Forum Moderators: martinibuster
As a real time example, Monday is often the best day of the week for my sites but February 28 was the worst Monday income and EPC day in ages. But our traffic was near record levels. Similar situation last Sat too with dismal EPC and revenue.
I have also noticed an all time high record number of PSA's. But had 'good' targeted ads on many sites for a long time but recently the same sites have far more PSA'S than normal.
After a noticable decline from Jan 28 thru about mid-Feb there was a fairly nice improvement for a while (about mid-month) but lately its back off the cliff again!
Anyone else notice this dubious long term (since 2003) and also short term trend (starting about Jan 28 2005), especially past several days? Any ideas why this happens? Has G possibly reduced its payout percentage? Does G perhaps have less advertisors which may be why there are so many PSA ads?
Could this be related to allowing 3 ad units on each page (and more and more of us doing that) vs the past where there was a limit of 1? Has that caused a double whammy of a reduced ad inventory and also caused lower bid prices, resulting in a significant increase in PSA's?
Of course, as a long time (well satisfied and very happy with G) publisher we are extremely worried about this trend. Nothing we do as far as making our websites better, good products/services, content targeting, getting improved traffic and good ad layouts/colors, seems to stop the ongoing decline. Any feedback would be appreciated.
What is a little strange is how one day in early February , suddenly impressions went from 100% of page views to 66% of page views - until Feb 27th - when they went back to 100%. And of course on Feb 27th, suddently CTR went down by exactly 50% and stayed there.
Yesterday suddenly, PSA's appeared on all my new pages, then ads for car washing products. Then the real ads came back - all at once.
This speaks - in my mind of glitches... I could be wrong, but that's what it looks like.
second option -- is Google paying less -- is always possible yet I think it's the first part, creating a situation where the sponsors are just paying less and/or avoiding AdSense placement with their pricier bids.
I think that the second option is the correct one "Google paying less". The decline happened almost overnight starting 1st of February. This can only indicate a major shift in google pricing structure rather then advertisers changing their ad channel preferences. The latter would have caused slow decline in earning and not an abrupt one starting at a certain date.
What most of us are seeing here is a change in pricing policy (smaller cut for us publishers, Larger cut for G$ shareholders).
The new Cruellllllllllllgle for ya...........there are alternatives out there. Look for them and be prepared.
My 2 cents, we ain't seen nothing yet.
Google could have slashed prices for advertisers on the content network, too - because in my limited experience, and from what I've read on these boards, the content network does poorly on a general level. Some new SmartPricing initiative to make it more affordable for advertisers to use it.
I also read somewhere that they were dealing with some instances of Impression Fraud. It's very likely in my mind that on Feb. 7, there was a big Impression Fraud attack. Big advertisers would all pull out at once, and so on. OR this is the day Google tried to deal with this.
Either way, they wouldn't want to publicize this too much, and a) give people bad ideas and b) scare them off using AdWords at all.
What most of us are seeing here is a change in pricing policy (smaller cut for us publishers, Larger cut for G$ shareholders).
This would be a very dangerous game for Google to play since if they were to continue down that road then publishers would begin dumping G big time when they saw that all their efforts were only benefitting shareholders.
So far today my CTR is at an all time low, I have never been in this region before however the earnings per click are just bearing up.
What I have noticed with my in-depth analysis the last few days is a marked increase in AFF sites which are totally usless in my niche widget market and it only takes a few visitors to click thru on them to stop clicking altogether.
I also feel that something also happened on Monday of this week looking at my stats since they've just gone downhill.
Either way, they wouldn't want to publicize this too much, and a) give people bad ideas and b) scare them off using AdWords at all.
Unfortunately this is the new corporate Google which does not want to inform the very people who made it #1.
A bit of honesty from them right now could reap huge dividends in the future since there are obviously many site owners reading these threads wondering "Where but for the grace of God go I?"
What's the Internet about? Ah yes, I remember...communication...has Google accidentally deleted this noun?
What most of us are seeing here is a change in pricing policy (smaller cut for us publishers, Larger cut for G$ shareholders).
If it were that simple, wouldn't all publishers be affected?
I do have to caution about looking at morning stats. I've nearly lost some coffee on the keyboard some mornings, but by midnight, things have "straightened out".
In fact, that happened the other morning with the big CPM "jump". It leveled out by the end of the day.
And sometimes, it seems that Google holds clicks for a few hours, and you'll see a click "dump" in the afternoon.
Now you know I check my stats too often if I've noticed such trends...
I am with you, though. G's communication has been too little. Like when we log in and see big changes to the backend, and then we get something about it 2-4 days later? VERY sloppy.
I worked in a Communications Department. It's a minefield, to be honest. One word out of place, and people can go nuts on you. When you have shareholders and a really high valuation, you have to be super careful about what you say to the public.
Imagine this - you write a casual message saying there's been a "problem" with AdSense. Analysts pick this up - it gets out on the news that day, traders start doubting their revenue base and projections saying its overvalued, and a stock sell-off starts. Next thing you know your shareholders have lost 10 - 20% in one day... you could be legally liable, even. Shareholders don't like losing money.
I'm glad they're billionaires and all, but personally I'd have settled for being a multi-millionaire and kept control over all this.
Anyway. Not to defend them - they DO need to tell us more, and do it more often. But I understand why they're hestitant. I think that's why AdWords Advisor is here, and fairly anonymous. If he lets something bad slip, there's always deniability on their part. Not planned, I'm sure! But as a corp. exec with an employee answering questions as such, that's how I'd go about it.
I agree with you about the stats all day long, I often do not finish until 3-4 am and when I log in at 11 am I have mysteriously gained a lot of clicks and earnings:-)
Actually it was not until after I posted that I realised why today was out of the ordinary. I was supposed to be in China for a very big international exhibition starting this morning and our morning stats usually show a huge amount of Chinese trade visitors throughout the sites.
I worked in a Communications Department. It's a minefield, to be honest.
I couldn't agree with you more. Our principal niche products are reasonable value trade widgets which are shipped worldwide and nothing annoys me more when shipments from our suppliers have not been made and there is complete silience only to be informed days later that there were local/regional/national holidays, a dock strike, a shortage of shipping containers, absolutely any excuse you can think of.
The problem is that even after 30 years of doing this the factories forget that we are the ones that have to face the lack of information barrage from our clients!
Lack of communication is so important, silence and clients start to think you don't care and start looking elsewhere.
Almost anything is better than nothing however one has to ensure that it is correct and not simply a fabrication since, fortunately, the Net has made some of this information easier to obtain and advise customers via the web sites about what is occurring.
My job and everyone who works with me? We are all the CEO, the CIO, the CTO, the SEO, and heaven's knows what else...we used to be called sales agents/representatives, my how things have changed in the last 15 years.
a blurb from an article at fool.com
"That's why it's almost shameful to point out why Yahoo! has money on the table by not taking advantage of its paid-search network to compete with Google's popular AdSense service for content publishers of all sizes. But that may be changing soon. Tomorrow I'll be back with the scuttlebutt on why many believe that Yahoo! is ready to give AdSense a run for its sponsor money."
Article Link [fool.com]
kz
I could care less how Google execs feel about transparency. The truth of the matter is they need to be transparent as far as possible.
It's bad enough that we have to deal with shadowy governments and mainstream media. This is our livlihood and we not only deserve respect, we should demand it.
It's a numbers thing. There's one Google. There are thousands of us.
As the song says, "strighten up and fly right..." you googlers. Most of us will buy your high-sounding morality only so long as you deliver in cash.
Can anyone other tham me tell that I'm guzzling Molson while watching the Grateful Dead Movie on PBS?
Such is life in the ether.
Party on, Garth!
I'm right on the verge of pulling all Adsense ads off all pages except for a few test ads I will keep running.
I think the problem is widespread with just a few webmasters seeing steady results. And, I think the problem is the well publicized flattening in advertising revenues this year for Google and their desire to work the payout down for publishers. There is no other explanation for the way it is shaking out that Google is walking the publishers cut down in order to try to stem a growth decline in revenue when they report the quarter to shareholders.
Also, Yahoo created their own search engine, MSN did the same in early Feb. and they all went on a SE tweaking benge in Feb. Some high profile sites dropped out of the rankings or slid badly. Led by Yahoo, the SE's are favoring their customers in the rankings over others moreso than ever before.
The bottom line? Many Adword advertisers wised up after new year and curtailed advertising spending growth. Google, seeing this, is squeezing the publishers. Net result is that the publishers are getting squeezed from lower ppc rates from Adwords advertisers and from Google taking a bigger piece of the pie.
Result: Google is in a tough spot here and will probably loose most of the small publishers before this shakes out.
For others I have read dates like Jan 25 Jan 29 Feb 1 Feb 2 Feb 5 etc. but on average Feb 1 give or take several days on each side. Apparently whatever the change was it must have been done on some kind of rolling schedule so we all seem to have slightly different dates it appeared to go into effect.
What puzzles many is why G simply can not be more straightforward making an announcement as to what happened then and also in the past when EPC's declined for many at about the same times.
I think the problem is the well publicized flattening in advertising revenues this year for Google and their desire to work the payout down for publishers. There is no other explanation for the way it is shaking out that Google is walking the publishers cut down
I still keep waiting for an explanation of why, if Google is cutting the payout to publishers, only some publishers are being affected.
I still keep waiting for an explanation of why, if Google is cutting the payout to publishers, only some publishers are being affected.
From what I read Europeforvisitors you are never affected by anything that google doe’s. Keep dismissing 140 pages long threads full of webmasters complaints about bad serps and crippled adsense earnings like they never existed or most of us were born today or have nothing better to do but to complian here.
The more I read your posts the more it looks like you are a paid google PR campaigner. How would you know if the majority of publishers are not affected, just because they don’t post here?.
I wish we had an ignore button over these boards. I find your comments plain IRRITATING.
I still keep waiting for an explanation of why, if Google is cutting the payout to publishers, only some publishers are being affected.
I wish we had an ignore button over these boards. I find your comments plain IRRITATING.
What is irritating about EFV's statement? Surely this is precisely what all of those who have been affected would like to know?
WallyWorld has already pulled/pulling his sites, I'm keeping a very close eye on what is happening and I am absolutely positive many others are too.
Sorry but I do not agree that you can take a handful of disparate observations and say that on average they support your position. If Google payouts had fallen off a cliff network-wide then I don't see why the 2 sites I track would show no indication of that. The simplest explanation is that these changes are specific to your site, or perhaps your subject area.
And you are entitled to your own observations, however myself with 100+ sites and several others with many sites reporting similar traits across all of them would suggest that this cannot be confined to a small area of subjects?
Many people do not post here preferring to read and learn what others are experiencing and they try and understand and implement what is discussed, and sometimes discovered, through these forums.
One of my main concerns is why is it that my earnings per click has gone down meanwhile I know that the most popular Adword payments in my sectors have remained the same?
My targeted niche widget sites have not seen any loss in earnings however my general, much larger, niche widget sites have seen a dramatic fall.
This probably does indicate that specific words are retaining their value whereas more generalised ones do have less value at the moment and since the "general" words outnumber the specific words this would cause a reduction in earnings.
Only by discussing these issues can others compare and comment which is what we are trying to do.
wish we had an ignore button over these boards. I find your comments plain IRRITATING.
Whoa, you need to check yourself there. EFV has been here a lot longer then you, a senior member with almost 4,000 posts. I think you should give a little more respect for what EFV has to say. Often, EFV is the voice of reason when everyone here is cackling like a bunch of hens.
EFV is more correct on his assessments then 100 new members and junior members put together. Just because he doesn't say what you want to hear doesn't mean it's not intelligent or thought provoking. He also keeps the newby fools in check when they start up with their pity parties.
I always read what EFV has to say because it's more thought provoking then some of the immature posts written by others I think are still in junior high school.
One thing apparent in this thread is that few (if any) of us as publishers have a wide enough view of the massive body of data we're dissecting to have any kind of real perspective.
I know that every third poster who has their assumptions challenged parries with "No way man, I've got like 1,000 websites each with 10,000 pages -- I frickin' KNOW!", but that don't make it so. Having your thumb in the pies of several sites lends more perspective than running a single site, but it's still a massively biased little pool of data you're wading in.
I can't even begin to name the factors that could skew the apparent results of such limited pools (consider the most obvious element in common with 1,000 websites run by a single webmaster that differentiates them as a cluster from the norm: THEY'RE ALL RUN BY THE SAME WEBMASTER). Does someone here have a working knowledge of statistics? How many AdSense publishers are there? How many variations on webpage structure are there? How many different kinds of traffic patterns?
My long-winded point: we can't be trying to shut each other down for asking natural questions ("Why do some publishers seem to be affected more than others?") any more than we can think any one of us is drinking from the grail of G knowledge ("I run 100 sites and I've been on AdSense since the start, so MY secret stats are truly telling of the larger picture").
As a member of the silent majority, I contribute the following bit of flotsam data: I'm a very small publisher (looking to recoup my bandwidth costs, modest goal), and my February was a really honkin' good month, especially in the last few days. Got a bunch of those $2.88 clicks that warm my heart so. So far, March is low-normal.
And so do I.
Yes, earnings declined for me, too, steadily.
This February has been my worst month ever.
However, this seems to be just the result of a free market balance of offering and demand:
More publishers joining adsense, existing publishers putting up more sites, adding more pages and putting more ad units on these pages --> with this explosion in publishing space the EPC over all *must* tank, if the number of advertizers is not increasing the same way.
And it seems there is now plenty of publishing space for 0.05 ads or even lower.
Depending on the market niche, this will hit some publishers more than others.
Yes, Google could be blamed for taking too much (even low quality scrapers) publishers and allowing too much ad units per page, but unless there is any proof, there is no reason to believe in hidden cuts of pay-outs.
Regards,
R.
Having your thumb in the pies of several sites lends more perspective than running a single site, but it's still a massively biased little pool of data you're wading in.
No one would disagree with this however do remember those webmasters who have been around for quite a while and using Adsense have past data to compare with which to make a comparison.
("I run 100 sites and I've been on AdSense since the start, so MY secret stats are truly telling of the larger picture").
Who has said that? No one! I have said that I have 100+ sites therefore it's fairly logical I should have a broader based knowledge and statistical historical information than for someone who is running one or two sites.
I have never claimed that I know everything about Adsense, I simply post my observations here for others to make a comparison with their own current experiences.
Does someone here have a working knowledge of statistics? How many AdSense publishers are there? How many variations on webpage structure are there? How many different kinds of traffic patterns?
Yes to the first two questions.
Questions three I do not understand what you are suggesting.
Question four is very open to interpretation like any statistic.
No one is averse to constructive criticism here however when several observe a similar phenomenon do you not feel it can be discussed just because your experience is not the same?
Keep dismissing 140 pages long threads full of webmasters complaints about bad serps and crippled adsense earnings like they never existed or most of us were born today or have nothing better to do but to complian here.
Max_mm, I'm not disputing the fact that AdSense earnings are down for many of the publishers who post on this forum.
I am curious to know how you can claim that Google has "cut the payout" when some publishers are reporting gains.
There are many possible reasons why some or even many publishers are experiencing a drop in AdSense earnings, such as:
- Supply and demand (advertiser bids)
- Smart pricing
- Quality of ad targeting
It's also possible that, as I've previously suggested, the compensation formula has been changed in some way--e.g., to reward certain types of content, to reflect the individual account's administrative overhead or profitability, or some other factor(s).
But it's illogical to make a sweeping statement that Google has "cut the payout" when only some publishers are being affected.
...because if your site doesn't convert for AdWords at a reasonable rate, SmartPricing will adjust the cost of your clicks down significantly.
It doesn't mean Google has decided to suddenly take a bigger portion of the pie. They lose here, too.
In this scenario, the advertiser is paying $1.50 per conversion, and many times it's for a 2 for 1 deal or a door opener kind of discount, so the business is not really making money, just getting a customer in the door.
Brick and mortar business would kill for the right to pay a nickel to get a customer in the door, but that's what the low end is paying to get people to their sites. It's dirt cheap, and I think actually too cheap.
The paradigm must exist to allow the small business (website) to at least make "close" to a living off the ads. How many pages does it take, and how good must those pages be?
I probably have 400 pages with ads on them and the money is not approaching what I would call "reasonable." Small publishers are being undersold.
My advice, raise the minimum to at least 15¢. The loss to Google - of some small time cheapies - will benefit the overall quality of business. Happier publishers, better advertisers, likely more money for Google in the short run.
G will have to do something to differentiate themselves from competitors. Raising the bar would show that they're dedicated to operating at a higher level.
Getting rid of the bogus sites would be a great help as well.
Hey G, if you're listening, I am available for hire to do your strategic planning. (Oh, stupid me. I don't have a degree from Stanford. Sorry!)
so if you run a Val-Pak ad
I'm not disputing your figures however these type of promotions seemed to have died a death in the UK, in fact I can't remember the last time I received any, it must be 2-3 years ago.
Are they still popular in the USA?
How about raising the minimum cost per click for adwords?
I believe the original aim was to make it possible for the small mom and pop businesses to be able to compete on equal terms with the "mega corps" of this world by offering them the opportunity to bid for the less obvious terms since "mega corp" had, or would, price out of their range the obvious words.
If the law of supply and demand is correct it should be reasonable to assume that many words ought to rise in value as competitors see their opposition succeeding with different terminolgies.
That's the theory anyway!
...Because if you're selling something that gets 1 in 100 to convert to a sale, then 100 customers @ $0.05 a click = $5 per sale. You're saying that it should be $15 a sale instead. That immediately knocks out a lot of businesses and products with lesser margins.
Remember, AdSense doesn't exist for you to make money. It exists to help advertisers SELL PRODUCTS.
So... if you want to make more money with AdSense, doing something with your website that helps people make a buying decision. That will capture more people in a buying mode, convert more people to make a sale, and the price you get per sale will be higher.
And if AdSense isn't working, there's all manner of web networks that sell by impression, not by action. Or as I mentioned in another thread, add on an affiliate program or two by yourself.
The reason some report ongoing good income is they are often small with 1 or a few sites, or lower traffic, or somewhat new at PPC.
The ones reporting ongoing declines are larger with many sites and traffic. The law of averages comes into play with them more so than the small publisher (where no declines are obvious) really due to the statistical validity factors.
Why do so many have ongoing declines? IMO it's because of last years advent of as many as 3 ad units per page. More and more publishers have 2 or 3 units running, whereas in the past we were restricted to 1 unit.
Also don't forget at first when G announced they will permit more units per page many of us were unsure or hesitant doing it. After a few mos many of us came on board the multi ad unit bandwagon.
All these ad units would seem to result in a shortage of well paying adwords, with either EPC reductions or worse yet no income at all at times due to so many PSA's.
My network of sites is a good example as I have more and more new websites coming on board running 3 ad units right away. Plus, as we improve old sites
we typically add 2 new adsense units to the page which always had 1 in the past.
Perhaps due to statistical anomaly, various adjustments going into effect, many new adsense websites going online early 2005 (with 2 or 3 ad units), or delayed marketing programs from new year Adwords budgets the overall effect seemed to happen somewhere near Feb 1 or end of Jan.
Please tell me if that all seems like the likely explanations for all of this? I think it's valid.
[edited by: trader at 3:25 am (utc) on Mar. 5, 2005]
All these ad units would seem to result in a shortage of well paying adwords, with either EPC reductions or worse yet no income at all at times due to so many PSA's.
Multiple ad units do make it easier for lower-bidding advertisers to get their ads noticed, and maybe that reduces demand for the top spots. On the other hand, Google's SERPs haven't been limited to four or five ads (the equivalent of one large ad unit), so maybe the additional ad units aren't that big a factor.
It would be interesting to know more about the publishers who have reported declining EPCs (and about those who haven't). Do these publishers represent a broad range of industries or topics? Do they have information, community, affiliate, e-commerce, or general business sites? How many are in categories that may have been saturated by too many publishers chasing the same keywords or keyphrases? Do seasonal factors come into play?
Also: How many publishers are we talking about (meaning publishers who have reported declining EPCs)? Are complaints (especially by new members) representive of AdSense publishers in general, or do unhappy publishers join Webmaster World to post complaints more often than happy publishers join Webmaster World to say how happy they are with their earnings? There's no real way of knowing, short of a research firm conducting a random-sample survey of publishers who have AdSense ads on their sites.
lets try a scenario
1. cpc/ctr re: g algo on green widgets has budget of #*$!.xx at x.xx per click
2. cpc/ctr g algo on green widgets has budget of xxx.xx at 0.xx per click
etc.
as the number of add units shown ( multiple add units per page ) GMAIL etc increase ( and we must also remember G itself increased adds per page in the last 12 months )it is more likely that lower cpc adds will be shown more often as budgets expire, this may also explain many publishers reporting as day progresses CPM decreases
It could well be that an additional consequence is that number
1. realises he can decrease cpc and improve roi
and so on down the food chain
( this is what i have found from my own adwords campaigns over the last 3 months and it seems to apply to search as well as content )
I suspect the increase in adds shown has outstripped supply from new advertisers and advertisers are becoming more roi savvy at the same time
I don't believe Google will have noticed a significant drop and should still be seeing some growth even if slightly slower growth than they would wish for.
For the publishers will it continue to decline
Sorry but YES until it reaches the supply / demand curve as per any business
and unlike many here I believe the entrance of Yahoo will cause further decreases not increases
I am sure G's big push will be in gaining new advertisers from the more traditional advertising agencies and providing improved tools for advertisers to ensure Internet advertising is a cost effective means of the use of advertising budget
but the glory days of cpc at a level which I and many other advertisers thought was not economical are finished and possibly for the longer term should be considered a good thing
For the odd few publishers who Quote CPM has increased or stayed stable they may be just lucky or are in niche areas that are unaffected I can see channels that have not changed ( possibly even increased over 3 month period ) travel / holiday being 1 , but overall as a measure across all my sites and channels the writing appears to be on the wall of good old fashioned supply and demand
just ramblings of oldy late at night
steve
