Landing Page Quality Score Implementation Coincides with Huge Revenue

and Profit Increases for Google.

[jim2003]

All those who were concerned that Google was going under because of the quality score rules implementation can breathe easy today:

"GOOGLE'S PROFIT NEARLY DOUBLES and revenue Grows 70% in the third quarter as online-ad sales remained strong. Shares rose 7% after hours"

[rbacal]

All those who were concerned that Google was going under because of the quality score rules implementation can breathe easy today

Nobody was worried! They were hoping and praying, since some of the QS self-victims want to see google fail.

It's kinda funny, because when google intro'd QS, a few of the of so wise folks told us to short the stock. One who remains nameless and seems to have slunk off in shame predicted a stock price of $300 by Xmas. At that time the price was about 370-380.

Today? It's about 50 bucks per share higher than when these experts predicted gloom and doom, and made their supposed "investments".

[humblebeginnings]

All true. However, I wonder if "quality score" is the proper name. "Cash score" appears to be more adequate.

[mike_ppc]

On the other hand, when there is no competition... there is no alternative. Many people have reduced their spendings on Y by more than 80% and moved mostly to G.
Even more, if you want to move from G to ... you don't have where!

[rbacal]

All true. However, I wonder if "quality score" is the proper name. "Cash score" appears to be more adequate.

Sad. If google reported lower income, there'd be a flock of seagulls saying "see I told you so, they're crashing and burning", and when they report their revenue is up, there's seagulls flying in and saying "see, I told you it was just a cash grab".

Talk about stupid human tricks.

[Green_Grass]

"Talk about stupid human tricks'

There was certainly a 'Cash Grab' element in the ' Landing Score ' thing. . You may believe it ...or not... The facts are there on the balance sheet.

[aeiouy]

So you are saying their doubled profits are due to the QS implementation?

[rehabguy]

Heck yes!

I was in a campaign tonight, and google wants $10.00/click for "autumn leaves". If that isn't a money grab, I don't know what is!

Luckily, I'm not dumb enough (yet) to pay that much, but somebody out there clicked on the link and paid it for a while until their credit card got maxed out... er... transferred to google's bank account...

It will all come crashing back to earth one day, everything does.

[Car_Guy]

I wonder if "Quality Score" is the proper name.

I always thought it was more of a "weasel penalty".

It will all come crashing back to earth one day. Everything does.

The AdSense program will outlive you. What some of us are hoping will crash and burn are ads pointing to MFA sites, like those deceptive "free ringtones (but we're going to spam you like you won't believe)" sites and lame, cheesy, superficial, paid "directory" pages.

[Green_Grass]

"The AdSense program will outlive you."

I am sure this is good news. But we were actually talking about the adWords programme.....

[magicdan]

The QS is going to have had an upward effect and will continue to in future. Google basically built in more control over their product pricing with this addition but clearly advertisers are paying it otherwise we wouldnt have a huge revenue increase.
That said who knows how much the revenue jump has to do with the quality score effect, they might not have even turned it up that much market wide, just on the so called weasels and a few randoms to test.

[humblebeginnings]

Sad. If google reported lower income, there'd be a flock of seagulls saying "see I told you so, they're crashing and burning", and when they report their revenue is up, there's seagulls flying in and saying "see, I told you it was just a cash grab".

Talk about stupid human tricks.

So you pretend to know what I would have said if Googles earnings were down? And based on that assumption you call me sad?
Indeed, stupid human tricks.

[Edge]

Amazing, advertisers are complaining about quality score and publishers are complaining about smart pricing. All the while, google is raking in the money.

So, when are the advertisers and publishers going to start doing business directly with each other?

[Car_Guy]

Advertisers are complaining about quality score, and publishers are complaining about smart pricing.

Some advertisers are complaining. A dozen (or a few dozen) advertisers posting on WebmasterWorld's AdWords forum is a pretty small percentage out of the thousands of AdWords advertisers. The same is true of AdSense publishers and SmartPricing. For example, my site's AdSense revenue has increased a lot lately. I'm not complaining about anything related to AdSense (other than having an ad filter that's full, and having to deal with an endless supply of ads pointing to junk sites).

Google is raking in the money.

Good for them. I'm making good money, too.

When are the advertisers and publishers going to start doing business directly with each other?

That's been going on since there have been Web pages. One of the key benefits of being an AdSense publisher is not having to deal with recruiting advertisers or chasing after people to collect their payments.

[Car_Guy]

"Green Grass" said:

We were actually talking about the adWords program.

Thanks for demonstrating your ability to grasp at straws in an attempt to sound clever. I'll repeat the point I made:

What some of us are hoping will crash and burn are ads pointing to MFA sites, like those deceptive "free ringtones (but we're going to spam you like you won't believe)" sites and lame, cheesy, superficial, paid "directory" pages.

[Green_Grass]

"Thanks for demonstrating your ability to grasp at straws in an attempt to sound clever. I'll repeat the point I made:"

We were talking about the QS and Landing Score algorithm affecting adWords and how Google has been able to use this to its advantage. Pls check the topic of the thread.

Thanks for being rude.

I guess hijacking threads is now common practice on WW.

[Car_Guy]

Here's another example of Green_Grass' logic. In another thread [webmasterworld.com], he said:

"It seems logical to me that if Google decides your site is low quality, they may forward crappy ads to you which no one will click anyway so it may be a form of smart pricing."

[Green_Grass]

I repeat this is the adWords forum. Car_Guy , you are off topic.

As rbacal used to point out, all threads on QS used to be hijacted by G baiters.. It is the other way around now, I guess.

BTW, you may be surprised that I am very pro G as I make decent money, courtesy G, for which I am grateful.

If G, has knocked off spammy Ads with QS, it is ofcourse good but it is also a fact that they have done nothing on the content side.

But, one direct effect of QS is increase in prices on both Search and Content side as advertisers have upped their bids on both Search and Content to try and be visible. This has definitely helped Google bottomline. A while ago they 'rounded off bids' on the adWords side, which also increased bid prices by 5-10% across most keywords.

We are not really debating if making nmore money by Google is bad or good but we are trying to make the point that the QS guidelines have definitely helped them make more money.

I guess QS is too much an 'emotional' issue with most members here.

[humblebeginnings]

Come on folks, let's take it easy.
We need each other too much to spend time on silly arguments.
Ok, getting back on topic:

Landing Page Quality Score Implementation Coincides with Huge Revenue and Profit Increases for Google.

The QS implementation gave me a load of problems.
CPC went up dramatically, I refuse to pay because that would give me a negative ROI. As a result I only get a fraction of the clicks I used to get. It appears many advertisers did raise their bids and Google indeed makes a huge profit. My question is, did the last QS implementation (on the content network) indeed result in higher CPC for you and do you pay the new price?

[elsewhen]

last QS implementation (on the content network) indeed result in higher CPC for you and do you pay the new price?

i guess i missed the memo... one of my sites was hit by the QS update on search, but i have not seen substantive changes on content. has there been a consensus that the QS update has finally been rolled out to the content network?

[aeiouy]

I am pretty confident in saying there is currently no QS for the content network.

[fischermx]

I am pretty confident in saying there is currently no QS for the content network.

Based on what? Because I have content-only campaigns and eventhough all keywords look active in the normal report, when you go to tools and search the campaing there, you'll see a lot of the keywords in the content-only campaign are indeed inactive and asking for $5.00-$10.00.

[europeforvisitors]

So, when are the advertisers and publishers going to start doing business directly with each other?

If I'm a publisher with a 6,000-page site, and if one of my pages is about Elbonian raft cruises, how likely is it that I'll have enough traffic on that page to (a) interest vendors of Elbonian raft cruises and (b) justify the effort in selling targeted ads to those vendors?

For publishers--and for advertisers--contextual advertising requires an aggregator/middleman to deliver targeted ads effectively and efficiently.

[fischermx]

So, when are the advertisers and publishers going to start doing business directly with each other?

When you're both big enough and specific enough.
Big publishers in technology sites already do this and most don't even care about Google.

[europeforvisitors]

Many big publishers profit from direct ad sales and Google contextual ads. The two types of advertising serve different purposes and, when used together, generate multiple revenue streams.