Forum Moderators: martinibuster
It's pretty clear (to me) that the major success factor is the "clickability factor" and it's not the same as "good matching".
Now, if you create a site about dogs and people go there to find out about dog training, chances are, people will click ads about dog training. Or dog breeding. And if you have a dating site where singles look for a date, it makes perfect sense that they click dating ads.
However, if you have a "TV site" or a "Game site" or a "Music site", the money simply isn't there. Not because Google is bad at matching - quite the contrary, but "clickability" isn't there.
Something to keep in mind when you start your next site.
[edited by: DavidDeprice at 10:08 am (utc) on July 22, 2006]
[edited by: martinibuster at 1:42 pm (utc) on July 24, 2006]
[edit reason]
[1][edit reason] tos [/edit] [/edit][/1]
Are you saying that presentation is not a factor?
but you know what, it worked, an the look simply stopped being a factor
There are many examples
I suspect that a plain site focusses attention on content an exit routes,,,,, like adsense adverts :)
True David, there are topics that pay and others that don't. But I didn't get the part about ugly sites, you are saying they pay because of the topic no matter how presentable, well organized, pleasing to the eyes, less tacky they are? Are you saying that presentation is not a factor?
No, I just meant to say that people who say "Oh my God, these sites are ugly pay so much and they are so ugly, so ugly sites pay better" completely ignore the obvious - these sites pay that much not because they are ugly (or pretty). But because the niche is clickable and the site is "info seeker oriented"
G-O-O-G-L-E.
They are the ones who pay us. So if you want to make cash with Adsense, I recommend you shift your mindset to one basic question:
What would Google want me to do to make money?
The ADVERTISER
they are the ones that actually pay (sorry HB)
Converting for them should keep Google, Advertiser, your visitors, and you happy. Personally I think my visitors come first, but I am old fashioned, never mind me :-)
However if you are looking for a professional company who spare no expense to make sure the customer is happy then may be the site design matters
Matching your ads to your content is key, and unfortunately we rely on Google for that.
So to go back to the OP, re clickability it's probably down to you as the advertiser makig sure you get the right ads on your site or the right traffic
Yeah, keep them wanting more....
Your setting up a chain: publisher-google-advertiser.
And since the advertiser pays Google, and Google pays us, you assume that equals advertisers paying publishers. But that's not really the case.
Let me extend your chain, we will bring in the advertisers paying customer, the consumer. So then we have:
publisher-google-advertiser-consumer.
The consumer pays for the Ipod your advertiser sells. Now according to your chain-model, it's the consumer who is actually paying us! Should we therefore primarily aim to match our content with the consumers needs? No, we shouldn't.
All 4 parties have different objectives and sometimes these objectives do not match, thus partly breaking the chain.
A clear example of that is the recent quality score update in Adwords. Many advertisers do not agree with that update and their business is damaged because of it. Now if publishers would aim to act according to the needs of those advertisers, publishers might get hurt too.
It's not safe to assume that advertisers needs are fully translated into the Adsense algo. I would stick to the basics. Google is the one who pays me. So if I want to make more cash, who should I please?
Should we therefore primarily aim to match our content with the consumers needs? No, we shouldn't
As I said, for me it's the visitor (consumer) that I cater to, without traffic I have neither Google, nor Google's advertisers interest, and both I can replace, but not my visitors (traffic)
In serving my visitors first I am satisfying both Google and Advertisers. But I feel we are drifting..
So to sum up, success is never one thing, it's a combination of many, priority among those many will vary from one webmaster to another, mine happens to be visitors, David's is the niche and clickability, yours is Google, but when the three of us satisfy our priority and move on to number 2 and 3 we all meet.
Good content generates interest and clicks, professionalism generates clicks, relevance generates clicks, unfortunately some of those factors are outside a publishers control
True, but for adsense to work you need traffic, and a bucket load of it, first comes the user experience, the bookmarks, the tell a friend, the newpaper review, the good incoming links, the high serps position, then the money flows.
This speaks volumes in reference to not only Adsense success, but site success.
Get the traffic and the money will come. Whether it's Adsense or some other CPC program.
Now, if you create a site about dogs and people go there to find out about dog training, chances are, people will click ads about dog training. Or dog breeding. And if you have a dating site where singles look for a date, it makes perfect sense that they click dating ads.
However, if you have a "TV site" or a "Game site" or a "Music site", the money simply isn't there. Not because Google is bad at matching - quite the contrary, but "clickability" isn't there.
There's another term for this: "audience." Or, more specifically, what the audience is looking for when it visits your Web site.
Let's continue with the "dogs" theme:
A site about the history of dogs or beloved pets who have "crossed the rainbow bridge" isn't likely to do well with AdSense because its readers aren't looking for ways to spend their money. They want information for a school report or to satisfy their own curiosity, or they want solace after their dogs have died.
A site about dog grooming, labradoodle breeders, or "how to select an airline pet carrier" should do fine with AdSense, because its readers are likely to be in the market for grooming supplies, puppies, or pet carriers.
In my sector, travel, there are some popular sites that earn lousy revenues because they appeal to armchair travelers--not to people who are planning trips. The person who's reading an account of a train trip though Siberia probably won't click on a "Siberian Train Discounts" ad, but a person who's reading an article on "How to travel by train in Siberia" may very well click on that ad--and, if he or she does click on that ad, the click is more likely to result in a sale for the advertiser.
I guess you mean designing the site to funnel potential purchasers off your advertisers products into close proximity with the correct add at the correct time,,,
I guess you mean designing the site to funnel potential purchasers off your advertisers products into close proximity with the correct add at the correct time,,,
I didn't mean that at all. For one thing, my site design predated AdSense by nearly two years; for another, I don't want to fall into the trap of letting ads become the tail that wags the dog.
I just use an AdSense leaderboard beneath the navigation bar at the top of each page, and that works fine with me. Some people claim that a large rectangle plopped into the text would yield a higher clickthrough rate, and maybe they're right. I haven't tried that for several reasons, including (but not limited to):
- The user experiencex
- Compatibility with my layout;
- The hassles of integrating a large rectangle into body text on pages that aren't produced with a CMS.
When some one creates an MFA I'm sure they consider the clickablility factor! Good content generates interest and clicks, professionalism generates clicks, relevance generates clicks, unfortunately some of those factors are outside a publishers control
Ironically, they don't. Their ads are usually something like that "best sites about new and used cake icings". That's it. Do you seriously think that if you create a page on "sexual harrassment lawyers" it's clickable? No it's not. The reasoning goes like that "a person who looks for a sexual harrassment lawyer will click the ad", but that's exactly the problem. A dog owner who reads an article on dog training is VERY LIKELY to click a dog training ad. And it's not the case with sexual harrassment and thousands of others supposedly high-paying niches. They are simply non-clickable and the high bids are for SEARCH ONLY anyway.
I'm going to go on a limb and say that an average MFA site owner underperforms compared to a legitimate AdSense publisher by a factor of 5 to 10. They only make money because they use automation to create hundreds and thousands of sites and millions of pages.
A site with a not necessarily high paying niche, still makes loads of cash simply because of traffic volume.
I understand that many will disagree with me and say that it's better to give the visitor ALL the info that they need, but most of us are not specialists (like matt cutts for instance) and are not able to create comprehensive content.
So that left me with a decision...
Do I create total visitor satisfaction and research my topic to death before putting it online...
or...
Give just enough information to "encourage" the visitor to click.
whatever your personal view, I chose the latter. I WANT to make money with adsense (nothing to be ashamed about that I believe) and fortunately for me, my model is working brilliantly FOR ME... it may not work for others.
Give just enough information to "encourage" the visitor to click. <<
I'd be worried about the long term viability of this model.
My view is that it's better to create quality, well researched (or uniquely valuable in some way) content that will still be useful and needed 5-10 years from now when the net is so full of crappy MFA's it will be busting at the seems. And this way, if the adsense bubble bursts, or even right now, you can still monetize your content in many different ways. Plus you'll probably get way more traffic, exponentially so, with high quality content.
I'm not an expert in anything really but I do have some strong interests in what turn out to be profitable niches... and I'm willing to take the time to create something of value because I enjoy learning and I think I'll be rewarded because of it.
Right now, I'm somewhere between ommelettes and fried chicken... and working my way up. I never said I was gonna stay at soup all my life. And yes... I'm sure the Adsense bubble will deflate sooner or later. I don't want to be still learning and perfecting and missing all the earnings opportunities Adsense brings.
In the meantime, I'm learning all I can from the recipe book called WebmasterWorld! ; ]
well i'm a raw foodist who mainly eats mono-meals... but yeah i can dig what you're saying :-)
Give just enough information to "encourage" the visitor to click.
My view is that it's better to create quality, well researched (or uniquely valuable in some way) content...
These two points are not an either/or situation.
You can easily have both on the same page. In fact, when the first includes the second the whole deal works better.
Give just enough information to "encourage" the visitor to click.
I agree with John5000's comment about the long-term viability of this model, for several reasons:
1) Google knows that the Web is awash in pages that are "shallow," rather than "deep," and on the Google search side, at least, sites that are designed purely to benefit the publisher aren't likely to prosper indefinitely.
2) Sites that rely on a "shallow" rather than "deep" model are more vulnerable to competition than more authoritative sites are, because the cost of entry is so low and it's so easy for big and small players (including huge corporate players) to crank out computer-generated, keyword-driven "user review" pages and the like.
3) Sites with shallow content aren't likely to attract repeat users, which means they're throwing away revenue opportunities. (I much prefer having a site that users visit throughout the research and buying cycle. For more on that topic, read DoubleClick's "Search Before the Purchase" study.)
I have just recently got this up and running and realized that the visitors motivation at your site matters. If someone is looking for a recipe they will find it and continue on. If someone is looking for a mortgage or little blue pills then they are of the mindset that they will visit with the intention to pull out a credit card.
Is that the point you were trying to make?
Truth be told, I'm a bit of a perfectionist, but I don't have the luxury of spending time perfecting my content 100% while others are taking their slice of the money pie. I figure that sometimes, you just have to catch the train (in this case the train is called Adsense) and worry later about the fact that you forgot to wear your socks and underwear!
Like I said... not everyone comes into this game a full-fledged gourmet chef. I'm somewhere between ommelettes and fried chicken. We all just have to work our way up the food chain.
