Forum Moderators: martinibuster
For example, if an advertiser only pays 5 cents per click, I do not want this advertiser using my pages.
What do you think?
TiogaRV
What would you put there instead? A blank space?
As a publisher, I would like a filter which would allow me to eliminate ads from being served on my pages that pay under a certain amount of money per click.
It isn't going to happen, because Google needs to find inventory for all of its AdSense ads, not just for ads that publishers regard as the layer of cream on top of the milk.
It isn't going to happen, because Google needs to find inventory for all of its AdSense ads, not just for ads that publishers regard as the layer of cream on top of the milk.
What do you consider cream? Is 5 cents per click cream?
The deal with AdSense is pretty simple: You give Google space for its "Ads by Google" box, and Google populates that box with the best-paying ads that are available. If advertisers aren't bidding much for the keywords on the page, the pay per click won't be very high. You can walk away from the deal if you aren't happy, but it's unrealistic to expect Google to change the terms of the deal when doing so wouldn't be in Google's interest or the advertiser's.
The arguement about blank ad spaces needn't be too much a cause for concern, as it would still be within publishers' power to avoid any such problem by accepting all bids.
I can't see such a filter being implemented though, because many advertisers could decide vote with their feet and march off to a cheaper server of ads where the going price is cheaper.
Although the advertiser bids 50c, if Google decided that the click doesn't convert, then smart pricing will discount that click and you would still see 5c clicks.
Can anyone sensibly imagine google giving us a check box:
"Give me the good adverts only, let others have the dross [x]"
Can't see the day that smartpricing would ever be ditched.
Some Adsense publishers will be happy to let their visitors go for 0.01 - some Adwords advertisers want cheap Adwords traffic, so let them have some useless cheap traffic.
Some site owners value their visitors more and won't let them go for less than 0.5 - if you want genuine conversion-ready visitor you'll have to bid higher.
Me personally I prefer my visitors do some more site-browsing, or close their browser window once they are done on my site and come back someday with trust, than leave for 0.03 and have unknown experience. Sorry, I don't trust Adwords advertisers who are after 0.03 traffic. I prefer to show blank space or some graphic filler if there are no available ads with my minimum EPC.
I think minimum EPC filter for Adsense publishers would only be good to system and autoregulate as in free market.
R
Who said that? I accept to get no ads at all if they are below my minimum acceptable EPC. I let Google algorithm judge, whether my pages are worth the high paying ads or not.
Who said that? I accept to get no ads at all if they are below my minimum acceptable EPC.
Which means you want the ability to get only high-paying ads.
It isn't just what's good for some publishers, it's what's good for Google and its advertisers. How is it in Google's interest (or the advertisers' interest) to let a publisher take only high-paying ads and reject low-paying ads?
This business is the advertisers on one side, and Google with the publishers on the other side. It is the same as a newspaper.
Perhaps there should be a minimum bid for an ad? How about a 20 cent minimum bid? I could certainly live with 20 cents. However, I cannot exist on El Cheapos going for a nickle.
I'm also a publisher. Now if one of my visitors comes to my page, and decides he needs more information than what I've provided. He looks at my AdSense ads and selects the cheapest one. I make a nickel. That means he's already decided not to choose the more expensive ads. So it seems to me that the choice to choose to run the cheaper ad is a choice to have no ad he'd select or a cheap ad he can choose. I'll some money over no money and let quantity make up the difference.
You gotta remember that 2,000,000 clicks x .05 is $100,000
I need 273 years to won that 100k :/
It's not a question of me getting the good ads and you getting poor ads. It'a a question of me getting some good ads and some defaults (which I utilize to my advantage) and you getting some good ads and some poor ads.
In a profit maximizing algorithm, turning off low paying ads can only hurt you unless you have another outlet to sell your defaults in.
Google can only get away with this because the CPC ad world is still not in perfect competition. I am for setting minimum bids even though I personally would never use them. In fact, if everybody here began using them that would restrict supply and raise the bids for permissive publishers like me.
...Google needs to find inventory for all of its AdSense ads, not just for ads that publishers regard as the layer of cream on top of the milk.
I know that this filter is never going to be introduced, but I don't buy the argument that Google have lots of cheap ads sloshing around the system, and it's down to all of us to share these ads that Google have agreed to show. As an advertiser, I know that if I don't bid enough on cpc or cpm ads, the ads don't get shown. So there aren't and low paying ads Google have to share around. You only set a maximum price bid when placing ads. If your bid is too low to have the ads show, the adwords page will tell you, and it's down to you what you do next. Placing a minimum bid doesn't oblige Google to show your ads.
If cheap ads are showing there may be many reasons for this, but certainly not because Google have agreed to show them in preference to more expensive ads.
If cheap ads are showing there may be many reasons for this, but certainly not because Google have agreed to show them in preference to more expensive ads.
Did anyone suggest that Google has ever agreed to show cheap ads in preference to more expensive ads? Maybe I missed that comment. The point is that Google can't afford to display only top-bidding ads on the network, which is what could happen (at least in theory) if publishers could block ads from displaying once their supply of high-paying ads were exhausted.
Did anyone suggest that Google has ever agreed to show cheap ads in preference to more expensive ads? Maybe I missed that comment.
I'm actually referring to previous times when I have got the impression from your line of argument that we, as webmasters all have a responsibility to share cheap ads that Google have signed up to. However, I do of course accept that I may be at fault for not reading your posting correctly.
My point is that as we all know (and has been pointed out in this thread) that it's an auction - highest bidder wins. Therefore if there are cheap ads in the system that is as a result of the auction process, not Google making deals with cheapo advertisers.
Likewise, if cheap ads are showing, then that is going to be down to a variety of reasons and minimum clicks would not help eradicate this.
The point is that Google can't afford to display only top-bidding ads on the network, which is what could happen (at least in theory) if publishers could block ads from displaying once their supply of high-paying ads were exhausted.
The other point is that not all advertisers want to place high bids just to appear on scummy joes blogspot.
I personally don't believe minimum click prices (though a nice idea) would work. I used to be keen on the idea, but when you look at the bigger picture the idea becomes less attractive.
I think I've mentioned that I'm in a different time zone from the US, yet most of my traffic and income is from the US. At certain slack times of the day I can watch clicks come in, and have some idea where they are from, what they clicked and how much they paid. The same advert pays a lot more at peak times of day, and from where the advertiser is located. If I blocked less than 5c clicks, I'd be blocking the same advertisers that pay well at other times of the day etc.
Maybe that's smart pricing in action. If so, you can see the logic behind it. Hence my approach of only blocking MFA's and all the new and used dead pope's garbage from the Ebay affilliates.
I think the bottom line is that if minimum bids were introduced, a lot of publishers would lose a lot of impressions, and money. I bet they'd soon lower their minimum price down to get the traffic again. Just like when I set a minimum bid value for one of my ad campaigns, if the value is too low I have to raise it to get the ad to show. I can also see some moans about smart pricing whacking them for low performance!
