Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.208.186.19

Forum Moderators: martinibuster

Message Too Old, No Replies

2Q 2006 earnings report and payout percentage

     
10:30 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


Google has announced its 2Q 2006 earnings at:

[investor.google.com...]

As in other recent quarters, the "traffic acquisition costs" payout to AdSense partner sites was just over 78-1/2 per cent (to be exact, 78.7362 percent), and it was $62 million higher than in the first quarter of 2006.

Caveat: No one is claiming that 78.7362 percent is the percentage paid to every individual publisher; your revenue share could be less (or, at least in theory, more), since Google doesn't reveal payout percentages by account.

9:15 pm on July 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>On the site search end, the EPC has dropped about 20% and the CTR has dropped about 50%<<<

numbers all over the map, lol... i suspect that your prof would likely tell you that site search does not represent google's search stats, in part because you can filter the site search advertisers... but why was your site epc so low in february?

likewise, hunderdown, what caused such a big spike in july? was it there in june as well?

9:28 pm on July 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:July 14, 2003
posts:155
votes: 0


well, the 78 percent seems right to me....

considering that aol gets 90% now....and as much as we all giggle at aol's monumental mistakes, they still account for an #@%^@# load of traffic.

i would bet that the premium partners such as aol, comcast, etc, get between 80-90 percent rev back...which balances out us getting between 20-40 percent (depending on smart clicks, performance, volume, etc)

9:29 pm on July 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>2Q 2006 AdSense revenues were up 7% over the previous quarter and 58% over 2Q 2005.<<<

hummm, looks to me like the toolbar deals increased adsense revenue over the last few quarters ;-)

and you can't prove otherwise.

9:39 pm on July 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


afaik, aol makes their advertising money as a portal, not with a publisher network like adsense or ypn.

>>>And by my figuring, if you did, at least 10% of the people in these discussions -- expert business people no doubt -- would believe you without any evidence at all.<<<

i bet that a lot more than 10% truly believe that TAC is the publisher payout! despite all the facts to the contrary.

10:01 pm on July 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


and you can't prove otherwise.

But you can't prove anything at all. :-)

10:10 pm on July 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>the "traffic acquisition costs" payout to AdSense partner sites was just over 78-1/2 per cent<<<

i proved that your statement there was wrong.

and you know it ;-)

10:14 pm on July 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


OK, now prove your claim that the number of content advertisers has declined.

hunderdown

1:27 am on July 26, 2006 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


OK, this is my last post to this thread, because it's getting silly.

danimal, what do you mean by "big spike" in July? I just said that my EPC in July is up from what it was earlier. That increase didn't all happen in July.

I'll leave you with a question to ponder. If Big Dave's EPC is up, and mine is up, and EFV's is at least stable (I can't remember if he's said anything about it in this thread), then what do our sites have in common? How is your site different?

2:30 am on July 26, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


and EFV's is at least stable (I can't remember if he's said anything about it in this thread

My EPC is higher in July than it was in May or June. eCPM is higher, too. (It's increased steadily, if slowly, over the same period.)

[edited by: europeforvisitors at 2:33 am (utc) on July 26, 2006]

2:33 am on July 26, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member ken_b is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 5, 2001
posts:5896
votes: 120


June was up from May, July is up from June.

This is pretty much my story too. Been climbing since Nov.

8:03 pm on July 26, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>If Big Dave's EPC is up, and mine is up, and EFV's is at least stable (I can't remember if he's said anything about it in this thread), then what do our sites have in common? How is your site different?<<<

one factor might be a lower epc than what i have... remember all of the efv posts about how much he likes site-targeted banner ads? yuk! same thing with ann in that silly thread about removing channels... you mentioned her ~$1 ecpm? that's mfa and site-targeted banner ad territory!

since you can easily clean up ecpm by removing non-performing pages, we need to look at epc... as an example, if your 12% increase put your current epc at, say, a monthly average of $.15 a click or better, i'd be impressed.

another possibility... afaik, google has told us that it's all about how well your site converts clicks to sales for the advertiser, as defined by how the advertiser sets up their conversion page... what if you had improved your site so that it targets shoppers? the conversion rate should go up, because shoppers are looking to buy, which means a higher epc.

in other words, you make your site more affiliate-friendly... i have never done any of that; no product reviews and i'm not a shopping site, so it's reasonable to expect a consistent epc out of a site that doesn't change it's focus.

hunderdown

9:26 pm on July 26, 2006 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


danimal, fwiw, my site's epc is now more than double the figure you mentioned.

I think EFV likes the CPM ads only because they appear on pages that don't otherwise earn very well. If I had to guess, I would say his eCPM is over $10. I'm guessing so he doesn't have to say anything about his numbers....

9:31 pm on July 26, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


one factor might be a lower epc than what i have... remember all of the efv posts about how much he likes site-targeted banner ads? yuk!

First, I was talking about site-targeted CPM text ads. (I don't run AdSense "image ads," the Google term for AdSense display banners.)

Second, I said that site-targeted CPM ads are useful to "fill in the gaps" by increasing revenue from certain types of pages (such as photo-gallery pages) that perform poorly with CPC in comparison to other types of content on the site.

Third, I mentioned that, in some cases, advertisers will pay a premium CPM for placement on sites they really want. You chose not to believe that, but of course you don't have access to other publishers' Google reports (such as mine).

So don't knock site-targeted CPM ads--unless, of course, you have a site that most advertisers would prefer to avoid targeting.

since you can easily clean up ecpm by removing non-performing pages, we need to look at epc...

Take another look at Hunderdown's post. Hunderdown, BigDave, Ken_b, and I are all talking about EPC.

another possibility... afaik, google has told us that it's all about how well your site converts clicks to sales for the advertiser, as defined by how the advertiser sets up their conversion page... what if you had improved your site so that it targets shoppers?

I haven't made any significant changes to my site in the past few months (except for continuing to add more pages on a variety of topics without regard for their potential AdSense earnings), so that wouldn't apply to me. I can't speak for the others.

I can think of three simpler and more likely reasons why some sites are enjoying a positive EPC trend while others (such as yours, apparently) are experiencing a decline:

- Supply and demand
- Smart pricing
- The sky isn't falling after all. :-)

10:34 pm on July 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>First, I was talking about site-targeted CPM text ads. (I don't run AdSense "image ads," the Google term for AdSense display banners.)<<<

i specifically stated "banner ads", NOT image ads... and efv... cpm ads can be either text or image-based, and the term "banner" refers to more than just images:

"text ad formats: Half Banner (234x60) Banner (468 x 60)"
[google.com...]

whether you like text-based cpm or image-based cpm is irrelevant... neither of them pay squat, as you proved when you refused to disclose the rate that you charge for direct cpm ads on your website.

fyi, site-targeted ads are so lousy that they only appear on the content network... even google doesn't want 'em!

so no, hd, based on all that, it's highly doubtful that efv is getting anywhere near $10 ecpm.

>>>Hunderdown, BigDave, Ken_b, and I are all talking about EPC.<<<

gee, that's funny, hd just posted otherwise: "I would say his eCPM is over $10"

who's going to pay a premium cpm rate for ads on pages that don't earn very well? remember that advertisers can't select specific pages on a site.

bad pages have bad epc, and site-targeted ads always compete with standard adsense epc... so the best that site-targeted ecpm will ever be is just only slightly better than standard adsense ecpm.

what you are saying there doesn't add up... and don't you think that if site-targeted ads did pay a $10 ecpm, they would be on the google search side as well?

>>>my site's epc is now more than double the figure you mentioned.<<<

if that's true, why aren't you sharing some tips for raising epc? you have our attention :-) you specifically did not mention any changes to your site that might have raised your epc so drastically.

how many new advertisers have you seen in the last couple of months?

>>>I haven't made any significant changes to my site in the past few months (except for continuing to add more pages on a variety of topics without regard for their potential AdSense earnings)<<<

another direct contradiction... you added pages on a "variety of topics", whatever that is, with no concept of how they affected your earnings? i guess that's efv-ese for "no channels" :-)

11:03 pm on July 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


whether you like text-based cpm or image-based cpm is irrelevant... neither of them pay squat

Speak for yourself. But then, we don't know anything about the quality of your site (or your audience) because you don't include a URL in your profile.

as you proved when you refused to disclose the rate that you charge for direct cpm ads on your website.

This may seem like an obvious question (at least to anyone with experience in the publishing and advertising businesses), but why would I want to undercut my rep firm's ability to set and negotiate prices?

For the last time: The sky isn't falling, bitterness is no substitute for rational observation, and it's a mistake to assume that one's own experience (whether happy or unhappy) is universal.

11:04 pm on July 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Nov 29, 2003
posts:875
votes: 0


Oh man...

whether you like text-based cpm or image-based cpm is irrelevant... neither of them pay squat, as you proved when you refused to disclose the rate that you charge for direct cpm ads on your website.

You didn't define squat, but how does $4.50 CPM rate for site targeted?

fyi, site-targeted ads are so lousy that they only appear on the content network... even google doesn't want 'em!

I thought you were joking. They ARE SITE targeted. Are you not understanding what these ads are?

who's going to pay a premium cpm rate for ads on pages that don't earn very well? remember that advertisers can't select specific pages on a site.

Well, I don't believe it's ok to discloser the names of advertisers on my sites. And for selecting specific pages, you're wrong.

what you are saying there doesn't add up... and don't you think that if site-targeted ads did pay a $10 ecpm, they would be on the google search side as well?

Then they wouldn't be site-targeted ads, would they?

Given that there's hardly any facts in your message that ARE in fact accurate, I'm wondering whether that's because you don't understand the site targeting thing? Have you used it to advertise in adwords?

10:26 am on July 28, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 1, 2005
posts:733
votes: 0


fyi, site-targeted ads are so lousy that they only appear on the content network... even google doesn't want 'em!

I thought you were joking. They ARE SITE targeted. Are you not understanding what these ads are?

Now that is the quote of the day :D, I couldn't stop laughing...

6:39 pm on July 28, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>You didn't define squat, but how does $4.50 CPM rate for site targeted?<<<

it's well under my average ad unit ecpm, but still pretty impressive!

>>>They ARE SITE targeted. Are you not understanding what these ads are?<<<

huh?

"Opting into Google's search network lets your ad be shown on the search results pages of our high-quality partners. These partners include search sites as well as shopping comparison engines. Ads are targeted to users' search queries, so that your ad will appear only if a user is searching for information related to your campaign's keywords. All ads served to the search network are contextually-targeted text ads. Advertisers cannot use site-targeting to select individual search network sites." [google.com...]

so to repeat my previous statement, rbacal, if site-targeted cpm ads are as good as you people claim they are, why aren't they on google's search network?

>>>And for selecting specific pages, you're wrong.<<<

o.k., show me where google states that an advertiser can site-target specific pages on a website.

>>>why would I want to undercut my rep firm's ability to set and negotiate prices?<<<

the last time i looked, this forum was for publishers, not potential advertisers :-)

and given multiple variables like seasonal changes in the travel biz, bird flu, your comments about how the heat in europe has hurt your business, etc., any price ranges that you quote out here are hardly set in stone.

1:25 am on July 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Nov 29, 2003
posts:875
votes: 0


o.k., show me where google states that an advertiser can site-target specific pages on a website.

If you go into your adwords account, you can always access relevant help from there.

BTW, you do know there are three different networks, right?

google pages, search network, content network?

hunderdown

3:23 am on July 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


>>>my site's epc is now more than double the figure you mentioned.<<<

if that's true, why aren't you sharing some tips for raising epc? you have our attention :-) you specifically did not mention any changes to your site that might have raised your epc so drastically.

how many new advertisers have you seen in the last couple of months?

I'm not sure that it's worth the effort to continue to respond, since you seem to misunderstand so much of what people say, but I'll try to clear a few things up.

My site's epc has NOT doubled or increased drastically recently. It IS double what you cited as a benchmark in one of your earlier posts. It has increased by about 12% since last November, which I mentioned earlier. Historically, it has actually moved fairly slowly. Started out in 2003 somewhat lower than the November of last year, dropped gradually after the introduction of smart pricing, and since Oct. 2004 has gradually gone back upward, surpassing the original level some months ago and now well above it.

This is definitely not due to new advertisers. The ads I see on my site are remarkably stable, I think. I see the same advertisers over and over. It's a good thing that I get a constant flow of new visitors!

So what are my tips? Nothing that hasn't been talked about here over and over again. No more than one ad block per page, and no ads on some pages. Ads follow the site's color scheme. I did some testing to find the best location, though my testing was limited by where I was willing to put ads. No large rectangles above the fold on my site. And that's really it.

What I suspect has made a big difference for me is a circumstance that many will not be able to repeat: that my site has been around since 1995 and is far from being SEO'd to the hilt. Though it's a niche content site, it's not tightly focused, and I see ads that seem to fall in several different areas. One in particular seems to me to be likely to be generating the highest clicks.... So maybe here's a tip, though it's not one that I've followed. If you can identify ads and keywords that earn significantly better on your site, think about ways to add content in that area.

And all of the above may help to explain why I am inclined to give Google the benefit of the doubt in discussions like this. If you've had a different experience, of course you'll have a different attitude.

5:56 am on July 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


This is definitely not due to new advertisers. The ads I see on my site are remarkably stable, I think. I see the same advertisers over and over. It's a good thing that I get a constant flow of new visitors!

Same here. I'm sure there's a certain amount of turnover, especially among new advertisers who are learning the ropes or find that PPC advertising doesn't work for them, but I've had some advertisers for a long, long time--probably since the early days of AdSense.

7:57 pm on July 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>If you can identify ads and keywords that earn significantly better on your site, think about ways to add content in that area.<<<

that could have been a factor in your 12% gain, and it's good advice... if you have been adding pages since november on a topic that paid better than the other topics(aka advertisers that paid better), it could have increased your average epc.

it also proves the wisdom of keeping your channels... what else would you use to determine which keywords paid the best?

my sites are tightly focused, and the oldest one has been around for ~9 years, with the same core group of advertisers of course... my average epc drop was a whole lot less than your epc gain, but i also lost epc on my best page, and perhaps recovered some(?) of that with a new site(same topic) that earns pretty well.

hunderdown

4:26 pm on July 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


Just to clarify, I have NOT followed my tip of adding content in an area that seems to attract better-paying ads.

I may start to do that, but so far as I can tell, the rise in my EPC since November seems to be unrelated to added content (I've added content but in several different areas, and have not added any in that area I identified).

6:28 pm on July 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


Again, same here. I think the prophet of doom in this thread is grasping at straws. Fact is, some publishers are seeing higher ECPs for reasons that have nothing to do with tweaking their sites for AdSense. Those reasons are likely to include:

- Supply and demand, and...

- Clicks that convert well for advertisers, or that Google believes will convert well for advertisers.

7:39 pm on July 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


since none of you have been able to account for the reasons behind your claims of increased epc, i took a deeper look at my own stats.

i have a smaller site on an unrelated topic, that has not been touched for months, so it's a perfect candidate.

the july epc is down slightly for that site... but it has always earned about 50% higher epc than my main sector.

the only possible variable that i can see is in the search traffic from google.

7:52 pm on July 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


funny how some people can distort the figures based on their own agenda :-)

"Bad .... 21
Ok ...... 14
Good.. 16"

"My July is also about a 1/3 of what I got for June even though traffic/ctr is steady. Shame."

"worst month for last 12 months, 40% down"

"This is the worst month in last 12 months. Earnings are almost 70% down.. Ecpm going down everyday."

"eCPM way down"

"Traffic is rising and rising but eCPM and CTR are falling and falling"

"it's CTR and eCPM that are tanking"

"worst month of the year"

"On pace for the worst month for revenue since last September, despite steady impression growth during that same period."

"Worst month for me"

"It is the worst month for me."

"This month is bad. 40% down in revenue."

[webmasterworld.com...]

8:52 pm on July 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


Distort what figures?

Some people are always doing worse, OK, or better than the average. And on the whole, people who are having problems are the most likely to post (a.k.a. complain). That's an accepted rule of thumb on all support forums.

If your numbers are correct, only 41% of the posts in this thread are from members who are reporting bad results in July. That's pretty impressive. We also need to remember that some members should be having bad results if smart pricing is operating the way it's supposed to.

Thanks for confirming that the sky isn't falling after all. :-)

10:48 pm on July 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>I think the prophet of doom in this thread<<<

only *one* prophet of doom? i just posted a bunch of people who saw declining epc this month.

so let's not let an agenda get in the way of basic math skills ;-) speaking of which, there were more epc losers than gainers this month, by a sizeable margin.

the adsense program is going downhill, and it has been ever since the search/content split last november.

12:37 am on July 31, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


the adsense program is going downhill, and it has been ever since the search/content split last november.

Whether the network is going "uphill" or "downhill" from a publisher's perspective depends on the numbers in the monthly earnings reports. If your EPC and/or revenues are eroding, you're going to feel like Chicken Little. If your EPC and/or revenues are healthy, you'll view AdSense in a much more positive light. But pretending that your own experience is universal, or that your account is a litmus test for the whole network, just doesn't make sense.

3:44 pm on July 31, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 5, 2005
posts:735
votes: 0


>>>But pretending that your own experience is universal, or that your account is a litmus test for the whole network, just doesn't make sense.<<<

as usual, you are ignoring all the people who reported lower epc this month.

tell ya what... maybe some of that agenda math can explain how publishers benefited from the content/search split?

This 95 message thread spans 4 pages: 95