experimenting w/ reduced revenue share. They have no accountability and it's not really right.
OTOH, they are returning some serious income (for now) so I'm willing to live with it.
Related searches should be paid for, true. But so should Clicking on Ads by Google. Maybe per advertiser signed up or some cents per click. But the reason everyone is up in arms is that Google had their code on our pages. I think it's an implied rule that if I as a webmaster make a deal with someone of "like mind", an "Internet Company", they understand that I care about what my site looks like. Maybe I'll compromise for Google. But when Google changes the look of MY SITE, WITHOUT ASKING, WITHOUT ADVANCE NOTICE, they are overstepping their bounds big time.
If they wanted to add new things, they should give us the OPTION to add it or not, or at least enough notice to bow out.
Personally I don't like it, but I don't think it's all that big of a deal. They are big enough to get away with it, and the adsense returns are large enough to warrant putting up with this, as much as I don't like it...
My 2 pence.
They are big enough to get away with it,
Just think about it.. every annoyed webmaster and publisher starting to talk bad about google ethics.. how long you think it will take before google takes place of M$
Even though most people think only one way that webmasters and sites survive cuz of search engines... but still most people forget to see that the this is a mutual relationship and door swings both ways...
I hope google will eliminate their links from AdSense code or give publishers an option to do so.
NS
So I would say to give this a little time before judging the related searches. Personally, I still think that making these ad banners more useful to users could very well help reduce banner blindness, draw more attention to the ads because they're more useful, and make surfers happier with a site.
Our ultimate goal with AdSense is to come up with a solution that is good for publishers, surfers, and advertisers--and it needs to be good for all three groups to succeed. Anyway, that's just something to think about. I spend a lot of time thinking about "short-term bucks" vs. "long-term usefulness of a site" and in my book, if you make a site more useful then surfers keep coming back. The related searches feel like the latter to me, but I hope people give the related searches some time before they reach a conclusion either way.
Okay, much too late for me--off to bed. See ya tomorrow...
I spend a lot of time thinking about "short-term bucks" vs. "long-term usefulness of a site" and in my book, if you make a site more useful then surfers keep coming back. The related searches feel like the latter to me,
Good point, but you're generalizing over a HUGE range of sites. Who says that all content sites NEED a related searches thingie? Give us the control on our own sites and let us make the call. Don't force it on us.
All I would say is that what you have said re changes made to Google.com makes perfect sense for a search engine and Google.com itself as it offers your viewers more choices and better results etc.
However my site for one is not a search engine it is a website with content that is already valuable, adding the adsense code was a way to generate revenue without having to go direct and be able to serve highly targetted ads on brand new pages.
Adding 8 adwords ads on Google results increased your revenue and also gave Google.com's customers more choice when they were searching.
When people are coming to my site they are not searching they are there to read the content and if there is an ad that appeals to them then they will click it earning my site revenue.
Related Searches is not of use to them unless they have no idea what they were coming in for. My initial reaction is that Related Searches are great for Search Engines when people are in search mode but not when people are in Buy, or Read modes.
Good point, but you're generalizing over a HUGE range of sites. Who says that all content sites NEED a related searches thingie? Give us the control on our own sites and let us make the call. Don't force it on us.
Ditto.
Double Ditto.
"Ditto."
Double Ditto.
How about Triple Ditto :)
lol.. what works for Google.. is not sure to work for our site.. let us take care of our sites and at least put a option for publishers to remove those google links they don't want to show..
NS
I am glad I waited!
It just feels totally wrong, spending time to get on the first page of the SERPS and then sending visitors back to check out your competitors!
I am in disbelief!
Dazz
[edited by: diddlydazz at 7:35 am (utc) on Aug. 7, 2003]
Although I dont mind it on my site I would like control.
Content sites probably dont mind as much, sites that are trying to sell you something probably do mind.
(1c was a bit of a joke, but better than nothin - I think I get 2p from Lycos on one of my sites)
Wonder if Google Serps will start having related searches under the adwords?
<edit>
Typos
</edit>
[edited by: Dayo_UK at 8:03 am (utc) on Aug. 7, 2003]
Wonder if Google Serps will start having related searches under the adwords?
lol very good question!
Not to be facetious GG, but to make a similar argument as you have about us showing competitor's sites through Google's free ads on adsense, wouldn't the same argument apply to Google?
In the long term, wouldn't it help Google to display Google's competitors at the end of Google's search results? This way if people can't find something from a search on Google they will find it on one of your competitor's sites? And if they don't it will just make your users more loyal to Google. Long term...
More often than not, the related searches link will have only the keyword in the description making it really attractive when compared with the ad where the text shows clearly that somebody is trying to sell you something :(
Adsense was easy. Now I am back to affiliate merchants for earning some good money :)
...Google may suggest up to two relevant search queries below the AdWords ads on your website. These queries are labeled as 'Related searches.'
Mmmn. Someone can't count. I just had a skyscraper with three ads - and four related search queries at the bottom of a skyscraper.
I'm also concerned because I have a reliable and fairly high monthly income from a search engine affiliate that offers related search links and pays me per click any time anyone uses them.
Google is high-jacking this source of revenue for me, by offering non-paying related searches on the same page that look virtually the same in presentation to this affiliate.
