Forum Moderators: martinibuster
I believe that "something" actually triggered the 50% reduction, and it was probably indeed a glitch that this reduction was executed with merciless accuracy.
Yes, I absolutely ageee. My eCPM/CTR/channel experience, the subsequent gyrations and (the few) explantions and reactions from Google and virtually everything else connected with this suggest a sudden corruption of data and/or coding that was slowly corrected. Those responsible for this glitch understandably wanted to contain it and the nature of it, not only from us, but also from its moving up the Google responsibility chain and especially to the media.
The fact that this "glitch" probably caused a revenue spike no doubt caused some peculiar complications for those trying to contain the damage.
Those responsible for this glitch understandably wanted to contain it and the nature of it, not only from us, but also from its moving up the Google responsibility chain and especially to the media.
Glitches can and do happen, but I'm still curious to know why only some publishers were affected. (Maybe software changes are tried out on one or two servers before being propagated across the board? Nobody except Google knows, and Google obviously isn't going to describe what happens backstage.)
but I'm still curious to know why only some publishers were affected
Yep, and especially since you were not affected however someone else posting here in travel-related was very badly affected!
I think most of the posters affected here are long-time AdSensers which may, or may not, be relevant, however since you EFV, like myself, were an early adopter, it's strange that some other long time AdSensers saw no effect whatsoever.
Maybe software changes are tried out on one or two servers before being propagated across the board?
I've queried this before when I've seen unusal metrics however why is it always MY server. :-(
And I have report that so far today, Sunday, my metrics look so normal that I cannot believe the past 4 weeks have actually happened. One thing is for sure, advertisers haven't just climbed back into AdWords and increased their CPC gradually, I am seeing no change whatsoever in my advertisers...where I can see them I'd better add.
...7 sites in diferents topic including travel...
My own site's database is very tiny and very simple when compared to AdSense but I can see how one corrupt data table or one corrupt query if allowed to propagate can affect some accounts and not others and affect them in different and irrational ways.
We can be thankful that the entire system didn't crash. Finding a common thread among affected sites while standing outside the black box is probably asking too much. If it were an easily isolated problem we most likely would never have noticed it in the first place.
Looking for commonalities in a system that is working well may yield useful information, looking for them in a system gone haywire necessarily will cause confusion, we're back to the old gigo proverb with that.
Glitches can and do happen, but I'm still curious to know why only some publishers were affected.
Do you seriously ask that question? If ALL publishers saw minus 30-50% eCPM overnight, what do you think would happen? It would be obvious that Google is taking more and that it's not a glitch. (BTW, I'm not affected.)
Why do they take more? Either due to greed or to beat (not just meet) earnings estimates of the Wall Street guys (and they always do -- see the Earnings Surprise graph at: [nasdaq.com...] ).
The black box model allows them to "print" money, effectively.
It would be obvious that Google is taking more and that it's not a glitch.
We hear that every quarter, until the next quarterly earnings report comes out and leaves the rumormongers looking for excuses. Then the cycle of unsupported allegations starts over, prompting references to the Casey Stengel line about "deja vu all over again."
If you've got evidence, share it; if not, why leave yourself open to embarrassment?
That doesn't mean that every publisher gets an identical percentage, or that Google's compensation formula may not favor high performers, low performers, or certain types of content. Indeed, it would be surprising if Google didn't tweak its compensation formula from time to time to provide incentives or disincentives. After all, it's in Google's own interests to encourage sites that complement its own mission ("to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible"). That doesn't necessarily explain why some publishers here have had big declines while others haven't; the "glitch" scenario is just as likely.
It's a pity that I spent so much time getting to those >4k pvs a day just to find out that I'm making roughly the same amount as I did with 1 k pvs.
Sorry, but my "evidence" is different from your "evidence,"
Yep. That's the brilliance of their black box model, which they consistently abuse as a real monopoly -- nothing can be proven (fortunately, there is at least some circumstantial evidence). Your interpretation of the SEC filings is wrong (and also naively assumes they are telling the truth about their black box, even though there are laws protecting business secrets). Remember that they even refused to hand over search query data to the US government to help them fight terrorism and child pornographers(!). They really can keep secrets no matter who asks.
Oh, I'd love to run a business where whenever you need more money, you just enter a higher value and click 'Apply'...
Am I the only one returning to "normal" figures or is anyone else seeing the same?
I'm not about to hold my breath, but mine have returned. Actually, they've gotten better than before the glitch. My eCPM has doubled and CTR is up, especially during this past week.
...[Google's] own mission ("to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible").
I tend to be a Google believer and defender myself, but an unbending loyalty is naive. The severest consequense of this glitch is that it has caused people like zett and myself to make a critical long-term analysis of the pay-out regime. I don't blame them for keeping some publishers on a never ending treadmill of diminishing pay-outs, it makes good business sense.
And I don't interpret this as evidence of evil-doing, but some certainly will.
added in edit: My earnings are back to near normal but my Spanish language pages never recovered and are barely covering bw costs, I may drop them.
[edited by: OnlyToday at 11:00 pm (utc) on Nov. 18, 2007]
I tend to be a Google believer and defender myself, but an unbending loyalty is naive. The severest consequense of this glitch is that it has caused people like zett and myself to make a critical long-term analysis of the pay-out regime. I don't blame them for keeping some publishers on a never ending treadmill of diminishing pay-outs, it makes good business sense.
It makes good editorial sense as well, if those publishers are working against what Google regards as the interests of the Web. Of course, since nearly all of the participants in this thread are anonymous, there's no way for us to make an educated guess about whether the affected publishers have been targeted (or should be targeted) or whether they're merely the victims of a glitch.
...what Google regards as the interests of the Web.
"Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," said Lord Acton. When the "Don't be evil" motto was adopted by upstart Google in mid 2000 I believe that the Google team had arrived at a reasonable consensus as to the meaning of evil and were acting in good faith.
In the years that have passed Google has become the web itself and I am convinced that they see "the interests of the web" and the interests of Google as one in the same. I personally dislike what Google's monopoly is doing to the internet and think they have grown too full of themselves and have strayed from their own ideals many times over the years.
Innuendos and assuptions that those who have been harmed by Google must have done something wrong and have only themselves to blame have been around for many years and are actually quite evil in my opinion. My days of giving them the benefit of the doubt on the evil question are over, though I am hopeful that all will work out well in the end, innocent casualties notwithstanding.
edited: speeling error
[edited by: OnlyToday at 12:18 am (utc) on Nov. 19, 2007]
glitch
Funny how them so called "glitches" always work in their favour... hardly ever the other way around.
The black box model allows them to "print" money, effectively.
Spot on!......only fools (or/and Goog option holders) can't see this.
[edited by: Web_speed at 3:11 am (utc) on Nov. 19, 2007]
Funny how them so called "glitches" always work in their favour... hardly ever the other way around.
Are you suggesting that all the publishers who aren't experiencing declines deserve their good fortune, and that none of them are profiting from software errors or Google's bad judgment? :-)
Europe for visitors clicks....you are a true legend.
I don't always agree with what he's saying (I'm sure he'll sing a different tune once he's badly affected) but at least EFV has a very strong and well deserved reputation on this board for posting intelligent and informed comments, so don't mind me if I'll favor his views over new users with shaky conspiracy theories and an obvious bone to grind.
I for one was glad Google didn't just hand over their private, commercial data about user searches over an governmental administration that has proven to be corrupted and disingenuous.
Google offers their Adsense program with a transparent TOS, no whining will do as much good as actually trying out competitors. If they so happen to still be the best game in town even after the infamous glitch, take it back and stop with the nonsense.
so don't mind me if I'll favor his views over new users with shaky conspiracy theories
Huh?
This thread is not about a conspiracy, and it has not been created by new users. It is a serious discussion about eCPM trends and (potential) ways Google might calculate the revenue/payout. How can this be a "conspiracy theory" in the first place? It can just be a "conspiracy theory" IF Google was openly telling the public, "THIS is the truth", while in reality something else is going on.
Here, however, it is quite different. Google promises nothing, and tells us nothing. Certainly, some of their statements could be interpreted in certain ways (e.g. that there is a direct link between bid, click and payout). But if you read the TOS letter by letter, you will find that this is not so.
The conspiracy theory thus only attacks the perceived image of Google, which mostly forms in our heads.
Yes, that's the beauty of a black box. Everyone can interpret why certain things happen when you push this or that button. But as we are not even (officially) allowed to discuss ("disclose") real facts, e.g. absolute EPC, traffic, eCPM, any criticism can be easily crushed by chants of "market forces, market forces", "it did not happen to me", or "evidents, show us evidents!".
To me, this is the discussion of a theory (not a conspiracy theory). We look at the results of the black box and discuss what we see. I, for one, have looked at the figures with some scientific view, and I am quite confident that my analysis has some truth. Of course, this is indeed just scientific interest (as it does not help me to improve revenue), which is probably why others are not looking at their data in this way. To them, there is probably no point in saying "I know now, how Google determines the payout to publishers". This does not earn them money.
Google offers their Adsense program with a transparent TOS, no whining will do as much good as actually trying out competitors. If they so happen to still be the best game in town even after the infamous glitch, take it back and stop with the nonsense.
Yep. You are absolutely right.
If one thing became crystal clear from The Glitch, it is that the others (MSFT, YHOO) simply do not get their act together. It is beyond me, why -after all the years Adsense has been creating money for Google- these companies still have not created a real competitor? I just don't get it. What is WRONG with these companies? I mean, we are not talking about startup shops. We are talking about $319B (MSFT) and $35B (YHOO) market cap. And they can't get an ad program up and running that can actually compete with Google?
It's true that everyone probably should leave Adsense. That is the key learning here. My prediction: it will become quite ugly for Google once a suitable competitor will be available.
One of the obvious ways would be to simply increase the traffic. When eCPM shrinks, you can (in theory) compensate this by more traffic. Then you will be at least able to keep a certain income level (even if the effort to do so increases).
OK, now what kind of traffic levels would I need to keep the absolute earning of my best day ever? The answer is not surprising: I would need absurd traffic levels. To compensate for seasonal effects and eCPM drops, I'd need somewhere between twice and four times as much traffic! And this would just keep the absolute revenue of my best day ever. If I wanted to increase absolute revenue, then it would have to be even more.
Clearly, one can only keep up with such traffic demands by
- implementing computer generated sites (aka MFAs)
- implementing successful user generated sites
- advertising in some way or other (preferrably Adwords)
The classical static content site with evergreen content plus some new additions every month probably does not work any longer.
The slow long-term eCPM decrease (on my sites, mind you) tells me that my business model (static unique content) is not attractive to Google. To keep up with their aggressive growth (required by the stock market), they NEED sites that increase their size faster than I do. Go figure.
intelligent and informed comments...
I can’t see anything intelligent (or informative) in repeat statements like
"It hasn’t happened to me so it can't be true…"
Maybe it is just me...sorry!
[edited by: Web_speed at 6:57 am (utc) on Nov. 19, 2007]
At first I thought this was smart pricing kicking in because of the channel data loss, but it should have ironed out by now.
Today is either not updating or it's gone back to 4 weeks ago, both EPC and eCPM slashed in two once more!
The classical static content site with evergreen content plus some new additions every month probably does not work any longer.The slow long-term eCPM decrease (on my sites, mind you) tells me that my business model (static unique content) is not attractive to Google. To keep up with their aggressive growth (required by the stock market), they NEED sites that increase their size faster than I do. Go figure.
You're basing several broad assumptions on a very limited data set (your own experience and a dozen or two complaints on this forum). There could be any number of reasons why your eCPM might be decreasing, ranging from changing market forces (e.g., overall supply and demand, or the state of the economy in your sector) to the gradual deployment of new advertiser tools (unlimited domain filters, placement reports, CPM and CPC site targeting). Google may or may not be playing a direct role in your eCPM's decline; there's simply no way to know.
As for the ad hominem attacks that have made this thread less useful than it would be otherwise, it's worth noting that misery doesn't just love company; it demands company, at least in forums like this one. Unfortunately for those who prefer slander and conspiracy theories to dispassionate analysis, saying "Google is lining its pockets at my expense" or "Member X is waving pom-poms" won't make the poor any richer. When I lost 70-90% of my Google referrals in 2005, I didn't waste time complaining about a Google "monopoly" or wailing that Google didn't like me; I found out what the problem was and fixed it. Looking for solutions close to home won't solve every problem, but it's a good first step.
After such a promising Saturday and through until midnight UK time Sunday, the thing's fallen apart again at the seams.
Today is either not updating or it's gone back to 4 weeks ago, both EPC and eCPM slashed in two once more!
That mirrors exactly what I see, I'm in the UK too. My traffic is the same as it has been for years, yet my EPC and eCPM is a fraction of usual (after being stable for a long time).
while I really appreciate your insights on the majority of discussions at WW, I am curious as to whether you actually read any of my posts?
overall supply and demand, or the state of the economy
So, you really think that a gradual decline of eCPM over a period of 400+ days within a strict corridor of -1/+4% can be the result of supply and demand? Wow. That's quite a stretch. During this period we had a holiday season, several bank holidays, seasonal effects, filters filled, emptied, re-filled, emptied again, and re-filled again. We had server outages. Yet the eCPM deviated just slightly from a perfect straight declining line. Over 400 days.
there's simply no way to know
Rrrright. And that's why we are discussing this topic here.
conspiracy theories
As there is no conspiracy (Google never promised anything to anyone), so there can't be any conspiracy theory. If we thought that we know how things work, then this is our fault. Thus, I really prefer to stick discussing theories (not conspiracy theories).
I agree that personal attacks are not useful, and it would be a shame if such attacks would lead to the closure of this thread. It's way too much useful information here already, so I really encourage everyone to strictly stay on topic.
Glitches can and do happen...Maybe software changes are tried out on one or two servers before being propagated across the board?
I think that's a fair statement to make. One has only to look into some of the threads on the Google search forum to see examples of glitches affecting webmasters in such a way. Google maintains many datacentres for search, so why wouldn't the same apply for Awords or Adsense?
So, you really think that a gradual decline of eCPM over a period of 400+ days within a strict corridor of -1/+4% can be the result of supply and demand? Wow. That's quite a stretch. ... the eCPM deviated just slightly from a perfect straight declining line. Over 400 days.
Yes, for you. But not for everybody. So if it's a "trend" or a "pattern," it's a trend or pattern only for your account and other accounts that share those same characteristics.
Earlier, you suggested that maybe Google doesn't like your business model. And maybe it doesn't, depending on what your business model is. Without knowing more about your site, it's impossible to make an educated guess.
It is worth noting, yet again, that a lot of things can affect AdSense performance and overall revenues. I'd love to give some specific examples about what's happening in my sector (and on my site, for that matter), but the moderators frown on that, so I won't. Suffice it to say that:
1) Changes in content, ad targeting, and the prosperity of advertisers (and the viability of their business models) can have a big impact on publishers' revenues.
2) AdSense is just one revenue source, and changes that may look negative at first (such as a decline in a certain type of ad) can lead to signicant growth in revenues from display ads and affiliate commissions. Think beyond AdSense, and you'll have a better chance of prospering in a publishing industry where direct-response ads are merely one specialized tool in the toobox.
