Comparing Mobile to Desktop

[csdude55]

I'm rebuilding my site to be mobile friendly, because (I'm guessing) that my search engine results are being punished. But it scares me to death, because right now my mobile ads are worth about 1/3 of my desktop ads.

Right now I have 2 versions of my site: when width > 800 they see a right column with two 300x250 banners, and when it's <= 800 they have a 728x90 at the top and bottom. So mobile users have to zoom in a little on every page.

I don't think we can post actual monetary numbers, but I'll give percentages for April 2018:

Comparing Mobile to Desktop
* Pageviews: 124.18% (I had 24% more mobile than desktop)
* Clicks: 86.7%
* RPM: 34.7%
* Impression RPM: 45.0%
* Earnings: 43.0% (mobile earnings are 43% of desktop earnings)

(Note, I'm getting these percentages by looking at Reports / Device Comparison, then manually dividing Mobile by Desktop)

I don't get new users that are mobile above what I would have had with desktop; I have a pretty specific audience, so my mobile users are in lieu of the same user being on desktop. So in this case, if those mobile users had been desktop like they used to be, I would have made about 50% more money!

Not counting the fact that mobile users look at less pages per session, and make fewer posts, so it's an exponential loss.

That scares me, because making the site mobile friendly and encouraging more people to go mobile might increase my number of users, but make me earn even less.

So I'm hoping to hear some comparison points from people that made their site mobile friendly... comparing your stats before and after you went mobile friendly, how did it impact your percentages and overall earnings?

[keyplyr]

All your perceptions about mobile users and mobile ads are irrelevant since you do not have a mobile responsive site.

Give a great experience to the mobile user and everything will change. More mobile users will start to visit. They will load more pages. Your mobile ads will return more income. I've seen this happen again and again.

The Google index is now ranked on Mobile sites. Going responsive is a lot of work but it is absolutely necessary. Mobile is where you need to be.

The Decline of the Desktop Computer [webmasterworld.com]

Mobile Surpasses Desktop in Search [gs.statcounter.com]

[EUmember]

I am running full responsive sites and non responsive sites. On my websites, the difference is 1:3 to 1:4, meaning that a desktop user will yield 3 or 4 times more revenues than a mobile user (tablets and "other" are equal to desktop, though their visit numbers are significantly less). For example, when I have 100 desktop users and 200 mobile users, the revenue for the desktop users is still 1.5 to 2 times higher than that for the mobile users.
Please note, though, that on the responsive sites, the number of adverts for mobile is 25%-33% less than for desktops (I skip for big skyscrapers and banners).

The above said is, btw, true for BOTH cases, responsive sites and made-for-desktop (non-responsive) sites, I can not notice any difference (not even in the number of visits).


However, this is not set in stone or for every site, it depends mainly of the targetted user base - my sites have mainly articles, research (not academic) an such and the topics are not related in any way to mobile phones, telephony, apps, mobile games and such.

Here is another observation: The difference between http and https pages is 1:2 to 1:1 - meaning https pages yield revenues of 50% (half revenue) to 100% (same revenue) of http pages, but never more than http pages. This was observed in month long before-after views and in comparision to similar sites of the portfolio. Also, the ranking of http and https is the same - no difference that I could notice.

[keyplyr]

Mobile traffic is usually >60% of the sites I manage, but it varies. Mobile Ad revenue is always a bit higher. I think this is partially due to accidental clicks with the user's thumb while scrolling down the page.

Different niches vary of course. So does the quality of the site. Some mobile sites are awful looking so accordingly they bring in less revenue.

One thing for certain, as the links above show, there is more mobile traffic than desktop now. If you are getting less action on your mobile version, it likely can be improved with some work.

[csdude55]

@EUmember, your reply is what scares me! I'm going through a HUGE amount of work to rebuild everything, and the reward for all my work might be that I end up cutting my revenue by 25-50% :'-(

My sites are mostly local message boards and classifieds, so I rely on user interaction. I have a near 100% penetration with my biggest site, so I'm not going to get more users; all I can do is focus on encouraging more pages per session and more interaction.

But so far, mobile users view 4-5 pages per session, where desktop is 10-12. I'm guessing that the mobile users come, find what they want, and leave... where desktop users surf around a little. So the problem compounds: the mobile ads are worth less than half as much per impression, I can show a third of the number of ads per page, and since the user isn't surfing they don't click on ads.

I was hoping a bunch of people would reply and say that, after they made their site responsive, the mobile RPM's skyrocketed... :-(

[Rasputin]

EUMember, I have converted quite a few sites to https and apart from a few days lower income for the pages to be re-evaluated have seen no change in income. It also just seems unlikely that change to https would effect income, so many people have done it and any problem would have come to light by now. I think your problem might be something else...

[tangor]

Mobile users and desktop users are not equivalent. One is on the go and generally "between things:", the other is sedentary, either taking a break, or has retired for the day (thus having more time).

That said, mobile does not pay equal.

Responsive improves both mobile and desktop, so do the work, it needs be done.

The number of ads, and the inventory (quality v not-quality) will continue to increase over time. What worked last year may not work this year.

Fine tune everything, all the time. Focus on the user/content as that is necessary first for anything else to follow.

Responsive can be as easy or as difficult as you wish. Most times it is a lot easier if expectations are reasonable. Handrolled sites tend to transit fairly quick to responsive, though a good cms well-supported can offer quick and painless options.

https is the future. Get there as soon as possible.

Continue to watch the numbers, but don't fall into the trap that going responsive was the cause for lower numbers. Like as not it is something else in the market that has a larger impact. The only way one could have tested that was to have gone responsive two or more years ago. :) (hindsight is 20/20)

[dartttt]

Its not just about ad revenue. A decently optimised responsive website for mobile will boost user retention and loyalty. Don't let a single user move away from your website. Give them options and that includes a clean and easily accessible mobile website even if it generates less revenue than desktop.

I am sure you must have heard it before but the golden rule now is to "start small and then go big". In short, design a website for mobile devices first, that slowly move for bigger viewports to optimise website for desktop. iPhone launch a decade back changed everything.

It may not be easy to implement but you can move at your own pace. Of course, only you can judge the need depending upon the content and niche you are serving, but if possible don't give up on mobile site.

[csdude55]

My fear is different. Making the site more mobile friendly might encourage current desktop users to use their mobile device more... so where I would have had desktop traffic, it now becomes mobile traffic.

If I'm going to continue having lower RPM and pages per session, then mobile will be killing my golden goose.

What really sucks is that Google punishes me for not being mobile friendly, so I have no choice in the matter. Either get with the times, make less money, and risk going out of business... or don't, lose traffic, and risk going out of business.

[dartttt]

No matter how much you try, you cannot discourage people from accessing your website on the go.

Your traffic can decline if you continue to serve desktop layout to mobile users. No-one likes to repeatedly zoom-in and zoom-out on small screen devices. People will eventually get annoyed and leave your site for good. Even if you are serving better content than your competitors. The only exception would be having some ultra exclusive content on your site and having a monopoly that forces your users to use desktop site on mobile. Even than it is bad for user experience.

Regarding RPM changes on mobile devices, you earnings can increase or decrease depending on your niche or can have same results as desktop.

Webmasters have to have follow current trends. We don't have luxury to choose our customers.The Web is huge and almost every niche have have multiple content providers.

We need to survive, retain and increase traffic first and can worry about RPM later. Nothing on the web is perpetual. Every single day, we risk loosing our business altogether.

If tomorrow a large number people start using 1.5 inch smartwatch to browse the web, we will have no choice left but to optimise our website for that or risk loosing traffic.

I always believe that traffic is first, RPM is second. Because in long term, quality well sustained traffic will automatically increase earnings.

This is what I think about current mobile trend but eventually you are better judge than me in deciding what is right about your business.

[csdude55]

I always believe that traffic is first, RPM is second. Because in long term, quality well sustained traffic will automatically increase earnings.

I used to say the same thing, but then the last year or so has seen a HUGE drop in revenue (with an increase in traffic), to the point that I've had to lay off employees. Currently, I have a staff of 3, where 5 would be considered a skeleton crew.

If I lose much more revenue then I'll have to lose another employee, and at that point our quality will suffer so much that I don't know if the business will be able to survive.

So after 15 years, my mentality has changed. Now, it's pay-the-bill first... because if I can't pay the bills then I can't provide content :-/ This isn't just a hobby anymore, it needs to support 5 families (including mine), and that means that I need to worry about the money.

I REALLY need to hire someone to do AdX management for me full time, and I could really stand to hire an app developer that knew how to work the ads, too. But that takes money to do, so... round and round we go! LOL

[dartttt]

Didn't knew about these problems. Hopefully you will be able to get around these. Good luck.

[NickMNS]

I recently updated my site from being simply responsive to being optimized for mobile (mobile first approach as described by darttt). In my mind responsive is not sufficient, that is if the design consists of simply taking a desktop pages and compressing it into a single very long column. Yes the content is readable but one generally spends much of the time scrolling, one reads a bit then gets bored, scrolls some more. One never really notices any ads because of all the scrolling. Then after scrolling to nowhere, one bounces.

To make my site mobile first I spent time to find ways to display the content in an intuitive fashion, using plenty of sliders/carousels and AJAX. The ads are placed near the content and users are seeing the ads. My average time on page has increased between 40% and 50%, AVV nearly doubled for mobile. The outcome is that my overall traffic dropped by about half but not my revenue. Revenue is down but not by half (about 1/3) and since making the change the bulk of my revenue comes from mobile users. The mobile vs desktop mix hasn't changed it is about 65% mobile.

I'm still not sure why the drop in traffic. I rolled out my website update during the March algo-update so the drop may have been due to that or it could be something more technical. I have covered my bases technically and everything looks okay, but I'm tweaking things here and there to be sure. The point being that using AJAX and other less conventional design patterns has real benefits in terms of usability specially for mobile users but implementation can be a challenge.

I think the most critical metric to watch in terms of mobile, specifically AdSense on mobile is AVV. Before my changes my mobile AVV was around 30% now it is at or above 60%. I think that this has really made the biggest impact.

[keyplyr]

As NickMNS mentioned, simply sticking viewport tags on a desktop site to get it to pass the mobile friendly checker is *not* enough.

The world is now Mobile. If you're building a new site, build it for mobile and extend the display for larger screens if you feel there will be much interest.

The first sites made for mobile a few years ago will not do well in today's competitive climate unless they have the mobile user's interest in mind.

Another thing to consider that differs from the desktop years is where the traffic is now coming from. Other mobile platforms can send significant traffic so make that a smooth transition and design accordingly. Consider the look/feel of some of the Social Media mobile apps and give the user a smooth transition, making it easy for them to Share your pages with where they came from.

[EUmember]

>>>
@EUmember, your reply is what scares me! I'm going through a HUGE amount of work to rebuild everything, and the reward for all my work might be that I end up cutting my revenue by 25-50% :'-(
<<<

Well, what I wrote is true for me - but only you can find out how and what works for you. We are not in the same boat, I write content and offer websites for the sake of it, for about 25 years, most of that time without any revenues. I am not depending on a revenue as high as possible, it is a plus for me, from whom not, but not required.

About two years ago, I took the decision to convert my websites (one large offsite database generated website, but also a forum and a couple of experience and information websites, some on a journalistic level) to responsive mode and I took various different approaches with the goal to find the "best" way - and I am still in search of that. In the course of these changes, I took extensive researches and compared similar content websites to one another, I also switched sites to https and some back, I kept some on desktop design and some on "mobile first". Some of my websites have a lot of competition, some have basically none or only very few (leading expert on topic).
Your situation WILL be different, your mileage WILL vary, so my observations may be the same for you, a bit different, or even exactly the opposite and I do not think that one publisher will have the same experience as an other.

In this regard, yes, you will need sooner or later to submit to the changing technology.

You will have to switch to https, even if it makes no sense for a site, because the sites that have https will put "maximum security" into the brains of web users. Whether that is just a hope or a blatant lie does not matter, people believe it, and THAT is what matters.

You will have to switch to responsive design, because more an more people like to have information at their fingertips instead at their (keyboard) fingers. However if you have content that will be consumed mostly in quiet, or SHALL be consumed in that way, you might opt to keep a desktop site. Same when you mainly have "older" users, because people who are used to read books will read a webpage rather by looking a big screen property that having to wipe after each sentence and loose context. Also, when the old eyes want to read big letters, people prefer having more than just one sentence visible on their screen. On the opposite, when you have young readers who are used to attention spans of only a few words at a time, or to react only when colors, sounds and big and strange lettering is being used and who have no problems staring to "mouse theatre screens" for hours, you will want to drop the organized and well sorted desktop for a presentation that simplifies and might also have to be changed every few months to keep up the attention. Actually, then you probably want to switch not only to "mobile first", but to "mobile only", because only then you can really "optimize" things in that regard (think "apps" as well).

Times are changing, and they are changing faster and faster because people need more and new sensations to keep them interested - and this development probably will continue for a while more until once the tide swings back again. It is up to each publisher either to ride it out or to try and cope with it by applying constant changes.

Only YOU will know, what your audience (probably) likes, and only you ill know whether your content can be served best in this or that -or both- manners. And this is also true, because it is only YOU who will be slain or rewarded by your decision. And, by my own experience there are times when everything you do turns out wrong, and other times, when things turn out pretty well, whatever you do or not do. Everything always involves a good portion of something called "luck".

Yes, I know, these words will make it not easier to decide, especially not when there is a whole bunch of people. employees too, being impacted by the decision. Me, personally, I see the whole development very critical and even sort of culminating fast and I probably would tend to think conservative until and unless I can go ahead with a totally new and sound concept - but then again, that is me.

I wish you, honestly and from my heart, success and luck in whatever you decide to go ahead with!

[keyplyr]

I think that just because you turn your site into a Mobile version or Mobile responsive (which Google recommends) and stick responsive ads on the pages, it is unreasonable to expect the same ad income you were getting on Desktop *until* the site is optimized for the Mobile user, especially taking into account where your traffic comes from and what type of audience your site targets.

A site designed for Desktop users will not do as well for Mobile users. Mobile users have a very different set of dynamics. The move around the site differently, the expect different things, they have less patience, etc.

[csdude55]

That's why it's taking me so long, I'm literally rebuilding everything from the ground up, and trying to focus on ad locations for each type of device. But I only get 2-3 hours of coding time each night, so I've been working 7 days a week all year, and still expect to be working on it for at LEAST another 3 months.

I'm VERY concerned, though, that all this work will lead to a further drop in revenue.

I honestly don't know the solution. It appears that mobile users don't click ads and buy online the way that desktop users do, so naturally the mobile ads are worth less. But you guys are right, more and more people are using mobile. So what does that mean, long term? Ecommerce is dying in general?

It seems like the general consensus here is that mobile is worth about 66% of desktop. That's better than what I'm getting now (mobile is worth 43% of desktop), unless more of my regular users switch to mobile instead of desktop.

[keyplyr]

It appears that mobile users don't click ads and buy online the way that desktop users do

That depends on your audience & your website... and things are changing very fast.

And don't forget, there is a lot of competition (SM & Apps) for mobile. You have to go out and bring in the traffic.

[tangor]

As ad revenue shrinks (and it is all the time), the only option is to scale up engagement or traffic, preferably both. It also helps to operate in a niche you can dominate by being either unique or better than the rest. In any scenario, it will be content/branding that entices the visitor. Once on site content and ease of use will keep them there.

Do have to ask, @cssdude55, do you have multiple page layouts (desktop) that is creating the delay in transitioning? Might be time to consider different layouts. Once the decision is make to code small screen (responsive) the only other consider should be how to "degrade" THAT experience to a larger viewport.

[csdude55]

As ad revenue shrinks (and it is all the time), the only option is to scale up engagement or traffic, preferably both. It also helps to operate in a niche you can dominate by being either unique or better than the rest. In any scenario, it will be content/branding that entices the visitor. Once on site content and ease of use will keep them there.

True. In my field I have a near 100% penetration, but the concern with mobile is that engagement is a LOT less. For example, the message boards are active, often with long and detailed discussions. But the average reply from a desktop user is 3 paragraphs, while a mobile user is 2 lines.

They also look at fewer pages per session, but I've mentioned that before; mobile users tend to look, find what they want, and leave, where desktop users hang around for awhile.

I can't really get more users, and I really don't know how to get mobile users to post more (that's out of my control... mobile keyboards just aren't that usable). So I can't help but worry that the increase in mobile usage is directly proportionate to a decrease in people posting ideas and thoughts online.

Do have to ask, @cssdude55, do you have multiple page layouts (desktop) that is creating the delay in transitioning? Might be time to consider different layouts. Once the decision is make to code small screen (responsive) the only other consider should be how to "degrade" THAT experience to a larger viewport.

My site is all hand-rolled, and the last major rebuild was 2013. I have a layout that looks like:

*******************************************************
LOGO       widget             widget
*******************************************************
Navigation
*******************************************************
                      |
Column A, 625px wide   | Column B, 
                      | 320px wide
                      |
*******************************************************
Footer
*******************************************************

Column B shows up on screen width >= 975px, and mainly contains banner ads and promos for other features of the site. On lower screen widths, it disappears and Column A centers on the screen.

When I built it, mobile traffic was non-existent. Resolutions were getting higher and higher, so low-res 800x600 screens were a minor afterthought, representing maybe 5% of my traffic... I was more concerned about people with super-high resolutions, which was where the trend was headed.

I also kept CSS usage to a minimum to allow for old browsers, and relied mainly on tables for formatting.

So it's time for a rebuild, anyway, and that's why I'm going over everything with a fine toothed comb to add new features, streamline it with a better focus on CSS (and jQuery, since I have to use it for some other features) and eliminating tables for formatting, and now with a focus on mobile.

I have around 30 different features, and each feature has a few different layouts of pages; eg, a classifieds section with a list of categories, then the list of items per category, a "view" page, a "post" page, customer reviews, and where relevant, maps. I literally JUST finished rebuilding that one section, and it took 5 months! After that, there are news article layouts, message boards, event calendars, weather, personals, business services... the list goes on and on.

[tryingtogrowsite]

I find mobile provides me with both a higher CTR and RPM.

[tryingtogrowsite]

Nick, I think responsive is adequate enough. If someone wants to read content on a mobile then he/she would have to scroll. There is no other way. I have seen page views go down somewhat as mobile views have increased, but not hugely. I also think there are some excellent responsive themes out there that you can configure to make the content very digestible on mobile, which is ideal for those of us who are not programmers (only know some basic HTML in my case). I used to hate reading content on mobile a few years back but now probably prefer it over the desktop. I also think advertisers are now aware they would need to advertise on that platform if they want people to see what they offer, thus mobile ad spend is increasing all the time.

[explorador]

Going mobile friendly is a must, you will have to do it eventually without a question. Responsive is not the same as mobile friendly (MF to be short here), MF means being adaptive to the screen, using an ideal navigation for small devices or alike, but also not exactly serving the same form of content, as in size and speed. You can visit a site on desktop that is about 2MB in excess, but you can't afford this on mobile. Being honest, the smallest and fastest you can serve is good for both (mobile and desktop) so 2MB while it can be done and people can stand it, doesn't mean is the ideal even on desktop. Not to mention not all mobile browsers are made equal and some will hurt your site if it's just the same but scaled. Just my two cents.

CSdude55: So I'm hoping to hear some comparison points from people that made their site mobile friendly... comparing your stats before and after you went mobile friendly, how did it impact your percentages and overall earnings?

I did the jump quite a while ago, it was more work than I wanted but it's worth it. I ended up with two diff approaches for diff sites (diff CMS that I wrote), one is responsive and mobile friendly, the other is extremely mobile friendly, it serves diff pictures, well: same pictures, but different files. The result is an amazing fast website, but it's too much work to apply the same on all my websites.

Comparing stats? can't offer you straight numbers, but the traffic has been growing on mobile (there are diff sets of devices) so the change is still going. In terms of visits (stats) it happens whether or not you have an optimized website. People get in, hate it then leave, or people get in and stay. It's IMHO not that easy to see a huge difference, why? because in desktop people tend to browse more content, in mobile most people get to X page directly from a search result page. It's better explained in other threads.

In terms of revenue... is too difficult, I guess you can only test and see on Adsense Reports. In my case mobile hasn't been a direct translation of visitors to earnings. Many people depending on your niche prefer to do some things on desktop, some only search for info, answers. Not to mention a lot of mobile browsers will cut the Advertising experience, I myself use Opera Mini a lot so I don't see any ads, I'm for quick answers when I'm on my phone not a full browsing experience.

Anyway, not the prettiest answer but it's valid: going mobile friendly is unavoidable, a must regardless of direct or indirect ROI via adsense. Keep in mind, it's about the user experience first.

[keyplyr]

The reason Google recommends using Mobile-responsive instead of a seperate mobile friendly site is the Mobile-first index.

If you have just one site that responds to screen-size (Mobile-responsive) then the Mobile-first index is working well for you.

If you have a large desktop site but have created a smaller mobile friendly version with less content, you will likely lose ranking because Googlebot is only parsing the mobile version for ranking, even for desktop users.

There's just the one index and it's now Mobile-first.

[tangor]

Reminds me of starting out on 320x200 screens, Assembly, fleshing out to Basic then C then back to Assembly to keep the bloat down.

Back to where we started (keep it simple, sir)

Only difference is scale ... and the constant threat of central computing rather than diversified.

The web is going through all these changes and the USER is not "tech", they are consumers. As such they have no standards, only devices (tickets to the entertainment) and those have gone backwards in resolution.

Meanwhile, we're in the third gen of net users and expectations. Sadly, they are less educated, less particular, and have attention spans of gnats.

Meanwhile, SCALE makes up for the losses as long as one is willing to work against uncertain results v effort.

OR, take the plunge and go into business for oneself and grow their own ad services, direct, etc.

All that said, one needs responsive/MF just to show on the devices. That is a given. HTTPS is future/NOW and sooner done the better. Navigating CLOUD is essential and working to retain copyright/IP (intellectual properties) is the battle never complete.

And having a financial ability/portfolio to keep flailing away is not just essential, it is mandatory. Beauty is, if having read all the above and the juices still flow, YOU ARE A WEBMASTER!

Code for viewport/device (responsive) and MF compliance should follow. After all, mobile is merely "smaller" than desktop. Dumb down the presentation only if it makes revenue CENTS, otherwise rely on Content Is King. If one plays to that metric most times the desired outcomes are better.

[surfgatinho]

Building responsive sites is one of my favourite bits about being a webmaster. Learn how to use a framework such as Zurb Foundation or Bootstrap and this will take a lot of the hassle out of it.

On some of my sites I run ads in different places on desktop / mobile. For example, I have a timetable on one site that I split in half, both to fit on a mobile screen and so I can put an ad in the middle of it. Not a horrible user experience and a positive impact on earnings...

[NickMNS]

@surfgatinho I have used Bootstrap a lot in the past as well, but I have found that it tends to make pages bloated.

As for splitting the timetable, try placing the timetable into a horizontal slider, then place the ad under the slider. When a user interacts with the table they will necessarily see at least part of the ad and that for the whole time that they are interacting with the table.

[Nutterum]

It is all about the business. If you are in the B2B category or sell luxury or sensitive items then mobile will yield dramatically less than desktop. That does not mean it is not profitable. It means you need to utilize it for what it is. Awareness, information and nurturing. If you believe your business is not a mobile one (selling metric tons of copper wire as a product for example) then rest assured, there will be plenty of people who can bookmark it and use it through their phones or tablets as a source of information and as a "product benchmark" and will ultimately convert via desktop or offline. I have seen it time and again how a good mobile experience moves the desktop sales needle.

[keyplyr]

I agree Bootstrap adds a lot of bloat. After my first site was switched to mobile-responsive using Bootstrap, I saw how much was added to every page and how that affected speed.

I then spent several weeks going through hundreds of pages all over again reducing bloat, inlining CSS and minifying the external files... got many pages up one notch at Page Speed.

Looking back though, I'm not sure the extra optimizing helped at all with ranking. My top several competitors all load very slow.

[surfgatinho]

@NickMNS - I only use Foundation personally. Seems reasonably lightweight and intuitive.

There is definitely an art to making a good responsive site. For example you might have a main section and right sidebar. This works fine on a desktop, but on a mobile the top sidebar content is pushed way down the page. One way I get around this is by splitting the top content into a wrapper div so the top sidebar stuff doesn't get pushed down as far.

Another thing to do with responsive sites is hide content e.g. hide-for-small . This won't load the page any quicker but it can make it far more usable on a mobile...