Filtering good sites and companies

the sites that belong on your filter list

[JS_Harris]

Some adsense users don't use a filter list, some swear by it.

I've read everywhere that its good to get low quality sites onto your filter list. I've read a lot about smart pricing too.

Wouldn't it be better for your bottom line as an adsense advertiser to filter only the best sites from your pages? Removing those sites that "appear" to be well know sites in favor of regular joe blow, ho hum, middle of the pack ads makes sense if you think about it.

If four major, well known brand names are fighting for space on your site right next to four less known sites, the less known sites will pay more per click and often have catchier, less targeted text which entices a wider range of people to click.

The top brands and most well known sites get great quality scores when setting up their adwords campaigns, they get to pay the least per click, some as low as 5 cents a click. A lesser known site may not be allowed to compete for less than 30 cents per click. It makes you wonder how the sites getting 5 cent ratings end up with ads ahead of 30 cent minimum rated sites.

Has anyone actively filtered good sites from their pages to eliminate the Google quality discount, leaving less known ads intact? If so, how'd it go?

[edited by: JS_Harris at 5:09 am (utc) on Oct. 21, 2007]

[jomaxx]

In this context, "low quality" usually means MFAs, which are certainly not bidding high in order to gain visibility.

Other kinds of advertisers may be banned because their ads are irrelevant or deceptive or somewhat adult in nature, but this normally isn't done in order to maximize EPC. It's done because the site owner doesn't want the ads appearing at all.

As for banning "high-quality" sites - you can try the experiment, I won't. IMO the reasoning is too rarefied and won't translate into the real world. I'd rather have more bidders competing. Also, just because they have lower minimum bids doesn't mean Google necessarily place high-quality ads preferentially. I'm not an AdWords expert, but I don't see why Google would prefer to accept IBM's 5-cent bid over some lower-rated site's 30-cent bid.

[JS_Harris]

I'm failing to see how the reasoning is rarified. It's simple. The most established companies tend to run top quality sites and benefit from the Google "landing page quality" subsidy that allows them to pay as little as 5 cents per click. Your share of that 5 cents is tiny even in comparison to lesser quality sites who must pay 30 cents minimum to be given equal consideration by Google.

Sites with the best landing page qualities are subsidized, pay less per click which results in an even smaller share for publishers. I don't think thats rare, its the norm.

[jomaxx]

You're assuming near-perfect knowledge of each advertiser's quality score and how much they are actively bidding.

You're assuming the quality score results in a discount or subsidy rather than simply determining the minimum bid, and I'm not sure that's correct.

You're assuming that the "lesser-known" sites will be advertising permanently and in all geographic regions and across all the pages of your website. If that doesn't prove to be true, then banning "name brand" advertisers from your entire site, in fact from ALL your sites, could be costly.

[farmboy]

Depending on the size of your site(s), this question becomes irrelevant.

I use the huge majority of my filter to get rid of the misleading/deceptive ads, so there is little room left for actual competitors, much less experimentation.

FarmBoy

[europeforvisitors]

The filter is called a "competitive ad filter." I use it to filter out a handful of direct competitors (such as affiliate programs that I belong to), but that's it. Life is too short to be wasted on second-guessing Google's ad bot or playing servant to a domain filter.