Forum Moderators: martinibuster
[nytimes.com ]
The small sites are getting the short end of the stick while the fat cats get fatter. If the fat cats are getting those whopping percentages, our percentages suffer.
The small sites are getting the short end of the stick while the fat cats get fatter. If the fat cats are getting those whopping percentages, our percentages suffer.
Small sites get high paying keywords and revenue because they are highly optimized for adsense. Large sites end up with run of the network rates because the sites aren't very optimized and google displays lower paying ads.
A venue like the WASHINGTON POST or USA TODAY is probably lucky if a fraction of its content can be "monetized." Sure, an article on cruising in the travel section will attract cruise ads, and a car review in the automotive section may display car ads. But such targeted ads (and readers) are likely to be the exception, not the rule. Even a network of niche sites like About.com has tremendous amounts of waste circulation, because for every About.com "guidesite" about cars or pregnancy or travel in New England, there's a site about freebies or urban legends or politics that's likely to attract ads with a minimal cost per click.
I think we'll see the market for contextual ads become a lot more like the magazine industry, where magazines like PEOPLE or TIME get mass-market ads and special-interest consumer and trade publications flourish by delivering targeted prospects.
[nytimes.com ]
The small sites are getting the short end of the stick while the fat cats get fatter. If the fat cats are getting those whopping percentages, our percentages suffer.
Welcome to capitalism! Doesn't it make sense that they will pay a premium for services they desire more and less for the contrary?
If you make your product more valuable to the buyer, then you will fetch a higher price.
After all, that $252 MILLION is money that was not available in this marketplace 5 years ago. Where do you think it came from? Someone *else* is not receiving those dollars because they are now flowing to adsense publishers.
No wonder Google is chasing the big guys offering guaranteed revenue. What sense would it make for Google to pay us the same percentage as the big sites? None.
Is this bad for the small adsense publisher? Absolutely not. It says to me if I build my content and build my traffic the advertiser base will be there to continue monetizing my site. And maybe one day I can be a big guy too. Isn't that what capitalism and the American dream are all about?
Google is not a charity and it was not founded to make sure the small guy gets an even share (which in my mind he is not entitled to). If you think it should you've been reading too much Karl Marx. Keep improving your site and your userbase and don't worry about what the big guy is getting and you will do just fine.
The article spoke of a new problem for Google.....more advertisers than searches/partner pages to sell ads on.
Now THAT is a problem I wish we had in our business! : )
...you've been reading too much Karl Marx
hehe... it was Karl Marx who inspired me to stop working for a newspaper and establish control of my own means of production in the first place... >;->
I side with the opinion that small, independent publishers probably do better from AdSense in percentage terms than large publishers.
independent publishers probably do better from AdSense in percentage terms than large publishers.
my 7 year old daughter does better (in percentage terms) selling lemonade on the sidewalk than minute-maid!
100% profit!
The small sites are getting the short end of the stick while the fat cats get fatter. If the fat cats are getting those whopping percentages, our percentages suffer.
You don't pay the mortgage and the grocery bill with percentages. You pay with the money that shows up in the "Your earnings" column of the Google AdSense report.
I don't know what percentage a typical portal or mass-market news and entertainment site gets, but let's say (just for the sake of discussion) that washingtonpost.com is getting 80% of the take and cruellas-cruise-guide.com is earning 40%. It's likely that Cruella the cruise expert is earning more $$$ per 1,000 impressions than the WASHINGTON POST is, even at the lower payout percentage, because her pages attract higher bids.
[nytimes.com...]
It's titled "Turnaround in Advertising Doesn't Extend to Magazines," and itincludes the following statement:
"...after losing about 21 percent of its ad pages in 2001 and 2002, the magazine industry was flat in ad pages last year compared with 2002. And in the first quarter this year, ad pages have declined 2.3 percent."
In contrast, overall ad spending rose 6.1 percent last year and is projected to rise 7.8 percent this year, while Internet advertising rose 15 percent in 2003.
I think we're going to see an acceleration of this trend over the next few years, especially in sectors like travel and computers where both advertisers and consumers (or advertisers and B2B buyers) are used to finding information and making transactions on the Web.
