Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.166.48.3

Forum Moderators: incrediBILL & martinibuster

Message Too Old, No Replies

Performance of 300 X 600 ad format

     
8:39 pm on Apr 25, 2013 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

5+ Year Member

joined:May 17, 2011
posts:170
votes: 0


I've recently replaced a 160X600 ad with the newer 300X600 ad (text/images), and so far the only image ads displayed are 160X600, centered horizontally. But the CPC is better than it was. I'm wondering if the pool of bidders is larger for 300X600 than for 160X600 -- hence the higher CPC.

Anyone here also use AdWords and/or experiment with this newer format long enough to have a good idea as to whether this is the case? If it is, and if you can afford the additional 140px of horizontal screen space on your site, it would seem to me that 300X600 is the better choice. Also, I'm kind of liking the 160X600 ad centered in the 300px space -- it adds white space to the left and right, which helps the ad to stand out and the page to breathe a bit -- at least on my site.
11:57 pm on Apr 25, 2013 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Mar 30, 2005
posts:12928
votes: 198


The 300 x 600 fit nicely in my sidebar on long pages, and I had some image ads that used the space too (never saw a 160 x 600 there though) and it earned. The problem was, when there was only one ad, it didn't collapse, which left a big gaping white space, and it's even worse on phones or tablets. So I took it off.
1:20 pm on Apr 26, 2013 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:July 7, 2003
posts:535
votes: 11


The problem was, when there was only one ad, it didn't collapse, which left a big gaping white space, and it's even worse on phones or tablets. So I took it off.


Ditto - looks good when there's inventory, but when there is not....
2:59 pm on Apr 26, 2013 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Sept 16, 2011
posts:492
votes: 17


I've tried it on 3 different sites at the same time. For whatever reason I got 3 very different results...Good, Bad, and Ugly. You might also see it display 2 300 x 250's stacked on top of each other in place of the 160/300 x 600 image. If it would collapse to a 300 x 250 when not filled I'd probably use it more. And when it's filled with 8 Text ads it looks terrible IMO.
4:21 am on Apr 28, 2013 (gmt 0)

New User

joined:Aug 30, 2012
posts: 11
votes: 0


"The perfect is the enemy of good"
2:58 am on May 1, 2013 (gmt 0)

New User

joined:Apr 22, 2012
posts:23
votes: 0


I just finished a one-week test of the 300x600 block. Over the week, it had about a 33% lower CPM than the 300x250 block I usually have in that spot (at the top of the right sidebar). The CPC was about the same, and the CTR was lower. Most of the ads I saw there were indeed 160x600 blocks with white space to the right and left, which I found found a little ugly but not horribly so. The one text ad I saw over the week was just one link with a lot of white space under it. I didn't like that too much.

Long story short, I have taken it down. It might be worth another try in six months.
7:25 pm on Aug 4, 2013 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:July 29, 2007
posts:1745
votes: 80


Try using lightly colored links on a darker unit background if your site has the typical white background. There won't be any whitespace below a single text unit when it happens. It's not as bad when there is actually a defined shape covering the area.