Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.20.34.173

Forum Moderators: incrediBILL & martinibuster

Message Too Old, No Replies

AdSense Disabling Arbitrage Accounts by June 1st

     

Freddy81

3:37 am on May 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



They told me my account will be disabled at 1st June, and also added that I'll receive payment for all outstanding earnings in accordance with the standard AdSense payment schedule.

For this day (17 May), does it mean that they will pay for April 1-30 earnings, or for May (1-18) also?

malachite

7:49 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



wonder why they wouldn't just ban the sites and not the whole account.

Precisely because Adsense is by account not by site.

If they just banned the sites, what's to stop the publisher putting up a whole load more?

sonny

7:50 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



How many adsensers are getting carpal tunnel from checking their email so much?

Play_Bach

7:51 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member play_bach is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member



Hobbs - yesterday was my highest earning since mid March! If this is somehow related to the policy change, then I say the "pudding" is looking very good indeed!

[edited by: Play_Bach at 7:51 pm (utc) on May 19, 2007]

sonny

7:52 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



If they just banned the sites, what's to stop the publisher putting up a whole load more?

Obviously with an email stating their stance on mfa sites

inbound

8:03 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



In late January I posted the following, only to change my mind and delete it. I think it's worth posting now with the additional notes at the bottom:


The last 8 months have been turbulent for many, and we can be sure that Google is going after the middleman (Affiliates, Arbitragers, Drop-Shippers, MFA's, Lead Generators and anyone mistakenly identified as such).

Having been hit badly by QS changes on some of our AdWords campaigns and algo changes on some of our organic campaigns I have had several conversations with Google representatives in the US and UK. We also have great evidence from the different ways in which Google treated our own/client sites (some are better than others; Google consistently favoured the better sites and penalised the poorer ones - from a user perspective) Here are my conclusions:

* Google sees middlemen as a threat to the quality of its SERP's (and hence user loyalty).

* Google are prepared to put up with collateral damage to innocent sites; after all it's usually only the site owner that complains.

* The monetary implications of algo changes do not appear to be the first consideration, user experience is still their top priority. They are thinking long-term.

* You are in danger of being labelled a middleman if 'the majority' of your content can be found elsewhere on the web (especially if it is from a single source). Think of XML feeds here.

* If you are seen as a middleman then be prepared to see your Google traffic/AdSense earnings wiped out. This means diversification, which can't be a bad thing anyway.

So what should we be doing?

I suppose the most obvious thing is to take a good hard look at what value your site has for a visitor. Google seems to be getting better at spotting sites that are more concerned with SEO or clicks than users. Concentrating on adding unique & useful features/content seems a good ploy (as it always has been if you forget about search engines).

Do I have any proof?

Not 100% proof, but pretty clear indications from the mix of sites we own/work on.

Our sites that have been hit by AdWords/Organic Algo changes were poor in terms of user experience, we've changed that (having spent months on it) and Google seems to be favouring the sites again.

Our sites that have seen increased Google traffic are advert-free and concentrate on adding real value. They all have content which is of true value to the user (and hence take much longer to create). They all tend to have picked up good industry links due to their content, these links have probably helped shield the sites form damage as such links are not handed out to all and sundry. These sites have tended to be client sites or our own sites which we use to test theories on. Finding alternative monetisation methods than PPC is in, big time.

The long-term outlook for us is good, which in itself indicates a change in our emphasis. We are now looking at the medium-long term rather than the short-medium term. Our sites are better for visitors, we have diversified our traffic base and we have learned a hard lesson; fast.

I'm sure many people will continue to fly too close to the Sun and get burned. Google prefer us to be on the beach with sun-block; we'll still get a tan, but it'll take longer.

Although the above talks about much more than Arbitrage or MFA's I think that we should take heed of this change and start looking more closely at what our sites offer. Since writing the above our ride has been quite smooth and predictable, create useful content and prosper. You can be sure that Google will target other 'nuisances' in the near future.

Google seems to be thinking long term on this; they can see a time when enough advertisers (that genuinely offer the service being searched for) exist to iron out the inneficiencies that are clear to see currently (an inneficient marketplace encourages arbitrage). This move seems to be an attempt to bring forward the time when Google has enough 'true advertisers' rather than middlemen.

I sincerely hope that Google remembers that most people just don't know how to search well; and hence middlemen can provide a valuable service.

DamonHD

8:15 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Hi


I sincerely hope that Google remembers that most people just don't know how to search well; and hence middlemen can provide a valuable service.

Yes, excellent and critical point.

I'm *not* doing arb, but I work with investment banks that do, and buy insurance from companies that are 'middlemen', and I sometimes buy from a convenience store rather than a supermarket and almost never direct from the farmer (etc).

The 'middle'/arb can be valuable if the users in practice can't (or are too idle to) look hard enough to find what they want or need.

If G can address this then middlemen have no place, and some money will no longer be drained from the market.

If G cannot address this then, much as I hate the MFA end of the arb spectrum, G may have done themselves and the users no good.

People can be quite lazy and ignorant, unfortunately, and the genuine arbitrageurs were probably bridging some otherwise-uncrossable gaps between user and their destination.

And removing arb from the market is unlikely (economically speaking) to make prices go down for advertisers or up for publishers or increase revenue/turnover, UNLESS G can somehow do a better job of bringing them together.

I'm sure that G realises this. G may have waited so long to act in the hope that the market would sort itself out acceptably and without continuing to hurt G's brand. G seems to have decided not.

Here's hoping that Google has it right.

Rgds

Damon

Januuski

8:16 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)



Glad to hear about some positive changes. The problem is that there is too many premium publishers with MFA websites. Are they getting banned too?

I would also like to see some AdWords accounts banned because other networks do allow MFA publishers. Any AdWords advertiser with ads pointing to a MFA page should be banned regardless of ad network.

Once all MFA are gone and Google will provide better tools to control what is displayed on my websites I may give AdSense another chance.

malachite

8:19 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member




If they just banned the sites, what's to stop the publisher putting up a whole load more?

Obviously with an email stating their stance on mfa sites

Right. And you don't think some of these publishers wouldn't be looking for the next way to game the system?

As someone already said, G don't have the resources or manpower to constantly keep tabs on all these guys just to make sure they're keeping their noses clean. It's easier just to cull them from the system.

buckworks

8:25 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator buckworks is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



In fact, publishers who have been getting a lot of MFA ads may see a decline in earnings because of falling ad demand in the short run.

The flip side of that is that with MFAs taken out of the picture there will be less ad inventory available. Real advertisers will be competing for exposure on fewer sites. It will be interesting to watch the extent to which it evens out.

Re middlemen ... they come in two types:

Find two people who want to do business and bring them together.

Find two people who want to do business ... and get in the way.

DamonHD

8:26 pm on May 19, 2007 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Hi,

I would seem likely that G has explicitly decided to stop trying to play whack-a-mole, and wipe out a whole class of troublesome players at once.

G is presumably going to be screening new AS applications as of 15th May *very* *very* carefully, to make end runs around this ban as hard as possible.

Rgds

Damon

[edited by: DamonHD at 8:27 pm (utc) on May 19, 2007]

This 513 message thread spans 52 pages: 513
 

Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month