Forum Moderators: martinibuster
[money.cnn.com...]
"A study from NewGate compared the performance of Google search and contextual campaigns for two clients. Results showed that click-through rates were 14 times to 150 times higher on the search ads than the contextual ads. The cost per lead, or order, was two to eight times higher for contextual campaigns. "
Clicks or CPM are all the same, it all cost you money and if it cost you 8 times as much I am not sure you will make money.
I turn off my Adsense long time ago on Google and Overture. I can't effort to pay 8 times as much per order for advertsing.
"What they miss is the branding advantage of a low CTR"
I didn't think branding is still exist on the internet or maybe it's still 1999. I don't think the CTR is the problem low or high it's all the same. It's how much it cost you per order or lead. That's how I do it, but then maybe i am wrong.
if it cost you 8 times as much I am not sure you will make money.
If content ads are costing eight times as much as search ads, the advertiser's copywriter should be fired. The ad copy obviously isn't communicating a clear message.
1. powerstar >>"Clicks or CPM are all the same, it all cost you money"
Nope impressions are free in Adwords. Its clicks that cost you. As long as you maintain a low minimum CTR which is there to insure your ad is relevant to the keywords. Now for Adsense sites, the news is even better.... there is no minimum CTR, and CTR does not affect the status of your campaigns. In effect therefore impressions in Adsense sites are FREE...
2. powerstar >>"...I didn't think branding is still exist on the internet or maybe it's still 1999..."
powerstar - most ad research suggests that people on average dont "act" on an ad communication until it has been communicated and perceived several times, and usually in different ways. So you may have seen a coke ad several times before your curiosity was enough to try it. And though you may not click on the ad, your mind will be reinforced to again certain associations with coke such as "fun" and "refreshing" and "young". So next time you walk past the coke display in the supermarket feeling lethargic, old and boring, you may think Fun! Refreshing! Buy Coke!
If you don't think branding is significant for ad value both off and on line, and in 1999 or now, you obvious have a completely different understanding of the term than i do.
Or said in a another way, do you think an advertising communication has absolutely no value unless someone acts immediately as a result by clicking through, sending in a coupon, running down to the nearest shop and buying it? Do you not think that awareness, recall, and positive image of a product or service is important to eventual sales? Business Week's latest survey of the world's top brands shows that the top guy - "Coke" is worth billions not in plant, human resouces, inventory, etc but BRAND VALUE alone.
Remember the final consumer decision to buy is usually based on several ad impressions over a period of time, all of which have reinforced benefits or the brand, from different media, or different "pitches".
OK an IMPRESSION is not as good as a CLICK, but a CLICK is not as good as a PURCHASE. They all have their own role to play.
3. powerstar>>I turn off my Adsense long time ago on Google and Overture. I can't effort to pay 8 times as much per order for advertsing.<<
Yes i remember you have been quite vocal on this over the ast few months.
This "8 times as much per order" claim came from a n=2 "research" study with no info on research methodology, funded, run and published by those with a self interest in such results. How often do you make decisions based on such fudgy information?
Of course in practice this would be unlikely to occur since given the close relationship between the terms one would expect the "doo-dad" advertisers to be bidding on "widgets" anyway. Even if this is not the case, if you don't want to pay more than a certain amount per click - then just don't bid higher than that amount.
The other contributing factor would be poor conversion rate when they click on the ad. This can be minimised with good copyrighting. Note that "good" in this context may not mean the same as in other situations. In a CPM environment you want people to click to matter what. In CPC you only want the right kind of person to click the ad - someone in your target market. Your wording should encourage the right kind of person to click - and the wrong kind of person not to. Once they get onto your site, whatever you promised them to encourage them to walk in the door had better be visible straight away or they will leave - and there goes your $0.05.
As I mentioned in a previous thread (http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum89/441.htm), with my advertiser's hat on, adsense has cost me an average of a twentieth of a cent more per click and delivered customers who are more likely to spend and more likely to spend a larger amount.
Obviously this has not been everyone's experience. Possible conclusions:
* some industries may be more suited than others for adsense;
* methods that worked well on google search ads may need to be modified to take into account the different environment of adsense; or
* getting adsense to return value is equally difficult for everyone, and those of us who have managed it must be exceptionally intelligent, innovative, resourceful and handsome.
methods that worked well on google search ads may need to be modified to take into account the different environment of adsense...
That may be the critical factor. On a SERP, where users searching for a very specific term, they're likely to know what they're getting when they click on an AdWord...and with all the other links cluttering the page, an AdWord needs a strong "Click me!" message.
On an editorial page, in contrast, an AdWord (in this case, an AdSense ad) will be seen by a wider range of readers. Some readers will be actively shopping, but others may not be, and still others may not be qualified prospects. So it makes sense to write the ad so that only real prospects will click on it.
The difference between "Click me!" and "Click me if you're a qualified buyer!" can be shown with an example: an ad for a luxury cruise that costs $700 or more per day. If the ad is appearing on a SERP where the only readers are people who are searching on "Silversea," "Seabourn," or "Crystal," it's likely that the reader has some idea of the cruise's price range. But if the ad appears in a general cruise article in the WASHINGTON POST's travel section, the average reader may have no idea that a cruise on Silversea, Seabourn, or Crystal costs nearly as much as the monthly rent on a one-bedroom apartment back home. So the ad copy needs to make it clear that it's selling "deluxe" or "luxury" cruises instead of just having a message like "Discounts on Silversea."
As time goes by and content ads become more popular, we may see new opportunities for professional copywriters who know how to maximize the cost-effectiveness of such ads.
If I understand it right, if it takes 10 clicks on Adwords to get an order. The same ad will take 20 to 80 clicks to get an order.
chiyo, I agree with your definition of advertising and branding but realty is a bit different. Not everybody are selling Coke and probably 90% of the Adwords advertisers are like me, "care about the results" and make sure we spend our advertising money wisely. I can tell you, I monitor my campaigns to the penny. Price per lead that's what it's all about. If I get few clicks for the webmaster and his wife, testing and a few dishonest webmasters I am out. I can't effort 8 times as much per lead. I'll be out of business but then again I still have my branding.
Its not hard to predict that there is a huge variation between the quality of clicks between different types of websites. At one end of the scale you have sites like europeforvisitors', with high turnover of visitors - all of them clutching credit cards in their sweaty hands just looking for something to spend it on :). At the other end you have community type sites, with a fairly sedentary base of loyal users - the sort who will "click to support this site" (even if its not asked for).
No matter how good the second type of site is, I don't really want to pay to support it in exchange for no-hope clicks. But the way AdSense is structured I don't have a choice if I want to reach the first type. This must add to the average cost per order for using AdSense.
Some ad categories are likely to draw more curiosity-seekers than others. It's easy to imagine that an ad for celebrity photos, for example, would get a lot of clicks from people who want to see Sandra Bullock in a bikini bottom or Arnold Schwarzenegger in the altogether. On the other hand, an ad for cruises on the Elbe or left-handed widget jigs probably wouldn't attract any clicks from the idly curious.
But why guess? For advertisers, it's easy enough to test AdWords only against AdWords plus content ads. Each advertiser's needs are different, and testing is the only way to find out whether content ads are a waste of money or a chance to reach the prospects who ignore AdWords on Google SERPs.
I agree that that is probably the situation today, but Google must believe that the growth lies in creating a market place where the "big advertisers" can enter and make it really grow.
Why do you get adverts on TV? Its not because it is a natural place to show adverts, its because 75% (or whatever) of the Western world is slumped on a sofa watching the box on any evening. Therefore the big advertisers brainwash the viewers while they are sitting there.
Sport thrives on advertising - nobody would pay Mr Woods, Mr Sampras or Mr Beckham tens of millions of dollars a year just because they can do something fancy with a ball...no, its the exposure it gives the advertiser. Soccer players were only paid $15 a week in the UK 1950's - before TV became involved. Today a soccer player, earns millions
Now we find a large portion of the world is slumped in front of a computer, what better time to feed them advertising. Problem is, that it is easy for the recipient to click away from the advert. Therefore the clever bit is to get the recipient to click onto the adverts.
If it works, then in a few years time the "straight ROI" sites will become the minority.
As many people have said, if AdWords users are not getting a return from AdSense, then turn off that option. But in the long run, it will be, IMO, the main stream advertisers that determine whether AdSense lives or just limps on, to eventually fade away.
Advertisers can hardly put the blame on us because we can't do anything more with our limitations. All we can do is judge by our meager stats and the amount of click thru's to determine what is doing good and not. We just have to judge by what our clicks are doing period.
Advertisers also have their own site optimized for maximum ROI on search results. Overlooking the fact that in order to expand they have to adjust to other marketing techniques and media (such as information sites).
Many of these advertisers still do not understand how to use information and market on that information to generate traffic and revenue. Many information sites learn how and do it well (such as europeforvisitors).
We take people of non-buying mindsets and turn them into revenue. We learn how to use information to develop our sites and brand into an authority of the subjects we work in. We get visitors to come back and if we say buy this they listen.
