Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Part of the reason advertisers don't bid on the network is it's perceived inferiority. What would make them more comfortable is the ability to pick out sites and bid by the click.
But that could work against us because the higher CPC sites may win out, while not actually generating clicks because of poor creatives or poor context. So Google would have to introduce quality scores to control for that, and jack up the cost of bidding for ads that aren't sufficiently relevant.
By providing advertisers with more information, they throw some light on where their money is going and make the advertisers happier at throwing their cash at the network, while encouraging a true auction environment.
Should Google focus on igniting bidding wars on the AdSense network?
But, for me the key really is in the conversion of the clicks to sales,
Please don't
[edited by: centime at 11:12 pm (utc) on Mar. 10, 2007]
Part of the reason advertisers don't bid on the network is it's perceived inferiority.
The inferiority isn't perceived. It's tested, measured and proven. I agree that Google should provide advertisers with more information on where their ads appear, but that's so we can exclude 80% of the sites in the network.
On the content network site-targeted CPM ads still have to compete with regular CPC contextual ads for the chance to be displayed. If that holds true for site-targeted CPC contextual ads vs regular CPC contextual ads we should be fine.
That's because poorly written site-targeted CPC contextual ads ads would lose out to better written (meaning more likely to get clicked) regular contextual ads.
At least that's what I'm hoping it works like.
Would or should that lead to bidding wars? It probably will for site-targeted CPC contextual ads competing for space on sites that attract site-targeted ads in any volume.
Otherwise I don't see bidding wars breaking out in general on the content network.
The nice part with Content Network right now is the fact that we can still get 5 cents clicks on this network and redirect people to our website where higher CPC (ex: 40 cents) Adsense ads are located.
Now if the Adsense CPC is dropping, if we see higher Adwords CPC (coming from the Contetn Network) then bye bye to all those 5 cents clicks and bye bye to Arbitrage. Well at least coming from Adwords.
It's true that it would be nice to get $5/clicks on the Adsense ads because of a Content Network bidding war but how we will attract people to our Adsense pages if it cost us $5 per click on the Content Network and $10 on the Search Network?
Just my 2 cents here
Mtlinfo
There's too much junk on the content network for bidding wars to take place on a network-wide basis. The "content network" as it exists today is an advertiser-take-potluck, lowest-common-denominator network that attracts scam artists the way #*$! attracts flies. Except for low cost (compared to AdWords), what's the content network's appeal?
Google's introduction of site-targeted contextual ads may increase bids for clicks from sites that are known to deliver the right kind of traffic, but it's hard to picture a scenario where "bidding wars" would drive up average EPC for the network as a whole.
Here is a better question to ask: Why haven't bidding wars broken out on the contextual network? The system doesn't seem to be set up to encourage bidding wars on the contextual network. Maybe that's something the AdWords people should look into, to encourage that kind of behavior.
Indeed. Remember when Google introduced it to publishers? Forced it on us was more like it. Seem to recall it was an opt-out setup, and I opted out pretty quickly.
My issue was lack of control. Like others said in this forum, I wasn't going to let MFAs take over my site. Bidding war is fine in theory, but if only one or two sites want to target you, the price barely goes up; instead you get plastered with junk which dilutes your brand.
Months later, the consensus here seems to be there are no bidding wars on the Content Network; it was just Google's pipe dream.
I don't know how much thought Google put into it or if it was beta tested. I think it needs oversight to work, or even to have a reasonable chance. For example, screening by Google of potential bidders. Their sites need to be checked to confirm they are not MFAs.
The problem, however, is probably mostly caused by lack of quality websites. Few sites attract top dollar and convert really well. Or that's the perception. If the vast majority feel that way, or have the data to prove it, they avoid the content network altogether, or only stay for discounts, not to pay more.
Can't most advertisers test websites? They try the content network, and if your site gets good traffic, they will notice. And of course they'll have the conversion rate data. So most likely there are no bidding wars because content network sites don't convert well.
If my site converted well for some advertisers, and they approached Google, and asked to bid on my site, I'd entertain the idea. If G will be the agent, I can think about okaying it. (I don't foresee MFAs risking closer examination of their sites.)
If Google doesn't want to get so personally involved, it should give advertisers better options so it's not in the content network, or out of it. For example, allow various kinds of sites to be blocked, e.g., sites which are very new; sites with PR0; sites with two web pages, etc., etc. These are not unreasonable options for advertisers, and not impossible for Google engineers to offer.
p/g
If advertisers could easily identify quality sites and exclude rubbish, then we might see the bidding war that martinibuster is hoping for. Which re-reading the first post, is what martinibuster suggested in the first place!
Once a "Bidding War" starts to happen over a longer period of time, I think the term does not fit any longer. In this case it's just "a high price" for the keywords, probably justified by high ROI.
So, I wish for high prices instead of "Bidding Wars" - I am just interested in long-term sustainable revenues with Adsense, nothing else.
So, I wish for high prices instead of "Bidding Wars" ...
In an auction environment, high prices are the product of bidding wars. You will probably never receive high prices without bidding wars.
The bid starts at pennies and goes up from there, but only with the onset of a bidding war. You will never attain higher prices without advertisers bidding against each other.
The lack of bidding wars could account for depressed prices. It's possible the system was not designed with enough attention to the auction environment, the way the search auction was. How can a frenzy (and higher bids/epc) be stimulated if the advertisers don't know what they are bidding on?
as outlined above I think there =is= a difference between a "Bidding War" (irrational short-term bidding behaviour by market participants) and "High Prices" (rational bidding behaviour based on valid business rationale and market experience).
Just the fact that a price is being determined in an auction based system does justify the label "Bidding War" to achieve a price that satisfies most of the market participants. If there is a (nearly) constant supply and a (nearly) constant demand, then you might see "high prices" without going into "Bidding Wars".
These are continous operational costs an if they continue to spiral upwards, the net loses its cost advantages rapidly, and pretty soon the deepest wallets have priced everyone else of the search networks
What then, do the winners continue to pay google gigantic amounts of cash, review their budgets downwards having running their competion in to the ground, to re coup their expenses?
The multitude of adsense publishers give many businesses a way out ot the bidding wars, an if google can improve the quality of the clicks advertisers have to pay for, then probably advertisers increase dramatically in number , thereby forcing up the spend in the content network
The relative lack of competitive bidding may be depressing EPCs and keeping them low. As I mentioned previously, competition is built-in to the search auction. It was left out of the contextual side.
How to build in more competition
I'll clarify. By bidding war I mean competitive bidding.
Ah, that's more like it. That's a good description. :-)
Now, where do these (low) prices come from? There have been zillions of threads here on the reasons, but it all boils down to a very simple fact:
Supply and Demand. (I hear you sighing already - not again!)
The higher the demand for a product, the higher is its price. The price is just an indicator for the demand. Translated to our (Adsense) world: Low price = low demand, high price = high demand. Let's please not look at the reasons for the demand now. That's being covered in other threads.
Thus, if we want to achieve higher prices, then the existing ad inventory needs to be reduced -and/or- the demand for the existing inventory needs to be increased.
1) Either by the publishers, e.g. by giving up publishing or taking off ads from certain pages.
2) Or by Google, e.g. by creating an environment that helps publishers to intelligently (!) reduce the inventory (an improved filter comes to mind)
3) Or -as strange as it sounds- by the advertisers, e.g. by focusing on specific sites (instead of a splatter-gun approach). This lowers the overall demand (prices fall), but for targeted sites the demand increases (prices rise!)
All-in-all, I feel that Google should use every chance to allow intelligent (better) use of the existing inventory.
As I mentioned previously, competition is built-in to the search auction. It was left out of the contextual side.
I don't know what you mean by this. Advertisers get an average position for content ads just like search, so there is competition. How else could Google run the auction? I suppose that it's harder for advertisers to see where they are on the page compared to their competitors, so you don't get any irrational bidding.
There's several issues that Google need to address external to the system itself (though I agree with your points entirely). If Google wants the big brand budgets, it's going to have to address them.
Google still has a lot of work to do to get more budget into it's non-search network. Unfortunately for them, they'll have to try a lot more than fiddling with a quality score.
