Forum Moderators: martinibuster
No explanation from "The adsense team". Since I'm pretty sure I didn't do anything wrong someone else must have "helped" me.
I asked if there is some kind of a "probation period" or something I can do to come back - but just got some standard answer saying nothing.
Any experience here?
Then - I have a customer who wants me to run his complete web site - and he has agreed that I put Adsense on his pages. Since my account is closed, what can I do? Let him sign up for adsense and manage it for him?
But that means a dairy farmer could be driven out of business by a competitor who is sneaking into his barn at night and scaring the cows.
Sad but true....
Markets should HAVE to buy the sour milk. Why should he be the one who suffers?
lemme guess -- "Dean for America?"
No competition.
Once Adsense has a few competitors to contend with, things will change a little.
Please note, I am not 'having a pop' at Google here - hell, if I was the only SEO in the world I'd be little more difficult to deal with than I am now.
Market forces dictate how many resources Google allocate to keeping publishers happy - right now their incentive is not as high as it is going to be once the other players enter the market.
...how many resources Google allocate to keeping publishers happy
you got it all backwards. THEY got the money, they are spending it on YOUR services. Millions more of YOU's out there than THEM, so YOU have to keep THEM happy!
It is so interesting to me that so many people think that the party SPENDING 'DA MONEY is also supposed to keep them 'happy'.
It is topsy-turvy capitalism!
To do that, it needs to ensure that advertisers are getting full value for their money.
It's that simple.
As long as Google tells a publisher they are generating "invalid clicks" without telling them what precisely the violation is, they handicap the publisher's ability to correct the problem.
Competition will bring changes. It always does.
Competition will bring changes. It always does.
It will. in the form of: click all you want and if your clicks don't convert for the advertiser you won't get the boot you will just get paid on a sliding scale downward until you get nothing for the clicks. Bring the conversion rate back up through better traffic and watch the clicks start generating revenue again. Kinda of like a slap on the hand versus the current guillotine approach AdSense has taken.
JAG
...never mind tracking the return for every one of their ads for every page each ad was shown on.
I would if it were possible....
I would understand if my grocery store stopped buying watered-down milk from a supplier even if they did not know PRECISELY who and how the milk was diluted. Hell, I'd even be thankful for it!
Absolutely. But if the grocery store told you:
1. hey something with your milk is wrong, but I won't tell you what.
2. For that reason all the milk you sold to us and that we sold to our customers for the last 3 weeks won't be paid for.
3. Get lost.
Then you might start to pray for another grocery store in the world.
But then, let's go back to work. Life wasn't created for weeping widows and orphans. And since my revenue is still up after beeing guided out, everybody must be happy. I now sell my sour milk to customers who eagerly want it.
I'll bet a lot of advertisers don't even know if their AdWords ROI is positive or negative, never mind tracking the return for every one of their ads for every page each ad was shown on.
Some don't. But, a lot do and every advertiser that has a budget should. When I worked for a marketing company you can bet your bottom dollar we had a budget that we had to work with for every single client. And every client had their own goals which made each campaign different. It didn't really matter if the campaign ran as a cpc, cpl, cps or cpm we still had to play within the budget rules and we still had to track if the campaign was a success or not. As much as content sites would like to know how much they make on any particular site or page even there is an advertiser who would like to know the effectiveness of a campaign the same way.
Plus, conversion rates and immediate ROI aren't universal measurements of advertising performance. Not all advertisers are affiliate sites or e-commerce vendors with shopping carts: they may be looking for leads that can be turned over to sales reps or dealers for follow-up.
Yes they are universal. They just might not be universal in the sense of dollar versus dollar but they are universal when you look at it as did my ad dollar produce the desired result. Maybe the desired result of a campaign is max dollar amount. Great. Track the dollar amount ROI like normal on a cpc and cps. Maybe the desired result is a lead. Fine. Track it and assign it a dollar amount even though you didn't get a sale. And if it's a cpm then it's just that.
Any advertiser who does not watch and track their advertising campaigns....well...I don't know what to say. It would be some marketing company dream account I suppose.
JAG
Yes they are universal. They just might not be universal in the sense of dollar versus dollar but they are universal when you look at it as did my ad dollar produce the desired result.
Well, sure, advertisers are going to track "desired results." My point is that they aren't all going to track conversion rates and immediate ROI (unless they choose to assign arbitrary conversion rates and $$$ amounts to leads so they can have something to report to the client or the boss even if it may or may not be accurate. :-)
In any case, I think it's unrealistic to expect that the majority of advertisers will (a) be willing to share such numbers with Google or (b) take the time to do so. It would be far simpler and more productive to let advertisers include or exclude sites, just as publishers are currently allowed to block unwanted advertisers.
It would be far simpler and more productive to let advertisers include or exclude sites, just as publishers are currently allowed to block unwanted advertisers.
How would an advertiser determine whether to exclude a site or not? If it's just because they don't like the site I can see it. But if it is for monetary reasons then the ROI must be tracked. This is very common and accepted in the affiliate world so I'm not so sure it wouldn't be accepted here since a lot of advertisers run both cpc and affiliate programs and a lot of affiliates run cpc on Google hoping for a cps return higher than their cpc. If Google or anyone else could take on the work that would normally be done by a warm body then that helps the bottom line which is the name of the game and I would think an automated system would be far more productive and simpler. Isn't that the heart of AdSense anyway? To automate and make things simpler for content sites? It can't go both ways?
JAG
How would an advertiser determine whether to exclude a site or not? If it's just because they don't like the site I can see it. But if it is for monetary reasons then the ROI must be tracked.
Some advertisers are going to want to exclude sites (or select sites) based on experience and personal judgment. An advertiser that's used to advertising in traditional editorial media, for example, may not feel comfortable having its ads displayed on a forum, a blog, or (for that matter) a competitor's Web site. Giving the advertiser control over where ads appear could determine whether the advertiser is willing to use content ads.
That doesn't mean advertisers can't track ROI, either with real numbers (affiliate and e-commerce sites) or with average or guesstimated values (advertisers who are buying leads). The question I have, and which I posed earlier, is whether the typical advertiser will want to share such data with Google. Some will; some won't.
If Google or anyone else could take on the work that would normally be done by a warm body then that helps the bottom line which is the name of the game and I would think an automated system would be far more productive and simpler. Isn't that the heart of AdSense anyway? To automate and make things simpler for content sites? It can't go both ways?
Sure, that might be a great idea, but first somebody has to develop a universal tool that will calculate conversion rates and ROI at the advertiser's end and upload the data to Google. Until that happens, there's going to be a manual bottleneck between the advertiser and Google.
Finally, I think it's worth remembering that affiliate sites and e-commerce sites (the traditional PPC advertisers) are only the tip of the iceberg. In my opinion, the real market for content ads is the mainstream advertiser who has used print or broadcast media in the past and is moving into Web advertising. For that kind of advertiser, an ad on an information site (whether it's a general news and entertainment site or a niche editorial site) is a much easier concept to grasp than an ad on a SERP (just as ads on SERPs seem to be easier concepts for many affiliates and e-commerce entrepreneurs to grasp than ads on content pages).
no. I am an Adwords client not an Adsense client. So I am quite happy with the number of grocery stores. Since Google is out to meet my needs (and cancelling accounts with fraud clicks or even just accounts which are unproductive) helps meet my needs and keep my campaigns cost effective and relevant, I am happy.
Where i think you go wrong is in thinking Google owes you anything whatsoever. Anything at all.
If you decide not to got to Exxon anymore you don't owe them an explaination. Maybe you don't like the tiger logo so you got to Shell instead. Do you owe Exxon an explanation? no. Do you owe them anything? no.
The question I have, and which I posed earlier, is whether the typical advertiser will want to share such data with Google. Some will; some won't.
Right. I'm pretty sure though that CJ, Linkshare and such wouldn't be where they are now if advertisers didn't share. After all, it's only a campaign. It's not like opening their entire books to someone. I'm also pretty sure you wouldn't make any money from the affiliate links you have on your site either if that were not the case. For those who don't share then there is nothing lost as they are in the same boat as today. They simply stop the campaign if it doesn't work.
Sure, that might be a great idea, but first somebody has to develop a universal tool that will calculate conversion rates and ROI at the advertiser's end and upload the data to Google. Until that happens, there's going to be a manual bottleneck between the advertiser and Google.
Any mid to large size marketing company already has this in-house and I only say it can be applied here because I've seen it and it works.
In my opinion, the real market for content ads is the mainstream advertiser who has used print or broadcast media in the past and is moving into Web advertising.
Sure and they are also the ones with the most experience in generating ROI. Unless of course the only goal is branding then that is slightly different but costs are still watched closely.
JAG
