Forum Moderators: martinibuster
I can't imagine that multiple ad units will NOT result in decreases in click revenue. Supply and demand. If you are showing more ads, then it's probably less likely that the high paying ads will end up clicked.
But what's more interesting is the implications for advertisers. The inventory available has increased, which means that for those who are advertizing on content sites, it's not necessary to bid as high for exposure. Where before you needed to be in the top 4, or 5 or 2) to be seen, now you only need to be in the top 4 or 6, or 10 (all things being equal, and of course they aren't).
I know I'm going to be keeping my bids low, and even lower some for content site.
What may happen is the click thru rate PER PAGE VIEW will go up as the CPC goes down, but I doubt it will compensate. I'm almost sure this will have to result in lowered revenue from content sites for adsense, because it will result in lower bids from some adwords advertizer sectors.
Interested in hearing what others have to say.
I can't imagine that multiple ad units will NOT result in decreases in click revenue. Supply and demand. If you are showing more ads, then it's probably less likely that the high paying ads will end up clicked.
Maybe, but it all depends on the page, on what ads are displayed, and on the copy used in the ads.
If you've got a page about Shelbyville hotels and all 12 ads are about that topic, then you're right: The average EPC may drop. On the other hand, if you've got a page about river cruising and the topics in the ad pool expand beyond the original four (Mississippi, Rhine, Nile, and Danube) to include more cruising venues (St. Lawrence, Rhone, Po, Vistula, Yangtze, etc.), then maybe you'll get clicks that wouldn't have occurred otherwise. And if the seventh- or eighth-place ad is more compelling than the four that displayed previously, you may also get clicks that wouldn't have occurred without multiple units.
But what's more interesting is the implications for advertisers. The inventory available has increased, which means that for those who are advertizing on content sites, it's not necessary to bid as high for exposure.
That's true, although lower-bidding ads may tend to attract a lower percentage of quality traffic (because scraper sites and other "junk sites" are more likely to use the maximum number of ad units than would be the case with product-review sites and other legitimate sites that devote most of their page space to content and deliver qualified leads).
On balance, I think that multiple ad units will tend to lower the quality of referrals on Google's "content network." Still, there may be a method to Google's apparent madness: When Google eventually offers alternatives to the current "run-of-network" apprach at a higher cost, advertisers who want high-quality leads will have a greater incentive to pay for control over where their ads appear.
The inventory available has increased, which means that for those who are advertizing on content sites, it's not necessary to bid as high for exposure.
Keep in mind that not all publishers are adding the extra ad units. I haven't added any additional ad units because I'm just not sure that I want to have more than one on my present sites. I've seen a few sites with them and I wasn't impressed with the visual appearance.
I might give it a try down the road, but that's most likely to happen on a site that I'm still developing. The site's design hasn't totally materialized so it's possible there may be a way to incorporate multiple ads without it looking like overkill.
The eye-shocker I've seen on quite a few sites over the past few days is the double leader board. One site used a clever layout and color scheme (or lack thereof) to make the double leaderboard look almost like a directory search result, but the others have been... jarring. If anybody here is taking that approach, I would be interested in hearing if (despite my personal reaction) it is resulting in increased clicks. Not that I'll emulate, but I am interested.
I think everyone assumed that clickthrough rates would fall -- and that obviously impacts CPM -- but it seems as if adding more ads has produced less in revenues.
My theory was that Google was paying out a lower percentage back to the publishers for the 2nd and 3rd ad blocks -- but your post makes a lot more sense.
Either this all coincides with the timing of smart pricing reducing the amount per click being paid to webmasters or multiple ads are having a counterproductive impact on a site's produced revenue (like Websearch).
Surprised I haven't seen discussion about how people see multiple ads affecting revenue here, so while I rarely post, I thought this was important enough to broach the subject.
if you check my recent posts, you will see I have make about 3 or 4 posts on exactly this issue in the last three days. But there doesn't seem to be much else. I suppose next week we will see more as the dust settles and people realise the implications of doubling or even tripling their ads carried on their sites.
Are people going to be happy increasing their ads by 300% to see their revenues stand still or even drop? That extra real estate being used can be used for other programs...it doesn't grow on trees so people saying "if I have to triple my AdSense ads to take another 10% in revenue" need to be looking at other baskets to put their eggs in.
I'm almost sure this will have to result in lowered revenue from content sites for adsense, because it will result in lower bids from some adwords advertizer sectors.
This statement assumes that (a) the 2nd and 3rd ad formats are always visible (in our pages, mostly they're not); (b) visitors will click only on the lower paying ads; and (c) only the substitution effect will occur (visitors clicking on the lower paying instead of higher paying ads).
It is forgetting that additional revenues can be gained by enticing visitors who previously NEVER intended to click on the ad but now clicks on one because the rectangle ad at the bottom of the article for ex. has an ad that interests them. Seen from this perspective, additional revenues can be realized given this approach.
The inventory available has increased, which means that for those who are advertizing on content sites, it's not necessary to bid as high for exposure.
Same rationale as the Google search -- bid high to be placed at the prime spots (e.g. first page, top4 ads) which is the first ad block of the page. Bid low and your ad will be seen at the very bottom of the page with less likelihood of being noticed.
Would anyone in their right minds give even more ad space to one company(doesn't matter who it is). All eggs in one basket?!?
The "made for AdSense" crowd will, because their sites are built around that one basket.
But of course, in the absence of anything else, $xx is always better than $0.
2/ Would anyone in their right minds give even more ad space to one company(doesn't matter who it is). All eggs in one basket?!?
If the eggs are extremely profitable, despite common sense warnings of not putting all eggs in one basket, many will take the opportunity. More so given the lack of confidence of many that Adsense will be here for the long haul. As they say, make hay while the sun shines.
Plus, it is pretty common to members of banner ad networks to use all of several, if not all ad formats offered by the company. Hence, they use the banners, leaderboards, skys, wide skys, rectangles, popunders/popups, invue, half page, interstitial even those provided by the ad networks partners such as Intellixt -- all in the hope of using their web site real estate (every square inch of it) to maximize their revenues.
What Adsense is doing, in my view, is to force these publishers to dump the other formats provided by banner ad networks and make them shift to Adsense instead. Adsense is not only competing with Overture, Ad**r, and other PPC providers, but with traditional online banner ad networks such as Burst, Fastclick, etc.
...well, it depends.
Net revenue is obviously determined by so many factors, that again, probably some sites will do better, some will do the same, and some worse. I our niches where bids can range from .05 to $12.00, I expect to do somewhat worse.
A complete disaster for quality content sites who now have to litter their copy with extra ad blocks. With one stroke Google have enlarged the playing field, giving advertisers much lower costs and quality publishers much lower revenue. Google sees that volume not quality is the way to go.
I find this board VERY valuable. I am waiting and reading and learning here - before I jump and make changes on site.
My first reaction was WOW - I can throw more ads up. Then I sat and looked at my page and said - geez these are not really long enough to justify additional ad spots. Because if a user reading your content / article - sees more ads while scrolling down just a bit - they may click on a lower position ad (lower payout)
In general though, do ads tend to be delivered high-paying first, with lesser-paying ads delivered as you go down the page? A very interesting question, since it would have a great influence upon what to do!
A complete disaster for quality content sites who now have to litter their copy with extra ad blocks.
Depends. I make far more from the affiliate links on my site than I do from AdSense, and I wouldn't dream of sacrificing those affiliate links to make room for more AdSense ads.
With one stroke Google have enlarged the playing field, giving advertisers much lower costs and quality publishers much lower revenue. Google sees that volume not quality is the way to go.
That may be somewhat true in the short term, but in the long term, I think we'll see what I mentioned earlier: relatively cheap run-of-network ads (the equivalent of an "occupant" mailing list) and higher-cost ads for advertisers who want quality audiences and/or qualified leads. Right now, advertisers have no choice but to buy a run-of-network audience of decidedly mixed quality, but let's not forget that Google's content network is a first-generation product.
