Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
As others have noted in the past it seems that Yahoo visitors don't click on AdSense Ads very much. I notice this phenomenon myself, but never thought how it could affect my AdSense earnings.
However, just last night I saw someone from Yahoo Corporate visiting one of my sites, and sure enough, they dramatically cut back on traffic to that site - I think they put some sort of filter on it. At any rate, I am now receiving only 1/10 of the traffic that I formerly got from Yahoo... and the surprising thing is my Google AdSense earnings has sky-rocketed.
Apparently the low click through rate from Yahoo visitors to that one site, had a negative impact on my AdSense earnings for ALL of my sites (three additional). So when Yahoo cut back on traffic it was supplying... my click through TOTAL Click Through Rate across all sites has increased by about 50%, and my TOTAL eCPM has increased by about thirty percent.
My question is, should I/we block ALL traffic from Yahoo... as "dead-beat" visitors from Yahoo tend to lower Google AdSense Earnings.
THANK YOU Yahoo! for providing me with this opprotunity to see analyze just how badly your traffic performed, and its coresp[onding negative impact it had on my AdSense earning. I should have realized it long ago myself.
I think I'll skip that one...
Good luck with it though!
And I wish I had time to drill into it, but it seems to me that my G payout tends to be higher on Yahoo/Overture traffic than on Google/Adwords traffic.
But then again, who knows.
I too, though, would not disable ANY quality traffic that generates ROI.
Only makes business sense frt Yahoo! now that they are gearing up their own contextual ad program - why should they "share" revenue with Google when they can get 100% of their own ad revenue (their cut)?
It's only a matter of time now when publishers will be forced to decide which Ad Network they wish to participate. Do you want to be a "Googler..." Yahooie..." or a "MSNer....?" The search engine will begin to show preferential placement for "THEIR publishers."
Already has with my particular case - Hnads down I'm a "Googler" as they have allowed me to pay off the house, buy CDs (certificates of deposit) and most recently open up an E-Trade account last week...
Yahoo traffic during the same time frame wouldn't even pay my electricity bills - which will be CLIMBING now.
You all do what you want... Yahoo has forced my hand, and I'm VERY greatful they did!
KEEP YOUR CRUMMY TRAFFIC YAHOO! (and I know you know who I am - show's how much I care what you know or can do to me). Google has always been MY "money train"... perhaps its been different for some of you
Why do you think Yahoo & MSN are struggling to play "catch-up"... just follow how each company's stock is performing on Wall Street....
And the "winner" is GOOGLE!
Fine by me Yahoo! Now that I have further analyzed my stats - the "corrections" you have made seems to have optimized the traffic for my site. Before the traffic I received from Yahoo had very low CTR (about 25% of the CTR I experienced from Google).
Now that Yahoo has cut back traffic to 1/10 of previous average daily traffic... my "Net Earnings" ia about the same from Yahoo traffic because my Google AdSense eCPM for that reduced traffic has TRIPLED! Simply Amazing...
Thank You Yahoo... Keep optimizing your traffic... Preferably until its eCPM is TENFOLD previous levels!
However... now that Yahoo has "diminished" my site's web presense in their SERPs... the visitors that expended enough effort to find my pages (I'm not TOO buried) seeminly are more apt to "click" on an AdSense Ad....
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..... So apparently searchers become more "desperate" to find whatever they are searching for and resort to clicking on an "advertisement" the further down the SERP rankings a site is...
I never experienced this because my pages are usually in the Top 10 for appropriate search phrases. So perhaps it is ADVANTAGEOUS to be a ranked a little LOWER in the SERPs because searchers will tend to check out the ads more? This is exactly the corelation that I am witnessing - it is TOO PRONOUNCED to be an anomaly!
Obviously one doesn't want to have their web site to appear TOO FAR down in the SERPS... but so far it seems to be condusive to AdSense Clicking to be a couple/sevearl pages removed from the Top 10, if your are concerned about Net AdSense revenue. Even if the higher ranking paid more per click on AdSense (I'm not aware if they did)... I am CERTAIN that Yahoo visitors are clicking much more now that my pages are appearing somewhat lower in Yahoo's SERPs.
So for everyone that is knocking themselves out to be at the TOP of the SERPs... it might be better for profits if your pages are found 10, 20, 30... results deep?
HOWEVER... the actual lesson was the one that smacked me in the face when I thought I was being "so clever..."
TOP RANKINGS is NOT necessarily required for optimal AdSense earnings... Now THAT is MONEY IN THE BANK for any studious observer of this forum.
Google's AdSense algorithms apparently adjusts to "diplomatically" distribute AdSense revenues amongst participating publishers.... THIS is the lesson that I have gained.
Bingo Erku... That's EXACTLY what I'm implying...
For what it's worth, I'm getting more traffic than ever from Yahoo, and I've had AdSense ads on my pages since June, 2003.
Date/Time: 10/7/2005 8:10:49 PM
Date of Last Visit: N/A
Remote IP Address: 188.8.131.52 Who Owns 184.108.40.206?
Remote Host Name: socks1.corp.yahoo.com Who Is yahoo.com?
Domain Origin: US Commercial
Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 Firefox/1.0.7 (ax)
Referring Page URL:
Visitor Time Zone: GMT -7 (PDT, Pacific US) Requested Pages
10/7/2005 8:10:49 PM
["MYSITE_TYPED_IN.org...] as they KNOW all about this site...
As well they should. I have been "battling" these people since 1996 - when the USA Telecommunications rules were changed to facilitate competitiveness.
I have archived visitor log records of Arthur Andersen, Adelphia, Global Crossing, WorldCom, and Enron - (their problems initially began in their highly touted broadband division - which was supposed to deliver pay-per-view video from Blockbuster Video). Too bad they never had the technology to deliver - my former company did have the sophisticated IP technology.
As much as people whine... the price per MEG bandwidth has dropped dramatically since the FCC/FTC opened the door to competition.
Yahoo has ALWAYS been in bed with SBC... and will do everything they can to maintain SBC's market advantage. They became over-confident for awhile, and allowed my information to be observed by thousands of potential clients daily... However, now they are waking up to the risk that WiMAX posses... and have chosen to "suppress" the information... Which is better than an outright censorship - which MSN tried in the past.
As I have stated in the past.... I am the former web master for the original 802.11 Wireless ISP... since 1996 I have been battling the "powers that be" to provide AFFORDABLE BROADBAND for the general public. I'm not talking the "Wi-Fi" crap which was a "concession" initially by Verizon in Downtown New York City - Verizon converted their pay phones over to wi-fi access points. Just like I was suggesting to the CEO of YDI Wireless about... and mentioned on my site... and Verizon announced a couple of days later when they "blinked..."
Ever since then, all the incumbents have been involved in a strategy battle for the survival of the fittest. WorldCON... they are teaming up with Verizon now... So as I have always know, Verizon can't be trusted for business. The Cable companies are "partnered" with Microsoft, and Bell South is teamed with the Germans. QWEST has been the odd man out... and they are grabbing at straws...
SPRINT/Nextel... AT&T... Clearwire (Craig McCaw's - the "founder" of cellular phone service in the US, new company) and quite a few lesser-knowns are ready to deploy WiMAx when the equipment comes to market... What the Phone & Cable companies once ignored... then tried to censor - which partially caused Telecom sector Meltdown - cannot be ignored any longer. BUT they certainly will connive to hide the information from consumers... They already made their move by disallowing competitors to "share" their networks - which is their choice (forced upon consumers). However, the companies that intend to employ WiMAX have much more financial wherewithal than the small "Ma & Pa" Wireless ISPs they have been jousting with the past eight years. The incumbents days are numbered because their refusal to uptake better technology provides a very large Achilles Heel.
Incumbents invested billions of dollars into FTTH - Fiber to the Home, and forgot that they had to connect the last mile to paying customers. Everyone was heavily invested in fiber... but "all of a sudden" these 802.11 WISPs in the unlicensed frequencies just "popped-up" out of nowhere to fulfill a need much more economically...
Trouble was...the "powers that be" didn't want ANYONE to no about this thing being called "wireless internet..." So mainstream media wouldn't write a single world about it (this is way before the terms "wi-fi" or "wimax" were coined}. Yet all the media... and Wall Street... and the FEDs including the FCC, FTC and SEC came to my former site often (I had the #1 web site for "wireless" the best that Nokia could do against me was #3 according to DirectHit.
There STILL are a lot of CROOKS that have not even been implicated in all the "shenanigans..." Let alone the ones that were found guilty serving prison time. These CROOKS literraly distroyed this nation's economy... and many pentioneer's retirements. It open the door to outsoursing... and our country will never be the same - PERIOD...
Many of the crooks were in Government itself... as they are paid tools of special interest groups (in this case - incumbent telecom). The "powers that be" don't want you to know about this... and I wouldn't be surprised if this thread didn't all of a sudden "disappear." But I KNOW many of the things that went on, because in a lot of respects, I was at the focal point of much of it. My former employer tuned down Cisco System's $42 Million buyout offer, and I personally answered the phone when Nortel Networks called to inquire about "licensing & co-marketing" our Bandwidth Management/IP Technology... However, after Nortel's engineers spoke with my former boss, they realized that virtually their entire inventory was obsolete, and the following month Nortel announced that they were writing off $17 BILLION worth of inventory.... and even with your foil hat on Bill... the resulting economic depression effected even you in California - even though you both are soooo "incredible" (if you ignore California's growing fiscal problems - everything looks GREAT!). Hell, the Silicon Valley is still trying to shake of the aftermath of the FALSEHOODS a few CROOKS perpetrated (and everyone else believed as truth)... and is trying to reinvent itself as "Biotech..." as Silicon has been commodity=zed... as has programming....
Unfortunately... there's not "much money" in "High Tech"at the moment..
But other than this... go ahead and wear your "foil hat" incrediBILL... as you obviously are ONLY concerned about your own well-being... I couldn't expect you nor most people to comprehend working for the "good of all" at the expense of oneself... until last year I placed AdSense on my site...
As I have tried to explain to disbelieving WW forum groupies... Google is quite aware of me & what I have been the "mission" that I have been conducting... Heck, I used to se the founders coming to my former employer's web site when they were testing their search engine back in their dorm rooms at Stanford...
And you can read here about people scoffing when I mentioned that I contacted Google over a year ago about setting up a "Free" advertising based Wi-Fi Network:
So tighten your hold on your foil hat, "Sir incrediBILL"... as the future shall prove who is right.. and who is merely entertainment. I've been doing this WAY before AdSense...
By the way... What makes YOU "incrediBILL?'
I don't even make THAT claim...
But no.... Nothing like that. I just ask you to judge Yahoo's SERPs for whatever it is... and actually NOTICE their results...
It used to be that I couldn't understandand WHY they where including "spammy" web sites (or scrapers - sometimes there is a differnence)...
BUT now I know that YAHOO has been doing this PURPOSEFULLY to devalue Google's offerings.... "LOOK at ALL these CRAPPY Scraper Sites that are Google AdSense publishers... LONG after Google begain deleting, or "diminishing" the web presense of "Scraper Sites"... They are STILL VERY PREVELANT in Yahoo's SERPs...
So silly me (and maybe others) just figured that Yahoo was doing the LOGICAL business choice - since they have been generating a good portion of their ad revenue from Google AdSense... and Yahoo even waS A major Shareholder of Google Stock.
Of course, once they milked that relationship dry, Yahoo needed to resestablish "their market dominance." Trouble is for Yahoo... many web surfers now prefer Google's results (trust Google's results)...
SOOOOOOO..... The ONLY way Yahoo can compete effectively is to DETRACT from Google's results (let scraper dominate in Yahoo's SERPs)....
It is so devious it doesn't even register as strange for most people..... I look at Yahoo's results, and at LEAST 25% are "scraper" sites, especially after the first page of results... and I wonder WHY? You can tell that Yahoo's search technology is sophisticated enough to catch & eliminate these "scraper sites..."
BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER TO YAHOO IF THEIR SERPs CONTAIN CRAPPY SCRAPER SITES... Because they still generate revenue for Yahoo... while at the smae time refelecting POORLY ON GOOGLE! Hey... those crappy sites are "Google Scraper Publishers..." except that your average surfer doesn't even realize THAT... THEY just see that crapppy sites with Google advertisements are cluttering up Yahoo's SERPs...
So the average person THINKS the problem is with Google letting all those scrapoer sites into their program... when in reality Google eliminated those spammy/scraper sites from Google's SERPs months ago (if they were ever even listed), yet they come up #7 and whatever else on Yahoo (and people gripe what's this CRAP? DANG Google CRAP...." and Yahoo makes some money from some people clicking on "Google AdSense" ads... and laughing about the certain percentage of the surfing public that are cursing the results...
Until Google & Yahoo completely break ranks, Yahoo is using Google results as a "whipping boy..."
They must make a clean break... than the consumer wilol be able to determine which search product they prefer. Currently they are "jabbing" at each other...
Can I check I have understood?
Last night you lost 90% of your visitors from Yahoo and your CTR (for the night)was up 50%.
This morning I had a long bath - when I checked my stats afterwards they were 30% lower than normal...
Question 1: does bathing lower your CTR?
Question 2: how does G know when I'm in the bath?
From the LIMITED traffic that I received from Yahoo (which was a 90% reduction)... the visitors clicked on the AdSense Ads more often as to make my "net earnings from Yahoo traffic" about equal to what I was making at ten times the traffic.... Was it 50%... or whatever... I don't know nor care because Yahoo's traffic HAS ALWAYS BEEN attributable toward around 10% of my AdSense earnings. As far as I'm concerned... that is negligible and I can make that up & more from Google, if I chose to...
What I state is fact... And I don't care what the HECK Yahoo thinks because I'm "coming at them" with something "special" now...
I've delt with these creeps before... Go ahead and LOVE Yahoo if you want... Just don't invest in their languishing stock!
That's very funny,
Because, as I said to my honey,
I lost a lot of money
Whenever it was sunny.
So the lesson to learn,
To maintain what you earn,
Is to show great concern
About getting sun-burn
Cause I agree with you
That what Google do
Is use a webcam to view
The actions of all but a few
So big brother is here
(And it's nothing mere)
So you should fear
Because it'll cost you dear
But let me get off the fence:
I agree it's a bit dense
To make too much sense
Of a simple coincidence
OR am I over anticipating the nature of capitalism?
Yaaaaaaaaaa... That's it... I'm over sensitive to the matter and imagining things...
Even though "to Google" is now a VERB in the Dictionary...
NOT "to MSN" or even "To Yahoo..." (although they MIGHT be listed as nouns... but I don't think so...)
Funny how something as simple as language can be so revealing to business viability....
Try this one (goes to the tune of 'The monster Mash').
I was looking through my visitor logs late one night,
when I saw something that gave me such a fright,
It seems I had a visitor from Yahoo corporate,
They turned a traffic switch and I nearly lost all of it,
It was the Crash...
It was the Yahoo crash...
(the Yahoo crash)
Traffic was gone in a flash
(the Yahoo crash)
But I'm still in the cash
(the Yahoo crash)
It was the Yahoo crash
The Yahoo traffic's gone now but I've made a supposition,
My CTR has tripled and this must be the position,
Earnings from Yahoo traffic were only ever frugal,
----insert last line here---
all I'm saying is to "watch out" as now that all three major search engines have their own Contexual Ad programs
I agree with that. I've wondered if having adsense on a page might help it rank better in Google or not as well at Yahoo or MSN. My experience is that it doesn't. Maybe in the future. Something to keep an eye on.
As to blocking traffic from Yahoo and purposely ranking lower as strategies to make more money, I hope a lot readers take your advice.
>Yaaaaaaaaaa... That's it... I'm over sensitive to the matter and imagining things...
No you're not. I know how these things work.
Its amazing the reaction round here when anyone says anything original as well.
After I checked, I would tend to agree that the loss of Yahoo traffic correlates with an increase in Adsense earnings.
However, it very well can be that we both may be just experiencing abnormal activity, or inactivity as the case may be.
I am fully aware that what one web site publisher's experience is, can be completely different given the same circumstances.
I'm just relating the facts as I see them... for those who wish to discount their validity, or dismiss their meaning outright... that is their perogative.
HOWEVER... it seems that you have detected a negative "occurance" similar to what I have seen... They can make jest of my "Yahoo Corp" visitor... I personally don't give a rat's ass about Yahoo - I'm just telling it the way I see. (maybe the "Head Honchos" never even visited their sites?)
Anyway... Seems like the "Fun Times" are coming to an end... Or at least the time when we all thought we could operate "independently" and still expect to have decent presense in all the search engines... NOT going to be happening, "going forward."
My advise is to study which treats you best, and design accordingly. Hopefully you won't have to "sell your soul" to make money.
I have no reserves about "affiliating" with Google... as Yahoo made the decision for me...
As usual.... MSN is pulling up ther rear, and is still working out their strategy!