Forum Moderators: martinibuster
There's even a glimpse of someone's AdSense stats for those as-yet-unAdSensed people who simply HAVE to know how much one can make.
but the broker who's getting a hefty commission on yacht rentals may think that a $1 lead is a bargain
Absolutely. If you have a good page on yatch rentals and are getting targeted ads on there you could see in excess of $200 on 5K impressions (again, very possible).
I don't believe it's "false" spin. And I don't believe it's dated figures.
Sites that are getting a lot lower CTR, EPC or EPM aren't necessarily not optimised enough. As pointed out before different subjects will attract advertisers with different bids. Again, has been pointed out before, the thing to compare Adsense earnings with is what you would earn if you took Adsense off and put something other ads on your site. It doesn't help to compare earnings, CTR or any other figure with a site in a different field attracting different ads and a different type of visitor.
Did anyone else notice that on the java (coffee) page one of the ads was an Amazon affilate selling Javascript manuals?
Perhaps not the best example of targetted ads!
GREAT catch.
Gotta say, that's being honest on Google's part.
Gotta say, that's being honest on Google's part.
No, I would say they just missed it ;-)
TJ
Did anyone else notice that on the java (coffee) page one of the ads was an Amazon affilate selling Javascript manuals?
I thought they were showing that AdSense knows NOT to show javascript ads but just coffee types. Watch it again...they fade out and the others stay.
I thought they were showing that AdSense knows NOT to show javascript ads but just coffee types. Watch it again...they fade out and the others stay.
Ohhhhh. I get it. OK.
70 odd dollars from 5k impressions
i assure you, wonderboy -- some people are getting that kind of numbers.
I've seen this figure sometimes in my niche market. Not unreal.
Of course, it could be that the adword advertiser has opted out of content ads.
But I would tend to blame targeting before lack of ads. I usually hear that the budgets can not be filled in the adword forum, and as an advertiser myself I never hit my daily budget. Of course, I am "el cheapo" when it comes to bid amounts ;) nothing over $0.19 for me.
I'm glad to see at least a few other people who thinks these are dream-figures compared to what they are seeing..
Don't you mean you are sad to see this? Or did it really delight you? ;-)
Don't you mean you are sad to see this? Or did it really delight you? ;-)
i guess that depends on how you look at it, i would have felt it extremely unfair if everyone was making more than me. but the way things are, i guess we all have different performing sites and should work with what we have instead of complaining. however my point was about PSA's, not really CPC - i respect the fact that some categories are payed more than others, but at least let me show the "bottom of the barrel ads" and not PSA's..
my point was about PSA's, not really CPC - i respect the fact that some categories are payed more than others, but at least let me show the "bottom of the barrel ads" and not PSA's..
If AdSense served "bottom of the barrel ads," it would be just like other ad networks. Fortunately, PSAs aren't your only option if you aren't getting enough targeted ads: You can supply your own "alternative ads" (defaults) when AdSense is short on inventory for your topic.
They are starting with finance. You select "finance" then you select a sub category--taxes, investing, etc--and they drop the highest bidders for those positions on the pages you say will be appropriate. I don't think they're reading the page with software--the publisher simply says "this page is about taxes," I think. Their ads are on the bottom of Marketwatch news pages now. Nothing very exciting.
And, as I noted elsewhere, the just added politics. No subcategories yet. No publishers that I'm aware of either. But, from what I read here and what others tellme about the poor context of the Google ads, this concept could have appeal to many.
Say, travel. The ad buyer goes in, click on "travel" and then selects US and then selects a state, then a city. Then, later, they can jazz it up with a little taxonomic filtering, maybe. Or maybe not. Just let folks fight it out for top placement.
Problem with this? Google or Yahoo can set the same thing up in a couple of weeks. So, will Google let you run it as an alternative. "Sure, prove the concept for us, will ya?"
If I say the page is about taxes -- even if it is really about Nicole Kidman -- then I could show what I would surmise the higher paying taxes ad? If they have no way to check the content of the page other than what the publisher says it is, that can be subject to abuse. It will be interesting to see how others will try to outdo Google in this area.
The concept sounds reasonable for sites with highly focused topics, but AdSense's contextual matching is a lot better for a site that has an overall "umbrella" topic with many pages on a wide variety of subtopics.
If Google would let publishers supply "helper" keywords or categories to prevent goofy mismatches like a St. "Martin Hotels" ad on a German travel page that talks about "Martin Luther," AdSense would offer the best of both worlds: automated content matching aided by human intelligence.
I don't think they're reading the page with software
You think right.
If Google would let publishers supply "helper" keywords or categories to prevent goofy mismatches like a St. "Martin Hotels" ad on a German travel page that talks about "Martin Luther," AdSense would offer the best of both worlds: automated content matching aided by human intelligence.
Just like TCLA can do ;-)
JAG
Problem with this? Google or Yahoo can set the same thing up in a couple of weeks. So, will Google let you run it as an alternative. "Sure, prove the concept for us, will ya?"
As long as Google or Yahoo! doesn't use someone else's intellectual property which then would definitely be a problem.
JAG
If Google would let publishers supply "helper" keywords or categories to prevent goofy mismatches like a St. "Martin Hotels" ad on a German travel page that talks about "Martin Luther," AdSense would offer the best of both worlds: automated content matching aided by human intelligence.
Yeah, in a few years we'll look back and say, "Ha, gosh, remember all of those stupid PCAs back in 2004 that ran across our pages back when AdSense ran contextual ads across the entire net! Sheee"!
We'll have Travel AdSense, Financial AdSense, Political AdSense, Health AdSense, Entertainment AdSense, etc. It just makes sense.
The concept sounds reasonable for sites with highly focused topics, but AdSense's contextual matching is a lot better for a site that has an overall "umbrella" topic with many pages on a wide variety of subtopics.
This is especially true in politics. You want to be on a political page, but you want to be on topic. Medicare, Iraq, Monica L's dry cleaning--the pressing issues of our day. But, basic taxonomic filtering using edited keywords--we all know what they are--ain't no big deal. I can introduce you do dozen firms that will set it up for you. So, put it in a category and filter to the keywords and, let the bidding begin!
People who are reading about celebrities and their drug problems are most likely to want to see more info or buy--what? Hmmm. I don't know. But, guess what? The news folks know the demographic of who is reading what and when, so they can attach that info to who is clicking on what and see if there is a market. And, there is, I can assure you--those articles get the clicks.
Still, we got some very basic work to do here. Why aren't publishers offering the music or movies on entertainment articles on celebs? I hear that NYT is moving on this.
If I say the page is about taxes -- even if it is really about Nicole Kidman -- then I could show what I would surmise the higher paying taxes ad? If they have no way to check the content of the page other than what the publisher says it is, that can be subject to abuse. It will be interesting to see how others will try to outdo Google in this area.
I would think that 1) the publisher would get more clicks if the ad were in context and 2) the filter could do a little checking.
But, so what? Clicks is clicks. If folks reading about DuPont's third quarter earning are interested in Britney Spears, hey, cool.
(BTW: If you want clicks, the ad needs a beautiful woman on it. On the WSJ ads have been run with and without lovely ladies--you know, looking very professional with their cellphones or laptops, of course--and ads have been run with just graphics or guys. The difference in the number of clicks? Same campaign, lovely lady and no lady--the lady gets almost twice (1.77) as many clicks. Product? Business software.)
But, so what? Clicks is clicks. If folks reading about DuPont's third quarter earning are interested in Britney Spears, hey, cool.
Trouble is, the advertiser is paying for those clicks, and the advertisers doesn't want clicks from people who are merely curious. Reaching the right target audience and getting "qualified leads" is why Ferrari Royce might buy an ad in THE ROBB REPORT but not in CAR & DRIVER: It knows that ROBB REPORT readers are rich, and that 99% of CAR & DRIVER readers will never be able to afford a Ferari. The same principle can be applied to the Web: A Ferrari dealer would have to be very careful about buying AdWords or AdSense ads, because those ads would rack up expensive but nonproductive clicks if they ran on a typical newspaper automotive page or Joe Sixpack's my-ferrari-fantasies.com.
For that matter, somebody selling products related to Britney Spears might be reluctant to have those Britney Spears AdSense ads show up in a report about Dupont's third-quarter earnings, because the investor who's secretly hot for Britney Spears is less likely to buy a Britney action figure, a Britney wall poster, or a Britney-inspired bra than is the hardcore teenybopper Britney fan.
Such examples show why advertisers need control over where their AdSense ads run, just as they have control over where their ads run in the offline media world.
Which brings me to my next prediction about AdSense. There are only so many ad dollars out there and when you divide it out by category, this becomes very clear. Therefore, Google (and others) will soon become very picky about where the ads run. They're not going to be interested in just click, but effectiveness. The network which is the most effective--and anyone reading this board knows that ad buyers look at this hard--will get the ads.
Therefore, it's in the best interest of the publishers and the marketers that we have the AdSense better targeted. Therefore, there will be competition for AdSense and other services. With contextual advertising just starting, publishers now have an opportunity to prove they are worthy. Later on, it's going to be tougher to get into a worthwhile network.
In other words, if you want in and a good payout percentage, you're going to have to earn it. And there is no news there.
But, fyi, I didn't pick the Britney on finance example out of the air. This stuff is sometimes counter-intuitive. We think we know what will work where, but we really don't. And I bet everyone on this board who looks hard at their stats has a story to tell there.
