Has anyone else noticed increased competition with Google business units within AdWords?
Interestingly, in the yellow page biz we pretty much all have the same landing pages -- a list of businesses in a particular town for a given product or service. Because I was trying to score a high LPQ, I don't run any ads on my site at all -- just trying to build some traffic. Yet, AdWords offers me an average min bid of more that $2.50 per click.
I'd be curious if Google charges itself, and what kind of LPQ it assigns to itself.
If Google owes itself two millions dollars for ads how does it go about paying itself.
Google spokesman quote “As was already mentioned, there are no algorithm changes to 'smooth the way' for Google's ads”
No, but it doesn’t hurt to have very deep pockets or own Adwords. Plus if you're one of the few who knows 100% how the system operates you don't need to "smooth your own way" with an algo change.
Given that this could increase the costs of genuine advertisers, why doesn't Google just give themselves free ads that operate outside of the bidding system?
I agree with outland88 - if it were a physical product, buying it from yourself would still cost something. But a virtual product, it's free for Google and nothing restrains them from being in any position they choose.
The Google staff who are buying ads with an assigned budget probably wouldn't agree that the ads are "free."
FWIW, it isn't uncommon for companies to bill for services (not for just physical products) from one department or division to another. One can argue that Google might ruffle fewer feathers and please more customers if it didn't compete for AdWords positions, but the argument that the ads are "free" doesn't wash.
By the way, I noticed superpages.com has lost half its traffic in the past year. They used to be one of the most important business sites. I wonder if they got caught up in all the algo changes.
why doesn't Google just give themselves free ads that operate outside of the bidding system?
Oddly Walter N in the mentioned Google article never uses such words like pay, paid, cost, buying, purchase, purchasing, or buys. Walter carefully chooses his words like we manage, we bid, we use the same interface as you, but nowhere does he directly say we pay, buy, or are charged just like everybody else. It seems to me that terminology related to actual purchasing would be rather common among paying Adword customers.
Again an Adwords client can loose money or have little return on his investment. On the other hand how can Google basically loose if they have access to a particularly complex Adwords algo which others don't.
why doesn't Google just give themselves free ads that operate outside of the bidding system?
Actually, they are:
Firefox Creator No Longer Trusts Google
[yro.slashdot.org...]
While advertisers compete to be first in a string of lookalike ads that are often shunted to the side, Google now determines the precise position and appearance of adsxx tips that are not subject to any of the same rules.
Google is now putting "tips" suggesting other Google products (such as Picassa) when certain keywords are used. These aren't ads, so are completely outside of the ad payment and placement system.
FWIW, it isn't uncommon for companies to bill for services (not for just physical products) from one department or division to another. One can argue that Google might ruffle fewer feathers and please more customers if it didn't compete for AdWords positions, but the argument that the ads are "free" doesn't wash.
I imagine the finance department is not happy that advertisers (outside of the company) are not buying that inventory.
