Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Dozens of sites, none of which have a shred of actual content, only sponsored links to advertising sites (I can't determine which ad system the sites use by looking at their source code). Someone's buying up cheap traffic to shuffle them along to other advertisers, is this not an MFA site that Google shouldn't allow?
I took another approach as most of the MFAs attacking my niche were scraping my site so I removed their ability to scrape my site (bot blocking) and fed some of them bogus pages full of words designed to invoke PSA's instead of showing actual ads.
I am curious about how you figure out which are scraper bots? Inquiring minds and all that...
I am curious about how you figure out which are scraper bots? Inquiring minds and all that...
That's a lengthy subject, required custom written software, in other words a long story.
plus he is exactly right, though how come only a few people ever voices it. It is the whole spam in the serps discussion all over again. Just outrank them, push them down, do it better.
>> If you're a competitive webmaster with an authority site and the MFA wins it's only because you LET them win.
exactly, last time I checked complaining about fairness never helped anyone win
...you're provided with a few internal page links, each page has five sponsored search results.
... only sponsored links to advertising sites (I can't determine which ad system the sites use by looking at their source code).
Usually I can put the ad block back after a week or two if I decide I want to, and it remains okay - for a while.
Google does not really like the MFA arbitragers at all:
1. It helps support their PPC competitors who are getting substantially more traffic from Adsense Traffic for free (well the arbitrager pays for it, but not the competing PPC provider who pays out the same commission wherever the traffic comes from - the more the better) rather than shutting them down as G would much prefer. The simplest and easiest way for G to shut out the competition would be to simply cut off their traffic through these type of sites.
2. Why allow the arbitrager (and his other PPC) to get the money G could be getting by sending the user happily on their way to the much higher paying END advertiser? If it was simply money G was interested in then it would have been, by far, smarter just to let them continue doing the adwords->adsense thing. At least G was making money on both sides that way.
No, I see no reason G SHOULD like MFA arbitragers. In fact they have proved this explicitly by shutting down ALL the adwords->adsense arbitragers last month. Why? BECAUSE THEY COULD. They could relatively easily detect them and because the contractS were both their own they could easily end them with no significant backlash.
So why haven't they cut off the adwords->non-adsense-PPCs yet? Simple, two words: "antitrust lawsuit"! Just search for "google antitrust" and start scanning the 2 million or so results. They already have enough to keep their lawyers busy for decades. Imagine what the other PPC companies would start screaming if it got out that G was cutting off their MFA "publishers" SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY POST THEIR ADS ("and nothing else" [in the fine print] :)!
It would be Netscape vs Microsoft all over again as the other PPC companies claimed Google was intentionally targetting them and trying to take away their business and create a monopoly by discriminating and cutting off their publishers' traffic from adwords. If they started this they would also have to cut off EVERYONE who also are affiliates, or who sell advertising direct, or... where does it stop? Of course, you also get into the situation of determining the gray area of judging between blatant MFA and what consititutes added value. So I think, until they find a way of legally dealing with this situation, they will be forced to allow it to continue.
they're parasitic, have no value for anyone except their owners
So how many people would a site have to have value to before you'd see it as legitimate?
they're parasitic, have no value for anyone except their ownersSo how many people would a site have to have value to before you'd see it as legitimate?
Well for a start, anyone except their owners
I understand there is a filter to block MFA from appearing on your site
There's a "competitive ad filter" that some publishers use to exclude MFAs. See your AdSense setup menu.
but how do you determine who is appearing on your site. Can you get a listing of what was placed on your site and how much you received from them?
No.
Can you get a listing of what was placed on your site and how much you received from them?
One way is to use the Google AdSense preview tool:
What is the Google AdSense preview tool?
[google.com...]
How do I install/uninstall the preview tool?
[google.com...]
Unfortunately it is a browesr plug-in that you need to install.
[edited by: tim222 at 7:19 pm (utc) on Aug. 10, 2007]
I Check every page using this free google tool. Check in the canada, UK and US areas.
I block all sites that are supported by ads. If they dont have an end product or service then I filter them. You only need the domain name ie widget.com
Not example.widget.com sub domain
Or widget.com/tonsofotherstuff/more/stuffetc
And ignore the www as well...
That should keep you busy for a while!
[edited by: Genuine1 at 7:20 pm (utc) on Aug. 10, 2007]
I Check every page using this free google tool. Check in the canada, UK and US areas.
Complete and utter waste of time if you spend more than 10 minutes a week.
I too block a few of the blatantly bad ones that I see when I'm on my site but the preview tool is next to useless for any site with a substantial ad inventory available as it only shows you a few ads at a time.
You have to expand how you think of AdWords/AdSense to a regional and global scale because the ads I see in California are different from the ads I see from Nevada or Florida, and the AdSense preview tool doesn't even offer those options.
OK, so they show you a snapshot of Canadian ads, big whoop.
The ads seen in British Columbia aren't the same ads seen in Ontario or Yukon.
If you consistently see a bad ad, kill it.
But wasting your time chasing ghosts, other than maybe a couple of seconds with a cursory glance looking for obvious junk, just doesn't pay as you can't see it all and your time is better spent working on your site.
a list of acceptable advertisers.
If that's what you want, contextual advertising is not for you...
And when I refill it within a day we get straight back to normal. The difference is 100 a day or 150 a day approx? (rounded obviously) How is that "a waste of time"? Not to mention the improved user experience...
[edited by: Genuine1 at 11:46 pm (utc) on Aug. 10, 2007]
So incrediBILL if you are right why does emptying the filter of mfas lose me lots of revenue?
Did I say to empty your filter?
I said "WORK ON YOUR SITE!" LOL!
As I'm working along I look at the ads displaying and check out those that look like garbage and block them, but I rarely ever go on a special mission just to seek out the crap because it's chasing ghosts. Most often the preview tool doesn't even show me the real junk I'm seeing on my site, it's a crappy tool, and crappy tools just waste time.
And I find the tool very effective if you use it right. At least it bumps up earnings by a third AND ensures that mfas dont ruin my (and all adsense) user experience. Both are good!
[edited by: Genuine1 at 8:35 am (utc) on Aug. 11, 2007]
