Forum Moderators: martinibuster
In an ongoing effort to provide more transparency to advertisers, Google announced today the availability of a new AdWords report, called a Placement Performance report, which enables advertisers to see the exact sites on the Google content network where their ads appear. Placement Performance reports also provide site-by-site performance metrics – including domain, URL, impression, click, conversion and cost data – as well as aggregated metrics for traffic generated from AdSense for domain sites. With these reports, advertisers have much more insight into their contextually targeted advertising spend and are able to leverage the information to more effectively optimize their campaigns and meet their objectives. Designed in response to advertisers’ requests, Placement Performance reports offer advertisers both increased transparency and greater control over their contextual advertising, which ultimately lead to more relevant ads for users.
NOW, just let me pick my crystal ball and let me get in the right mood... Ah, it's working... Oh yes, it's working... Hold on... There is something... It's getting clearer... I am seeing copy... It's on a web page... It's on a web page by... Noodle? Poodle? What the... No, no, now I see that it's Google...
In an ongoing effort to provide more transparency to its publishing partners, Google announced today the availability of a new Adsense report, called a Placement Performance report, which enables publishers to see the exact ads that have been shown on their sites on the Google content network. Placement Performance reports also provide page-by-page performance metrics – including ad copy, landing page URL, impression, click, conversion and earnings data for each ad and click – as well as aggregated metrics. With these reports, publishers have much more insight into the ads that show up on their sites and are able to leverage the information to more effectively optimize their sites and ad placements and meet their objectives. Together with the newly introduced feature "block by advertiser", which lets publishers block all ads from a specific advertiser, Placement Performance reports offer now publishers both increased transparency and greater control over their advertising, which ultimately lead to more relevant ads for users.
Uhhh - the image vanishes. I'm losing it... It's gone... (shrug)
Five Dollars, please.
I can't see Google giving publishers the kind of control that advertisers have, for two reasons:
1) Publishers aren't Google's paying customers;
2) Google and its customers wouldn't gain anything from letting publishers micromanage the serving of ads.
Without publishers, there are no advertisers for Google. In my opinion, publishers are as important, if not more, to Google. Remember, Google first recruited publishers and only then advertisers came. If Google mistreats publishers, they will soon be gone. Successful publishers like us are being contacted every day to switch from AdSense.
I think maybe you're putting the cart before the horse to some degree. After all, there's search. I run almost no advertising on content right now; I spend around $60k per month on search. I'd be perfectly willing to spend that much or more on content if it converted, but so far it doesn't.
And even if AdSense competitors arise, in most cases you don't have to switch away from AdSense - you can either run the ads along side, or if they are contextual and thus against TOS, you can either put them on different pages, or else write a script to alternate display.
I don't see much incentive on AdSense's part to change.
-Shorebreak
...which enables advertisers to see the exact sites...
"See the exact sites"
Does it allow the advertiser to do anything if he/she sees an unwanted site?
FarmBoy
Google and its customers wouldn't gain anything from letting publishers micromanage the serving of ads.
As for the part of the crystal ball vision about
"Placement Performance report, which enables publishers to see the exact ads that have been shown on their sites on the Google content network", I agree that Google doesn't have much to gain. As a matter of fact, I think that information would be used to exploit AdSense by some publishers.
On the other vision in that crystal ball, "the newly introduced feature "block by advertiser", which lets publishers block all ads from a specific advertiser", I think that feature would be of benefit to both publishers and Google.
FarmBoy
Remember, Google first recruited publishers and only then advertisers came
AdWords was introduced long before publishers could use AdSense to run ads on their sites.
Remember, Google first recruited publishers and only then advertisers came.
Hehe... not quite.
AdWords had the advertisers first. When they opened up the AdSense program Google had already established itself as a leading PPC company. It was the publishers who came rushing in after the fact for a piece of the advertiser pie.
If netmeg has sufficient controls, she might run a small test campaign on content, she might find some of my sites and find them worthy of her ad dollars. If this increases confidence in the content network, those of us with real content on our sites will be much better off.
Does it allow the advertiser to do anything if he/she sees an unwanted site?
Yes, we can specifically exclude them from our campaigns.
BTW, I don't think this option is totally rolled out yet - I only show it in a couple of my client accounts, and most others are reporting they can't see it yet.
If netmeg has sufficient controls, she might run a small test campaign on content, she might find some of my sites and find them worthy of her ad dollars. If this increases confidence in the content network, those of us with real content on our sites will be much better off.
She will (actually she periodically does anyway) yea - if the network performs, we all win. (I'm an advertiser for clients, but a publisher for myself, after all)
...she might find some of my sites and find them worthy of her ad dollars... those of us with real content on our sites will be much better off.
Do you think content quality trumps the conversion statistics to an advertiser?
What the advertiser will consider:
Placement Performance reports also provide site-by-site performance metrics – including domain, URL, impression, click, conversion and cost data...
The motivation of advertisers is sales. The conversion data will likely trump all other considerations.
Does your quality content convert? We will soon find out...
The challenges, of course, include engineering limitations, unexpected effects on earnings, CTR and conversion rates, legal issues, and, as farmboy said, the publishers looking for new ways to exploit the system.
Turns out publishers and advertisers don't always want what's best for them (surprise!), but we do everything we can to balance both. :)
-ASA
Do you think content quality trumps the conversion statistics to an advertiser?
I think there are some advertisers, maybe a lot of advertisers, who care about the content beside which their advertisements appear.
FarmBoy
I think there are some advertisers, maybe a lot of advertisers, who care about the content beside which their advertisements appear.
That's probably very true. And if advertisers get more control over the sites their ads appear on, all well and good. It always disappoints me when I see rubbish .info MFA/linkfarm sites displaying ads from quality companies.
If those companies could stop their ads appearing on these MFA types of site, then maybe rubbish publisher sites would end up advertising rubbish sites and the whole lot would eventually disappear. (Wishful thinking on my part, probably :( )
From a publisher's perspective though, it's all the usual suspects.
I'd like to be able to filter by TLD.
I'd like more control over showing an ad on one of my sites that it's appropriate for, but being able to filter the same ad from appearing on sites it doesn't match.
I'd like to be able to filter by advertiser, rather than playing whack-a-mole with one individual advertiser's 1,000+ domains.
don't always want what's best for them
By whose definition, and in what time frame?
As a publisher, my goal is to build sites that project quality, that are quality. I make some use of Adsense but because I have so little control over the ads it shows I've had to remove it from some of my most important pages as a matter of editorial integrity.
A few extra shekels in the short term are not worth the sacrifice of my larger goals in the long term.
I think there are some advertisers, maybe a lot of advertisers, who care about the content beside which their advertisements appear.
That's very true. But ultimately, what they pay me for is conversions.
Do you think content quality trumps the conversion statistics to an advertiser?
Yes, though I never said (or even implied) that. I do think that conversion rates are important, but I also KNOW that a lot of advertisers care about the quality of the site they are connected with.
On one site that I run, that does not accept ANY advertising, I could sell banners that wouldn't even be clickable if I wanted. Mom and Pop shops care about conversions. Big companies care more about reputation, knowing that the conversions will come eventually. Subaru isn't going to sell any of their cars online to my readers, but they know that my readers are within their demographic.
Even mom and pop shops care about their reputations enough that AdSense doesn't accept certain categories of publishers.
So yeah, I do think that advertisers will look at quality content sites and decide if they want to advertise on them, even more so than looking at the conversion data. Advertising is a numbers game, but most people buying ads are not numbers people. They make their decision on what they like, and they only use their numbers to comfort them that they are making a good choice.
If Google mistreats publishers, they will soon be gone.
Not giving some publishers what they want isn't the same as mistreating publishers. What's more, the publishers who leave because they feel mistreated are likely to be the publishers who are least profitable and valuable to Google. If a disgruntled publisher with an abysmal eCPM signs on with a competitor like YPN or MSN, that's a win--not a loss--for Google.
Mom and Pop shops care about conversions. Big companies care more about reputation, knowing that the conversions will come eventually. Subaru isn't going to sell any of their cars online to my readers, but they know that my readers are within their demographic.
BigDave brings up an important point: To continue growing, Google needs to reach beyond the traditional PPC market and tap into Madison Avenue ad budgets. And to achieve that goal, Google needs to ensure that big-budget media buyers have the control over ad placement that they expect--and get--from other media.
I have lots of highly specific niche traffic and if you can't covert it, then WAH!
FWIW, I want to be able to set a BASE RATE for my clicks, nothing under $0.10 in MY pocket per click minimum. If I lose some advertisers, so be it, but I suspect they'll bump up their rates to come play in my sandbox.
Heck, if some big advertisers are already willing to pay me $1/click directly for ad campaigns running on my site why shouldn't I be able to set a BASE RATE of 1/10th that for Google advertisers?
That still gives Google some wiggle room to smart price my traffic, just not below $0.10 and it'll probably drive the MFAs away and save me the trouble of blocking them.
[edited by: incrediBILL at 1:55 am (utc) on June 13, 2007]
1) Publishers aren't Google's paying customers;
No, apparently publishers are the hired help. :D
"P*ssboy! Oh, P*ssboy!" "It's good to be da king!"
[edited by: inactivist at 2:54 am (utc) on June 13, 2007]
No, publishers are the hired help.
Only if they're foolish enough to rely solely on Google for income.
No, publishers are the hired help.Only if they're foolish enough to rely solely on Google for income.
I'm working on that aspect, for sure. I am definitely investigating alternatives to AdSense - including affiliates, and selling my own ad space as others have mentioned in other threads.
I thought that Google would prefer that quality content publishers stay with them. Perhaps some of use are deluding ourselves about the quality of our content.
no, the egg came first.
yep... and after that, they invented baskets so we would have a place to put them eggs...
then we found out that if we put ALL them eggs into one basket (eg. Adsense) it would be dangerous, so we looked for many different baskets to put our eggs, and labelled those baskets affiliate programs, ppc, direct advertisers...etc.
Only if they're foolish enough to rely solely on Google for income.
ahh... the month of May taught me that if I rely on only one chicken (Google) to gimme eggs (traffic), then I'm screwed if the chicken decides to stop or gets fried. So I've now started looking for other ways to get them eggs -Yahoo! ducks, MSN geese, Live quails, Ask pigeons, etc.
I thought that Google would prefer that quality content publishers stay with them. Perhaps some of use are deluding ourselves about the quality of our content.
Many publishers fail to understand that the quality and motivation of the audience can be as important as the quality of the content. When Google introduced smart pricing, it used the example of a page with photo tips (less likely to convert) and a camera review (more likely to convert). In the first case, users are trying to figure out how to use their cameras; in the second case, they're researching possible purchases of cameras. The latter type of content and audience are likely to be far more valuable to Google--and to advertisers--than the former, and allowing the publisher of the photo-tips page fiddle endlessly with lists of advertisers won't change that business reality.
