Forum Moderators: martinibuster
If you are running a full page ad in the Times, you still run under the scrutiny and banner of the Times.
Yeah, but they don't modify your artwork and stick a logo all over your ad and expect you to pay full whack for it!
Opinions are definitely split - people either love it or hate it. Now, if testing shows the CTR increases by a couple of % (ie. you have 3% CTR, but you would go to a 5% with the Google background images enabled) would people enable this? After all, money is money.
Now, if testing shows the CTR increases by a couple of % (ie. you have 3% CTR, but you would go to a 5% with the Google background images enabled) would people enable this? After all, money is money.
No. I want people to click because the advertisement interests them and I'm sure most advertisers would want that as well. Heck, if 'tricks for clicks' are to be implemented why stop with just Google images? Why not just do a redirect?
Google should deliver the ads and the advertisers should write good enough copy, whatever that may be, for the click. Nothing else.
JAG
Now, if testing shows the CTR increases by a couple of % (ie. you have 3% CTR, but you would go to a 5% with the Google background images enabled) would people enable this?
The important thing to me is that we have a choice.
On the antique design on one site of mine the Google graphics would look totally out of place. The site has a good reputation as a well reserched and professional site and I'd want to be able to stay away from the Google graphics there. OTOH they might be perfect for another site I have.
I do hope that someone from AdSense is reading this thread as making it an option seems to me to be the best policy.
Now, if testing shows the CTR increases by a couple of % (ie. you have 3% CTR, but you would go to a 5% with the Google background images enabled) would people enable this? After all, money is money.
And if the CTR doesn't increase but Google gets $x of free extra branding (which admittedly they don't need) will I get paid $x? And/or will I get a chance to opt out of giving them free branding? After all money is money.
This is a one way bet. Only Google knows the true CTR. Stats aren't updated in realtime. Some clicks are carried forward for days. There isn't a way somebody can actually run with and without the logos and compare accurate CTRs (bearing in mind daily fluctuations and other variables).
Besides, Jenstar, a 67% increase in CTR sounds very nice but it's hardly likely now is it? Further, it's hardly likely to result purely from the offensive intrusion of the Google logo. If the logo does add some credibility to low quality sites it will make hardly any difference to CTR. If their CTR is 3% it may go up to 3.0000001% or it may go down too. If it goes down by the same percentage as in your example the 3% CTR could become 2.01% when Google add their watermarked logo to your Adsense ads. Hmmm, it doesn't seem so exciting now.
From your post, I'm not sure if you are a publisher or an advertiser.
Publishers that run Adsense code are allowing Google to modify their "artwork", if you are referring to the design of the page. If a publisher deems that Google disrupts the flow and design of the page, then a webmaster can choose not to run the code. Many choose not to for this reason alone.
The analogy of Google's logo ruining the advertiser's artwork doesn't hold up because it compares the interruption of a print display ad with interrupting an electronic text ad. If Google inserted their brand into the title and description of the text link, then there may be a point to make. But they are not doing this.
The only thing I would be concerned about as an advertiser and publisher (I am both) would be if running the Google logo actually decreased clickthroughs, and caused the ads to be less effective.
The ones with the barely readable graphics in the background or taking up part of the space in the end ad area don't work for me, though, largely just because they are cluttered and are in addition to the textual "Ads by Google" notice. And I've always thought those differently sized colored balls were ugly -- people are just going to wonder what the heck those are supposed to be.
I don't want those people adding them to their site tricking people in clicking, as it's getting my revenue down...
Still, I hope they keep the choices open to all publishers...
- I do worry a bit about Google making their text ads start to look more like graphical banner ads.
- I think the coloring is a bit stark and amateurish. I'd prefer some more gradient-style color borders.
- I definitely would like to see this sort of thing as optional for AdSense publishers.
