Forum Moderators: martinibuster
We're showing another site-targeted CPM ad today that only shows in our skyscrapers. I looked at channels of our site this morning and found a number of $0.01 earnings with 0 clicks, and we found varying prices: from as low as $0.185 to $0.90. The low CPM price showed up in our blog while the higher price showed up in one of our high eCPM pages.
For one, I can't believe that the CPM price could be as low as $0.185! I thought there was supposed to be a minimum price of $2 per thousand impressions for site-targeted ads (or was I just hallucinating?). If this was in Burst or Fastclick, I definitely would filter them out immediately. I never run campaigns that are below $1 CPM in banner ad networks. And here in Adsense, the CPM price can be incredibly low that it's almost a giveaway (and to think I complained at $2 CPM the other day)!
Does anyone know if site-targeted CPM ads are also subject to smart pricing? I can understand that the ad in the blog can be cheaper than in our more meatier content sections. And since it shows up in our last ad unit (skys), so the prices will be lower (but I am not expecting this low of a price).
I never run campaigns that are below $1 CPM in banner ad networks
Interesting. We serve roughly 60,000 banners a day and currently restrict them to no less than 20c CPM, increasing that threshold results in a very large percentage of default banners being displayed (non-paying banners).
Matt
(a) The sites are picked by the advertiser; and...
(b) CPM ads aren't necessarily intended to generate a "business action" such as a transaction, registration, request for information, etc. as CPC ads are.
For what it's worth, my site's overall eCPM has gone up sharply since site-targeted CPM ads were introduced, though I have no idea whether that's because of or in spite of the site-targeted CPM ads. It could simply be coincidence.
AFAIK, CPM ads do not get smart priced whatsoever, but they are competing with your CPM on a site level. So they still have to pay more than your CPM in order to appear.
You can block CPM advertisers as well, using your URL filter, but I suspect the issue might be something beyond there being CPM advertisers. The program is still quite new, and there do not seem to be that many CPM advertisers targeting sites yet. I believe many publishers will actually see higher earnings once more CPM advertisers kick in. However, those with high CTRs could see the opposite.
I have been watching, and I think publishers are scoring a better deal with CPM than EPC. I just wish we could track is separately to be sure.
So I am hoping that the price difference is because of different advertisers rather than anything else. But I'm a little disappointed with the $0.185 CPM price that I saw, though. A little too low for my taste.
However, those with high CTRs could see the opposite.
This is exactly what I saw with the first advertiser, particularly since they showed up on almost all our pages that the nosedive in terms of eCPM was very noticeable. ECPM climbed back up when the advertiser was filtered out. The site enjoys a very good CTR so I'd like to have the ability later on to select whether I want CPM or CTR on a particular channel, selecting CPM only on sections were our eCPM are low and keeping them off on sections where eCPM are high. G's sales pitch promises to do just that, so I hope they improve their ad serving mechanisms to deliver what they promise.
As a matter of fact, if you WERE getting minimum CPM ads for $1, wouldn't you have more than 1 CPM impression? If you had 1 impression it would be $.001 and not $0.01, remember it's IMPRESSIONS PER THOUSAND so 10 impressions would be $0.01. So that fact you're only seeing $0.01 means absolutely nothing IMO as it could be anything as maybe Google shows $0.01 minimum when in fact you've only earned $0.001?
MAYBE THEY'RE PENNIES FROM HEAVEN?
back to CPM hysteria mode
Hard to believe indeed. Is Google posting the CPM earnings for every 1000 impressions made? Maybe Google is posting it as a ratio of 1000 impressions. For instance, your earnings of $0.185 might be equivalent to 10 impressions, which is the number of impressions made when Google updated your stats from the last update. If this is the case, then you're actually being paid a CPM of $18.50! ?
OK, thread after thread of this $0.01 being blamed on CPM is getting overly paranoid
Sorry to sound so paranoid, but site targeted CPM is a new product currently not available to all, and I simply want to understand what this thing is all about and more importantly how it can really improve my revenues.
As stated in Google's help section, with CPM ads, you'll see earnings that are not associated with any clicks. Sorry for being so late on the road that you have long ago seen this phenomenon (as to how, I don't know since site-targeted CPM ad has just been beta tested and there is no rapid advertiser adoption as yet) but it is only now that I am seeing this. And it coincides with the showing of CPM ads on my site.
You are most welcome NOT TO READ these posts, if it so riles you up incredibill. I don't know how it could be "CPM HYSTERIA MODE" by simply relating my own experience and asking questions like:
- Does smart pricing affect site-targeted CPM ads? (jenstar said NO - which is good to know)
- What is the lowest CPM price people are seeing?
I think these are VALID points that anyone who runs Adsense should know, especially if their site would be selected by an advertiser for a CPM campaign. Especially if what you are seeing on your site runs counter to the hype that CPM campaigns will provide better returns than the original CPC Adsense.
[edited by: alika at 6:56 pm (utc) on June 28, 2005]
Sorry to sound so paranoid, but site targeted CPM is a new product currently not available to all, and I simply want to understand what this thing is all about and more importantly how it can really improve my revenues.
I don't think it's CPM ads that are hurting you in the way you describe as non-stop CPM ads would be making a positive contribution to your bottom line, not just $0.01 unless you're talking about a very low traffic page.
You are most welcome NOT TO READ these posts, if it so riles you up incredibill. I don't know how it could be "CPM HYSTERIA MODE" by simply relating my own experience and asking questions like:
I'm not riled, just being me ;)
You must've missed the threads where I had CPM hysteria, search for PURPLE PILLS and DODGE TRUCKS in Adsense.
[webmasterworld.com...]
Do the math, I've run the numbers before, unless the CPM ads displayed are more than $2/CPM (start at $4 minimum) it's really not worth having them on the site for me anyways. If I could control the minimum CPM for my page then I'd be all for it.
How much traffic are you getting on the pages showing the abysmal earnings you attribute to CPM?
I think these are VALID points that anyone who runs Adsense should know, especially if their site would be selected by an advertiser for a CPM campaign. Especially if what you are seeing on your site runs counter to the hype that CPM campaigns will provide better returns than the original CPC Adsense.
You are correct, your points are valid, that's why I had CPM disabled on my site.
Problem solved.
For what it's worth, my site's overall eCPM has gone up sharply since site-targeted CPM ads were introduced, though I have no idea whether that's because of or in spite of the site-targeted CPM ads. It could simply be coincidence.
Same here, but my guess is it's because of the site-targeted CPM ads, not in spite of them.
I'm not saying this is what happened in your case, but it is a possibility. On the channel you were tracking, say you had 900 CPC impressions that generated 0 clicks. plus 100 CPM impressions at $5.00 CPM. Your stats when averaged would read:
1000 impressions, 0 clicks, $.50 revenue. You might think that the CPM ads were paying low but it's the CPC ads that brought the average down.
As others have said, it would be nice to have seperate tracking, which I bet we will in the future.
