AdLinks Revisited

[shafaki]

As soon as G released its AdLinks, some members here talked about it for a while, many were afraid to try it and just wanted to know from the other first how well it did. The short discussion that went on gave me the impression that AdLinks is not good, 'couse of the ugly page it gives and that it is not a good idea to use it. The discussion kind of closed up there. Till now, I'm still in the wait-and-see group.

Did you really find that AdLinks performed unsatisfactory and that the original adsense ads are better?

Ashraf Al Shafaki

[david_uk]

I tried them for a few weeks. They didn't earn any money, so I removed them.

I wasn't unhappy with the look, bit a couple of things bugged me. Firstly, I didn't like the way you have to click twice, and that's probably the reason they didn't work for me. Secondly, if you looked at the links provided then hit the back button, you would see a different selection of links. Very annoying, especially as there was usually a selection of links I wanted to look at that were no longer there.

I guess they must do well for some.

[JohnKelly]

I tried AdLinks also. While they earned some money, I felt that it was money that would have been earned by the regular AdSense ads. Also, my EPC took a dive after putting AdLinks on, I'm not sure if it's related or not, but I removed AdLinks. EPC has recovered since then, though that could be from the CPM model being used now.

[howiejs]

I have mixed feelings about it.
You need to test each one with a channel -

Some are doing well some are not - but I had no idea the mix until I studied a few weeks of data.

[icedowl]

AdLinks are performing quite well on my main site. Nearly 25% of my total earnings for that site are coming from them. I'm keeping them.

[OptiRex]

We're using Ad Links across many sites and this month they have provided 44.66% of earnings.

Our header 728 x 90 leaderboard has earned 36.36% of the earnings this month.

Total site earnings are just double two months ago prior to Ad Links.

Ad Links in general are very well targeted, 90% I would say, and I have to admit that I'm amazed how well they've been used.

[Atomic]

I initially felt that AdLinks worked great on my site but after a while income dropped to close to zero.

I also didn't feel right about putting the AdLinks above the menu on the left because it seemed to be contrary to my website's theme.

I can see place where I might try them in the future on other sites but that will have to wait.

[Rachel]

AdLinks seem to be working good for me. I worried that they'd be all low priced clicks, but some of them have been close to $2, which surprised me.

I haven't been doing AdSense long, though, so it's hard to tell if it's helping or hurting (no real previous stats to go by.) I do know that it was my highest paying channel this month.

[birdstuff]

Adlinks are doing great on my sites. I won't be taking them down any time soon.

[clearvision]

$500 extra on adlinks alone...I can say that now right :)

General content Adsense up in April, so this was a perk.

[winglian]

I actually saw a 40% drop in page eCPM due to AdLinks. Once I removed AdLinks, my revenue returned to pre-AdLinks levels.

[Sunflux]

You should base your decision on the bottom line, not EPC or EPM, which can be misleading.

For me, I added AdLinks and my CTR went down, my earnings on other AdSense ad spaces went down, but my total earnings went up a significant amount, and have stayed that way, so I'm keeping them.

[berto]

About half of my clicks (across two sites) are for AdLinks.

No drop in EPC or CPM since implementing them a month and a half ago.

Occasionally, I will observe upward spikes, clusters of AdLinks clicks. I never see that with other Adsense ad types.

The best thing about AdLinks is that they take up less space than other ad units (while still performing as well), freeing up valuable screen real estate for other affiliate ads.

AdLinks are a keeper.

[HitProf]

After a slow starts they perform very well on 2 completely different sites. Thinking of expanding them to another one.

[ZenArcher]

I do detailed channel tracking. It's been easy to see that Google did their homework on the AdLinks thing. If the page is well-targeted, then the links will generate clicks and additional income.

AdLinks don't replace my current ads--they supplement them.

Their small footprint also makes them easy to place on a busy page.

[birdstuff]

While it's true that a visitor has to click twice before I get paid, I have found that virtually every person who clicks once does indeed click again on the "links" page (at least on my sites).

[berto]

Although AdLinks are generally working for me, they would work much better if it weren't for the "bait and switch" and/or failing to deliver on promises.

For example, an ad link promises "widgets" but the follow-up ad page has nothing at all to do with widgets.

Or the ad link promises "widgets" but the follow-up ad page is about "wydgets" or is about "widgets" in an entirely different and off-topic industry (i.e., "widget" has more than one meaning and Google's AI picks the wrong, off-topic meaning).

The more my visitors see this sort of crap, the more they tune out AdLinks, probably. I have been observing this mistargeting since the beginning but assumed that Google would refine the ad targeting over time. If they don't do this Real Soon Now, I am inclined to take AdLinks off of many more pages and only leave them up on pages where the ad targeting is nearly perfect.

The "bait and switch" and ad mistargeting makes Google and me look stupid.