Forum Moderators: martinibuster
On one hand we are encouraged and all strive to postion ads in areas where visibilty is greatest in order to get maximum amount of views and, ultimately, clicks.
However, is this best.
While we don't know much about SmartPricing, it is generally accepted that conversion rate determines how much publishers are paid for clicks.
If we were to follow the positioning strategy above, it would increase our clicks, but one could argue that this would decrease the conversion rate since a percentage of all traffic would be clicking and not just those who were most likely to execute a conversion.
I'm unable to articulate this as it is in my head, but does anyone follow?
Any thoughts?
For example, on a site that teaches people how to knit with a links page for knitting supplies... That page, showing ads for such items, has good conversion no matter how well the ads are blended. Exceptions to every theory.
While we don't know much about SmartPricing, it is generally accepted that conversion rate determines how much publishers are paid for clicks.
I tend to think more along the lines of "the odds of a conversion" rather than a "conversion rate" since not all advertisers let their conversion info be known outside of their own office walls.
Also, I'm not entirely convinced that "smart pricing" really exists beyond being just an excuse given for poor performance, low EPC, etc.
Positioning IMHO is to get the folks (visitors) to notice the ads. It is still up to the folks to pay attention to them and read what they're clicking on. If they can't or don't read the ads, then whose fault is that? Not the publisher's nor the advertiser's.
I tend to think more along the lines of "the odds of a conversion" rather than a "conversion rate" since not all advertisers let their conversion info be known outside of their own office walls.
If you do your owning testing, you won't be left wondering.
If you do your owning testing, you won't be left wondering.
Spaceladie, I agree, but with all the variables involved in AdSense, I find testing to be very difficult.
If we were to follow the positioning strategy above, it would increase our clicks, but one could argue that this would decrease the conversion rate since a percentage of all traffic would be clicking and not just those who were most likely to execute a conversion.
Exactly. I suspect that a lot of this forum's "my CTR has increased but my EPC is down" posts are the result of optimizing for clickthroughs.
The first is at the point on a page where a visitor might realize the content does not address their needs, if that turns out to be the case.
The second, and in my mind and experience, more profitable point, is where the visitor has found what they came for and is ready to take the next step, as in make a purchase, get the further info an advertizers provides, etc.
I'll take the second spot any day if I have to make a choice.
You don't need to keep testing once you've got a basic idea. Then you can rely on "odds of conversion", as icedowl mentioned.
Ken_b is right on the money with his second example. That's the trend I've seen. Pages that give visitors all the info they need to make a purchase do best. But, actually not even directly on that page. Give them the info, make them click one more time to the "purchasing page", and optimize that page. You can safely tweak those pages for better CTR without worrying about your EPC going down.
