Forum Moderators: martinibuster
It's my understanding that G will place the ads that bid highest in the banner. Therefore, I'm assuming that the reason the directories/scraper ads are in the banner is purely because they have bid highest.
However, does that mean that the ads that bid the highest actually end up earning us most? Does smartpricing decide that because it's a scraper site the click is only worth $0.03, even though they have outbid a genuine advertiser who smart pricing might have decided the click was worth $10?
So I guess my question is "Should who gets placed in the banner be decided by smartpricing and NOT bid price"?
Any thoughts?
I'm just wondering if it's possible that the highest bidding ads, whilst getting placement on our sites are not necessarily the best payers if smartpricing is deciding that clicks to these sites are not worth much. Therefore, is it a good idea to weed out the scrapers/directories from appearing, and possibly get a better return from clicks to sites that might bid less, but ultimately the payout is better because smartpricing might decide the clicks are more relevant and pay more?
1- Click through ratio of these ads are higher than their competitors, so much that it's more profitable for Google-and therefore you-the-publisher to display these ads compared to higher bid - much lower CTR ads.
Example:
AD1:
Bid: $0.10
CTR: 10%
Estimated Click Value in 1000 page views: $10
AD2:
Bid: $0.90
CTR: 1%
Estimated Click Value in 1000 page views: $9
Conclusion: AD1 beats AD2
2- They have many topics to advertise, therefore many ads in the inventory. More ads = more exposure.
Therefore, is it a good idea to weed out the scrapers/directories from appearing, and possibly get a better return from clicks to sites that might bid less, but ultimately the payout is better because smartpricing might decide the clicks are more relevant and pay more?
I believe this is a flawed premise. The evidence that I've seen (and I've seen a lot) demonstrates that clicks from scraper pages actually convert better than clicks from article pages. It would be pretty hard for any article page to match the relevency of the ads on most scraper pages. I'm not defending scraper sites here, just trying to clear up a common misconception. Now I'll stand back and watch the flames and name-calling begin.
If I believed that the scrapers advertising on my site gave me the best return, then they'd stay. At the moment, the stats I have indicate that booting them has increased the bottom line cash figure. It's early days yet and I'm keeping an open mind.
The scrapers that I have seen advertising on my site have two things in common:-
1, the same genuine advertisers ads appear on my site and theirs.
2, the scrapers ALWAYS exclude other scrapers. If scraper traffic is more profitable, why exclude other scrapers? Maybe they just aren't that profitable - I'm positive that morals wouldn't come into it!
I have to say I prefer to see only genuine advertisers on the site. I hope that the trend continues and I can keep the scrapers off AND have better bottom line $$. Time will tell.
The evidence that I've seen (and I've seen a lot) demonstrates that clicks from scraper pages actually convert better than clicks from article pages.
That could very well be the reason that Google has not nuked the scraper sites yet.
Does smartpricing decide that because it's a scraper site the click is only worth $0.03, even though they have outbid a genuine advertiser who smart pricing might have decided the click was worth $10?
Wouldn't that mean that Google is giving advertisers with scraper sites a better cpc then advertisers with content sites?
in many respects, google and the publisher are on the same side of the fence. google only makes money (from adsense), if the publisher makes money. therefore, google tries to give you the best-paying ads that it can. in your case, it was low-paying clicks, and if you turn some of those off, you will only be given the same-or lowerpaying clicks, or those with lower CTRs.
now, if you are blacklisting ads because the presence of their ads cheapens your site, that is something else entirely.
one thing you may try is to have fewer ad blocks on your page... the top of the topmost adblock has the highest paying clicks - any clicks on additional adblocks will pay less.
I've been with Adsense 18 months, and round here nearly as long, so my site is well optimised and I am well aware of the fact that "Less is more" re ad blocks. In fact, I was an early adopter of this before it became fashionable.
I understand all the points made in this thread, and I'm well aware that any change in income is just as likely to be for some unknown reason beyond my control as it is from anything I've done.
I'm not dumping scrapers because their presence cheapens my site. I'm interested in the bottom line cash figure, but if I can dump the scrapers and improve my bottom line that's ideal, as I rather like seeing ads for real products/services as opposed to scrapers.
However, I'm keeping an open mind and will follow it closely. What I'm seeing at the moment is normal impressions and clicks, yet EPC is up about 30% over the recent average, therefore the bottom line cash figure is up too.
I'm running at slightly lower clicks/impressions that the average of late, and the epc has rocketed by a factor of 5 over last Monday. Bottom line figure is up, and eCPM is very healthy.
Maybe dumping scrapers on many sites doesn't help - hence the conventional wisdom not to do it. However, my experience the last few days playing with this is that it's well worth experimenting with, but keep a close eye on how it goes!
