Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Google Inc. reported late Thursday third-quarter profit rose 92% on another strong surge in revenue from the ads it places next to Internet search results, sending its shares higher in after-hours trading.
Something interesting which may have some competitive advantage to AdSense webmasters is the emerging market information.
He said revenue growth was particularly strong in the U.K., the Netherlands, Spain, France, Italy and Australia. He also noted that India and Brazil, which he considers emerging markets, were growing at "high rates."
It would seem if there's a new influx of advertising money from those countries then it makes sense to target those regional markets as they expand to take advantage of the emerging revenue click streams.
Anyone seen any visible upward revenue trends from these countries?
Anyone seen any visible upward revenue trends from these countries?
I certainly have on the affiliate side. (I don't know what countries AdSense revenues are coming from, since Google doesn't say.)
If you're handy with PHP, do a quick IP to GEO lookup in a database (free ones exist) and put the proper COUNTRY channel into your AdSense code dynamically.
Then you can run reports on earnings by country!
Since I don't have enough channels left (200 CHANNELS SUCKS!) I think I'll start with maybe the top 30 countries from my weblog stats and see how much income they each contribute to my earnings.
This will be cool...
According to Google's official release, payments to AdSense partners were $780 million in 3Q 2006, out of $1.04 billion in revenues generated "through AdSense programs."
Note that these were payments to AdSense partners. Payments to distribution partners are itemized separately in the financial release, and they totaled only $45 million during the 3rd Quarter.
The financial release is at:
[investor.google.com...]
Compare this:
Q3 2004: AdSense programs, contributed $384.3 million, or 48 percent of total revenues
Q3 2005: AdSense programs, contributed $675 million, or 43% of total revenues
Q3 2006: AdSense programs, of $1.04 billion, or 39% of total revenues
That's a HUGE increase in total AdSense revenue in 3 years, it's phenomenal to say the least.
For all the whining about AdSense revenues going down there's obviously someone out there earning some massively large increases in revenue that are keeping REAL QUIET about it.
Numbers like that just make you want to launch a few thousand more sites real quick.
[edited by: incrediBILL at 11:45 pm (utc) on Oct. 19, 2006]
Since I don't have enough channels left (200 CHANNELS SUCKS!) (...)
According to Google's official release, payments to AdSense partners were $780 million in 3Q 2006, out of $1.04 billion in revenues generated "through AdSense programs."
The small publishers get less than 75% and the large publishers get more than 75%.
Mike
The small publishers get less than 75% and the large publishers get more than 75%
Interesting. Is it because they are paying more to get the big publishers?
If anyone has any information that supports this belief, I would love to hear it.
I know a premium publisher that gets less than 70% and we get less than that.
That's what Mike BELIEVES to be the case--and it makes sense. If anyone has any information that supports this belief, I would love to hear it.
- (...) premium AdSense allows rev share negotiation?
- Yes, that's correct.
(Google AdSense: Optimization Webinar [google.com], 2005-06-30)
When you have 20 million page views per month, or 5 million searches (...) you qualify for the Premium Publisher program from Google AdSense.
(JenSense: Premium Publisher Perks from AdSense [jensense.com], 2005-07-10)
[edited by: incrediBILL at 2:06 am (utc) on Oct. 20, 2006]
[edited by: Juan_G at 2:17 am (utc) on Oct. 20, 2006]
Also, for all we know, Google could skew its payout percentages to reward certain types of publishers while discouraging others. Why go to the effort of reviewing and banning "click arbitrage" sites, for example, when they can be starved out through a combination of higher bids on the advertiser side and lower payouts (not just smart pricing) on the publisher side?
It is correct that each publisher negotiates a deal individually that includes individualization of payout percentage.
It is also the case that in addition to having more freedom and flexibility to customize code and use premium features, premium publishers have ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS, including making a commitment about how long they will display ads and be part of the program.
Also, while PP status has something to do with volume, being asked to be a PP is not determined only by volume, but also takes into account things like quality of site, potential for revenue and growth, etc.
It IS possible to be a PP without the volume.
Mike
Everyone does not get the same split with G.
Nor should they.
If you are a big publisher you get more perks... and the small publishers pay for those perks.
How do you figure that? It's like suggesting that the sales rep who sells $100,000 a year is subsidizing the sales rep who sells $1,000,000 a year (and who gets a bigger bonus or commission because he generates more revenue).
Of course, if Google instituted a minimum traffic level the way many ad networks do, small publishers wouldn't have reason to complain about premium publishers getting more perks, because they'd be looking for revenue somewhere else.
He said revenue growth was particularly strong in the U.K., the Netherlands, Spain, France, Italy and Australia. He also noted that India and Brazil, which he considers emerging markets, were growing at "high rates."
I wish that we could see a breakdown of how these countries stack up, but Google won't do that. What may help is to see how our logfiles show we do in these countries, and maybe target content more to the emerging markets.
Looking at my pages in the UK at the moment shows that there are certainly more genuine advertisers over the last few weeks. To me, that's a positive and shows that the plague of locusts MFA's that decimated the sector may have moved on to some other sector. I'm not seeing an increase in returns as yet but hopefully that will follow at some point and restore income to previous levels.
The thing that strikes me most is that as adsense publishers we are in the best place to gain from this. Just look at the ridiculous stance YPN have on the 97% of the planet that isn't governed by George whatsisname? Stupid looking guy - can't string two sentences together and likes invading places. Something botanical. Tree? Petunia? Water feature? Who cares anyway!
As Google operates in these markets and is strong, we stand to gain more than we would do with any other advertising program IMHO.
I wish that we could see a breakdown of how these countries stack up, but Google won't do that. What may help is to see how our logfiles show we do in these countries, and maybe target content more to the emerging markets.
Re-read the 4th post in this thread.
After posting it I figured out to get country specific AdSense information with the new channels and a little server side scripting :)
Doesn't this alter the adsense code, and might cause the great god G to vent wrath and thunderbolts and all?
I'm not technically changing their HTML, I'm just making a combination of valid Google ads on the fly. Would look the same to the outside world if I had 30 different ads and served up the appropriate one vs. inserting just the single line of channel code into the AdSense code on the fly.
Technically it's looks and smells like 100% original AdSense code that came straight from Google, you would never know the difference, which is what they don't want is the code changed from it's original format and I'm not doing that at all.
How do you figure that?
====================================
Do you really think that Google pays for the perks that big publishers get? Come on. They spread the cost of the perks for big publishers out onto the small publishers.
Mike
Just think about the possibility that Google "loss leads" small publishers in order to get that long long tail and keep publishers away from Y!, M$, etc.
In other words I can see many reasons why G might want to pay small publishers *more* than large ones.
I'm not saying they do, but saying that it *must* be otherwise is tilting at windmills...
Personally I think that I get a fantastic deal from G, much better than I used to get in the BadOldDays(TM) from the likes of ValueClick. And DoubleClick wouldn't even reply to my enquiries... G pays regularly and promptly and more than anyone else does or ever did, and even manages some friendly real humans on support. If nothing else, G has forced the other ad networks to at least be polite to small publishers!
Rgds
Damon
Q3 2004: AdSense programs, contributed $384.3 million, or 48 percent of total revenues
Q3 2005: AdSense programs, contributed $675 million, or 43% of total revenues
Q3 2006: AdSense programs, of $1.04 billion, or 39% of total revenuesThat's a HUGE increase in total AdSense revenue in 3 years, it's phenomenal to say the least.
Interestingly my AdSense revenue proportionately has increased better than this 270.6% and I assume many others could say the same therefore if publishers keep ahead of Google increases do we deem oursleves to be fairing better than the average?
Just think about the possibility that Google "loss leads" small publishers in order to get that long long tail and keep publishers away from Y!, M$, etc.
It's hard to imagine that Google makes a profit on really small publishers (the people who earn a few dollars a day, if that). So one could argue that the big publishers are subsidizing the tiny publishers, and that--in the interests of fairness--Google should abandon its populist philosophy and set a revenue or traffic minimum.
Mind you, I'm not advocating such a change, but it would be a logical response to the "Google is robbing Peter to subsidize Paul Corporation" argument.
I just generated new code. Google is now date stamping the adsense code and along with the date stamp is a text version of the channels; that's helpful. This is all nested in a single line comment "//"
Google may be recording and versionizing these blocks of code generated using the publisher tools, now they can detect any change. (At least as soon as you update to new code from their tools).
What they're going to do with this, who knows.
It's hard to imagine that Google makes a profit on really small publishers (the people who earn a few dollars a day, if that).
Since those folks make up the numerical majority of AdSense publishers, Google better be making a profit on them. I bet they do just fine. :-)
Regular AdSense, the people that post the craziest problems and most inant problems, because the masses can't read and comprehend plain English posted on the Google support site, probably cost Google the most support. Therefore, Google probably make a lot less money just to factor in all the stupid things people do which cost Google support a ton to chase down and help fix in general AdSense, therefore a lower payout because of all the stupid people.
Regular Adsense gets that brain damaged javascript API which, the usual web idiot can install, yet doesn't work for people blocking javascript, a tradeoff between simplicity and racking up tech support time vs maximizing profits.
Premium publishers get access to nice APIs that allow the ads to be embedded server side which most bottom feeding webmasters are incapable of implementing, meaning there's probably LESS support with a high volume premium player, and they aren't using the javascript API so they get even MORE impressions and click thrus.
If you ask me, the regular AdSense accounts are the loss leaders because we could make so much more with access to the the non-javascript APIs to avoid javascript being disabled.
FWIW, I would kill to have the premium API so I too could shove adds down the javascript blocking audience but I barely get close to 2M page views a month, sigh.
That's my theory and I'm sticking to it, YMMV.
[edited by: incrediBILL at 1:20 am (utc) on Oct. 21, 2006]
