Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Two defunct customer accounts and sites were used (with permission) to see if Google was quick to discontinue accounts from fraudulent clicks.
Site 1 averaged less than 5 cents per click.
Site 2 averaged over $1 per click.
In April the ads from both sites were clicked on around 100 times from a computer about 30 miles from the system used to check stats. No email or warnings.
In May the ads from both sites were clicked on around 100 times from the SAME computer used to check stats. The 5 cent account had no warnings or email. The $1 account was discontinued within days.
Summary: It appears you will only be discontinued if you have a high CPC and click from the same computer you check stats from.
This is a very interesting exercise. It alleviates many people's concerns.
[edited by: rfung at 5:21 pm (utc) on June 3, 2004]
However, it must be admitted that the evidence is anecdotal and therefore the argument is not conclusive as it currently stands.
I assume the average EPC on the 5 cent site after the experiment was 5 cents .. so you made 5$
Just cough once into the phone if I am correct..
Can you sticky me examples of more discontinued $1/click accounts?;)
Two defunct customer accounts and sites were used (with permission) to see if Google was quick to discontinue accounts from fraudulent clicks.
With permission from Google?
From the advertisers whose wallets this "expirement" it came out of?
I hope you are emailing google next to let them know not to pay the account for the fraudulent clicks.
From the advertisers whose wallets this "expirement" it came out of?
No Doubt!, maybe this is why I went way over budget the other week.
I can't see how you would have permission from google to do this.
In a perfect world, anyone who clicked on their own links(accidentally or not) would be jumping hoops to track/contact Google and beg to refund the $0.01 they ilegally obtained.
This isn't a perfect world.
The manhours alone from Google to devote someone to address issues like this over pennies or a few bucks would suggest to me it isn't worthwhile for them either.
Let's not get too harsh on the guy for giving us invaluable information.
I think he meant 'permission' from the owners of the discontinued accounts.
I don't understand how the owners of those accounts would have the ability to grant someone else permission to steal from advertisers?
In a perfect world, anyone who clicked on their own links(accidentally or not) would be jumping hoops to track/contact Google and beg to refund the $0.01 they ilegally obtained.
I think he said it was .05 cents per click mulitplied by 100 times.
That also doesn't take into account the advertisers that paid their hard earned money for those intentionally fraudulent clicks.
This isn't a perfect world.
Yeah, so why try to do the right thing, eh?
The manhours alone from Google to devote someone to address issues like this over pennies or a few bucks would suggest to me it isn't worthwhile for them either.
I think it should be up to Google and the advertisers to make that decision.
Because a person commits fraud and "thinks" it's not worth it for the company(ies) they defrauded to track it down and make right doesn't mean the company(ies) in question would think the same thing.
Let's not get too harsh on the guy for giving us invaluable information.
"Invaluable information" at whose cost?
"invaluable information" sounds like a synonym for theft and click fraud.
It's threads like these that give AdWords advertisers more fuel for their "AdSense and content ads are bad for business" fire.
This kind of thing effects all of us. Publishers and advertisers.
I think he said it was .05 cents per click mulitplied by 100 times.That also doesn't take into account the advertisers that paid their hard earned money for those intentionally fraudulent clicks.
Why don't you ask funandgames yourself and wait for an answer instead of going into a tirade when you don't know all the facts.
Why don't you ask funandgames yourself and wait for an answer instead of going into a tirade when you don't know all the facts.
There's not much to ask. He stated it pretty clear that he clicked 100 times.
No tirade really, just trying to get people thinking past "I clicked 100 times just to test". It's not a victimless act.
I doubt google gave him permission to do the "testing", that's the only question I had for funandgames.
Call me pragmatic - and lest you think otherwise, I also advertise on AdWords, so I am involved from both sides.
If his conscience hasn't made him contact Google and report the $5 or so he might have made, it isn't going to be anyone's harping on this forum that's going to change it. And if it does, to me it's like arresting the guy who jaywalked when there's actual bandits killing people out there(i.e. truly ripping people off).
Having said that, I understand is human nature to go ahead and chastise him because that's really the only target that has presented itself and puts a face to a crime and criminals we can't see or do much about.
I digress and perhaps I shouldn't have joined in with the comment I did. Just my opinion.:)
The .05 account was indeed reported and neither Google nor the advertisers will pay for the $5.00 worth of invalid clicks nor the $40 or so worth of valid clicks also made during those two months.
The $1 CPC account will not get any money as well after March 31st as it too was reported to Google after the closed account email.
I myself did not click any ads. Both accounts and the sites are now shut down as of June 1st.
Back to the original point, this thread should alleviate anyone's concern about accidentally clicking on their own links and automatically thinking they're doomed, the G-men will come bursting through the door and they'll burn in hell.
Ah shucks, and here's me thinking that it was exactly those concerns that kept the box ticked in the AdWords advertisers control panel........
TJ
this thread should alleviate anyone's concern about accidentally clicking on their own links and automatically thinking they're doomed
Actually, perhaps you want to read the summary again:
Summary: It appears you will only be discontinued if you have a high CPC and click from the same computer you check stats from.
But, given that nothing is certain about what really goes behind the curtains, this won't appease the more paranoid amongst us. :)
However, I hope everyone recognizes while interesting this is far from conclusive..
Granted, I do not know how much those clicks were worth. I just don't think that there's any inherent magic qualities to $1, when there are clicks that can be worth a lot more.
In April the ads from both sites were clicked on around 100 times from a computer about 30 miles from the system used to check stats. No email or warnings.
Sounds like a very high CTR and no warnings.
Anyways, it's not a good idea to really draw any conclusions one way or another based on the above data.
If it were up to me it would be on a conversions basis. If your website wasn't converting as well as the mean, then you should be punished by a lower EPC. Even better would be just paying AdSense publishers on pay per aquisition basis and then there would be no fear whatsoever of getting banned..
Fraud detection in online advertising isn't something new - it's been a discipline in place since the dawn of online advertising and PPC and CPL advertising was around for years before Google took expanded their PPC revenue stream into content site delivery.
In April the ads from both sites were clicked on around 100 times from a computer about 30 miles from the system used to check stats. No email or warnings.In May the ads from both sites were clicked on around 100 times from the SAME computer used to check stats. The 5 cent account had no warnings or email. The $1 account was discontinued within days.
Hey, everybody, I just stole $200 from the neighborhood drugstore! But it's OK, cause I was just trying to see how much I could steal before they caught me. Sort of a scientific experiment so I could post the results on Webmasterworld.
I was really just casing out the place so you all will know how much you can steal in the future.
Google always gets paid, wether its a fraudulent click or not. Suuuuure it's in their interest to make sure the system is reliable, but at the same time they're in the business of making money.
As an aside, I think the people doing customer service at Google have a laugh at anyone who panickly contacts them over an accidental click on their own link.
The question becomes how realtime it is they can do it.
More information here:
[adwords.google.com...]
Improved smart pricing
We're introducing automatic price adjustments for certain clicks you get from the Google Network. Google's smart pricing model has always provided better placement for better performing ads, and reduced the cost of a click to the least amount possible to stay above your competitor's ad. And now, with no change in how you bid, Google may reduce the cost for a click if that better reflects the value it brings to advertisers like you.How smart pricing works
We are constantly analyzing data across our network, and if our data shows that a click is less likely to turn into business results (e.g. online sale, registration, phone call, newsletter sign-up), we may reduce the price you pay for that click. You may notice a reduction in the cost of clicks from content sites.We take into account many factors such as what keywords or concepts triggered the ad, as well as the type of site on which the ad was served. For example, a click on an ad for digital cameras on a web page about photography tips may be worth less than a click on the same ad appearing next to a review of digital cameras.
Google saves you time and hassle by estimating the value of clicks and adjusting prices on an ongoing basis. With improved smart pricing, you should automatically get greater value for clicks from ad impressions across our network, all with no change in how you bid.
