Forum Moderators: martinibuster
But yestrday, I had my record-high day...
Very Very strange...
The js has been there for a year now with no problem until last month. Note, Google acknowledged that they ARE changing things with AS code (all the time, they say) -- in our case it's impacting us severely because of this js issue. Their recommendation was along the lines of "remove your javascript," which of course isn't possible. (Urgh.) However, on the plus side, it is helpful to get an answer from them, and to know that they are changing things that impact ad targeting (and it's not just our imagination).
I might suggest instead of removing YOUR js, maybe making a change to it somehow might improve your results with AS. However, I still believe Google should adust THEIR js. After all, they have a vested interest in your site showing relevant ads, no?
Anyway, since the only short term solution is to try to fix it, I've already posted separately to try to find some other WebmasterWorld members who've experienced this issue ...
Also, another (very helpful) member took a look at our js and found what might be incorrect type attributes ... we'll try changing to what he recommended. (Even though we have had no problems to date, and even AdSense was targeting fine until last month, so I think it's a little bit of a stretch for Google to say we have a "bug." But this is life as a flea on the backside of an elephant, as they say! I'll let everyone know if either of these end up working ...)
and that, my friends, doesn't make sense.
Been with adsense since the very beginning and after all this time my opinion is it is much better to find other ways to monetize your site than relying on third parties like Google. Sure, you can make some money. But it isn't reliable and sucks up your time.
Sure, you can make some money. But it isn't reliable and sucks up your time.
True for you, perhaps, but not for everyone. Even in the month of my lowest earnings (Sept. 2003), which was before I figured out some basic things, AdSense equalled what my site was making from all other sources of income combined. Most months it has been triple, and recently it seems to have reached a new plateau, of quapruple--this in spite of the fact that the other sources have been increasing too.
For my site, it's been very reliable, and takes up very little of my time....
Ditto. Although, a plateau is a flat high point and we still seem to be climbing. And for us, unlike previous improvements to income that we've achieved, we haven't done anything. The income just seems to have taken on a growth of its own.
Can we call it Google NoSense (instead of Google AdSense) , and also we can rename this forum name to Google NoSense ;-)
21_blue, well, I got to the plateau by trying a few new things. I've now got new plans that I hope will lead me higher yet.
Just to clarify, when I say not reliable what I mean is that you can't count on it. It has been relatively consistent for me and is a serious chunk of change. A full time salary for many people in fact. But it went down 50% after smart pricing came into effect and it has taken since then to bring it back up 10%-20%. So "consistent", with a massive downturn one day is not the same as "reliable" for me.
Although I'm certainly not spitting on the extra income Google brings, if I depend on that money, it's like sitting on something at someone else's whim with no control. If an engineer feels like tweaking an algo, boom my income is halved. I can spend a year to bring up the income 10% and G can just feel like increasing their quarterly earnings and reduce my share 10%. Not only don't they guarantee to give me a set percentage of what my site brings them, but they won't even tell me what the percentage is.
So strategically, it isn't easy to come to the conclusion to mentally dump adsense. But I think it's worth it. Because the time I invested in testing out the new adsense features, making the javascript not clash, trying the different colors, reworking the site to be mediabot friendly, etc etc, could have been spent building a foundation that brings in income from a source that won't dry up because G felt like it.
Bad enough that much of the traffic is dependent on Google. Now the ad income too?
They have way too much power.
Aren't virtually all businesses like that? With the exception of a select few, all industries are subject to sudden changes in the market. Managers of all businesses sometimes feel they have no control over what is happening.
Using your definition of "reliable income", it is very difficult to find anywhere that brings you a reliable income these days. Even Government jobs aren't safe (eg: recent sackings in New Orleans).
Although online publishing is a business, with all the commensurate business risks, ups, downs, etc., it has the great advantage of not haveing the hassle delivering a new product or service in exchange for every cent.
So you really didn't see my point?
You really think G is reliable, relatively speaking?
You really think G isn't too powerful?
Did I not see your point, or did you not see my point? I have been employed. I have run a conventional business. I am now publishing via Adsense. Yes, imho, relatively speaking, Adsense is reliable - as reliable as many businesses can be.
With regards G's position as "too powerful", I think you have a point to some degree, as they have enjoyed and are continuing to enjoy a dominant position in the market. That also happens in many industries. But it doesn't usually last forever. The emergence of YPN, especially given Yahoo's collaborations with Microsoft, will imho create a better balance in this market.
Not only don't they guarantee to give me a set percentage of what my site brings them, but they won't even tell me what the percentage is.
Of course not, because they don't want to make life easier for competitors. Also, they know--as AdSense publishers should know--that eCPM is the proper metric for determining whether ad space is profitable for the publisher. (IMHO, publishers need to get out of the affiliate mindset and think like publishers.)
So strategically, it isn't easy to come to the conclusion to mentally dump adsense. But I think it's worth it. Because the time I invested in testing out the new adsense features, making the javascript not clash, trying the different colors, reworking the site to be mediabot friendly, etc etc, could have been spent building a foundation that brings in income from a source that won't dry up because G felt like it.
You don't need to play with your javascript, colors, site content, etc. for the sake of AdSense. If you've got decent content and the right audience, you should be able to do quite nicely just by slapping the code on and following the same common-sense rules that you'd use with any other form of advertising (e.g., put the ads where people can see them).
What's more, you don't need to choose between AdSense and other sources of income. It isn't a matter of "either/or." Do as the big corporate publishers do: Have multiple revenue streams such as AdSense, display ads, and affiliate sales, and don't let any one revenue source become the tail that wags the dog.
I don't know what the equivalent stats are for Adsense Publishers, but my guess is that it is unlikely to have such a failure rate.
Of course not, because they don't want to make life easier for competitors.
Pass me some of what you're smoking. Must be good "stuff". ;)
Pass me some of what you're smoking. Must be good "stuff". ;)
Put away your roach holder and think about it. Pretend that you're about to launch another contextual ad network, and you want to attract (or, better yet, cherrypick) publishers from the market leader, Google.
You look at Google's AdSense FAQ, and you see that publishers are getting, say, 65% of the revenues from every click.
What do you do? You announce that your network will have a 60-40 split instead of Google's 65-35 split, and all the unhappy AdSense publishers come running. You then go to selected publishers who'd clearly be an asset to the network and you offer them a 55-45 split. Google is then forced to either match your offer or come up with very convincing reasons why publishers should stick with what they've been getting.
Why would Google want to open that Pandora's box? Especially when they don't have to?
If a newbie service comes in and offers a greater cut, people will know anyway. I doubt google will be able to hide it.
When YPN came in w/ greater figures, we all knew about it. And lo and behold, G upped the pot for a few days. Their "secrecy" did not help with their competitor.
The moment it was clear that YPN beta is still a joke, the pot went back down.
The day YPN becomes serious, G will have to pony up anyway.
If a newbie service comes in and offers a greater cut, people will know anyway. I doubt google will be able to hide it.
Sure, they can. Who says it's a simple percentage split? Combine a complex compensation formula with smart pricing, and nobody will be able to reverse-engineer it (especially if it isn't a static formula).
When YPN came in w/ greater figures, we all knew about it.
What do you mean by "greater figures"? Even if publishers were earning more per click, that didn't necessarily have anything to do with the percentage split. It could have been advertiser bids, a lack of smart pricing, etc. There's no way publishers can be sure they were (or are) getting a better percentage split from YPN or another network if they don't know what split they're getting from Google.
Sure, they can. Who says it's a simple percentage split?
Not me. I'm sure it isn't.
Combine a complex compensation formula with smart pricing, and nobody will be able to reverse-engineer it (especially if it isn't a static formula).
Your line supports my point.
What do you mean by "greater figures"?
Higher payout. Everyone saw it. Didn't see the usual odd guy saying the numbers were down. First time I remember that happening. But if you're not sure, ok. We can disagree :)
There's no way publishers can be sure they were (or are) getting a better percentage split from YPN or another network if they don't know what split they're getting from Google.
Semantics.
I've tested both and was able to tell very easily.
Higher payout. Everyone saw it. Didn't see the usual odd guy saying the numbers were down. First time I remember that happening.
Higher payments don't necessarily represent a higher payout (with "payout" meaning the publisher's revenue share, which is the generally accepted definition here).
I suppose it may be easier to estimate YPN's payout than Google's, assuming that YPN isn't yet using a Yahoo version of smart pricing.
