If so, am I upsetting G every time I post 1000+ keywords to a point where it might take longer for the review process to be completed.
As my experience goes, I feel that Gooogle rate or add notes to accounts detailing credibility/problems. Well behaved account managers will have their submissions automatically posted while others may have instant posting followed by a quick check up and new or troubled accounts have complete censoring before posting.
... just trying to keep G happy :)
Do the Googlers review and authorize every single keyword that is submitted?
Yep.
If so, am I upsetting G every time I post 1000+ keywords to a point where it might take longer for the review process to be completed.
No, you certainly aren't upsetting us. That's our job. ;)
Caution: AWA now stepping up on soap box!
On the other hand, you may be upsetting all the other folks who have an ad in the review queue behind yours! Or those who are upset that the AdWords system is slower than it used to be.
It seems to be in vogue these days to submit many thousands of keywords, not because they are good keywords, but simply because it is possible to do so.
I've looked at a lot of accounts recently that are filled to the brim with thousands of useless 'deadwood' keywords. Some examples:
* Thousands of keywords that are entirely unrelated to the product or service being advertised.
* Thousands of 'what if' keywords, that are only remotely related to the product or service being advertised. (For example, 'what if' someone who is searching on tickets for the a particular performance center in California might instead decide to click on an ad for a music service for professional musicians in New York?)
* Thousands of keywords that have never had an impression, let alone a click. (These are often keywords with a $0.05 Max CPC, that are so competitive that the ad is showing in the 140th position on a good day, for example.)
At the bottom line, thousands of non-performing keywords in thousands of accounts slow things down for all advertisers. So, personally, I don't recommend it.
AWA now stepping down from soap box
... just trying to keep G happy :)
Thanks, kmander. And thanks also for providing me with the opportunity to talk about a little pet peeve of mine. ;)
AWA
More or less every keyword I submit I also submit:
keyword.com
www.keyword.com
keywordphrase
keyword-phrase
Okay, they get 1 impression a week but they are often coupled with a very high CTR. These are still targeted kws, so I believe this is a good strategy.
Tens of thousands of keywords do become rather difficult to manage, but putting all these more quirky keywords in their own ad groups helps.
PS
I am sure this has been said elsewhere, but it would be an utter joy if creatives/keywords had an "Under review" status.
PS
I am sure this has been said elsewhere, but it would be an utter joy if creatives/keywords had an "Under review" status.
absolutely
shak
I think we all like to try to come up with all variations. Perhaps Google could come up with some way of allowing us to specify variations easier.
For instance, instead of
buy red widget
buy red doodad
buy green widget
buy green doodad
buy blue widget
buy blue doodad
purchase red widget
purchase red doodad
purchase green widget
purchase green doodad
purchase blue widget
purchase blue doodad
Perhaps Google could allow us to specify
(buy¦purchase) (red¦green¦blue) (widget¦doodad)
This would allow us to add more variations very easily and at the same time reduce the number of keywords. For instance, I could easily expand "(buy¦purchase)" to "(buy¦purchase¦order¦find)", doubling the number of variations.
On the other hand, you may be upsetting all the other folks who have an ad in the review queue behind yours!
Looks like Google is in need for a CRM system, which would give higher priority to those words that are likely to bring more profit to Google ;)
Anyway, if all words are reviewed manually then why not set queue rule of X items per queue then the rest goes to the start of queue?
The simple fact is that you get much more traffic from 10,000 keywords than you do from 100 keywords. Until you offer something that will allow them to accomplish the same thing, people will continue to enter more keywords.
Nail on the head. I can still appreciate the pain the AdWords team must be going through but I doubt AWA can dispute that more (relevant) keywords = more traffic.
Top notch ideas MovingOnUp & Lord Majestic BTW :)
Nail on the head. I can still appreciate the pain the AdWords team must be going through but I doubt AWA can dispute that more (relevant) keywords = more traffic.
Nope, I certainly can't disagree with that - with the operative word being 'relevant'.
It's just that you probably haven't seen as many accounts as I have with many thousands of irrelevant keywords that haven't had a single impression for months on end.
It's those keywords that I'd argue against. ;)
AWA
Would it not be good strategy to include many relevant keywords (or semi-relevant) at .5 cents to deliberately avoid getting direct clicks but instead benefit from content site exposure.
To this end, surely it is also bad advice to seperate out good performing keywords into their own group, since there is benefit from having both good and bad together.
Interested to hear other peoples thoughts on this.
From what I understand this should be specific enough shouldn't it?
Can anyone please help here? I'm out of ideas.
p.s.> my CTR and is 0 and no impressions since the 1st 1k after I reactivated.
Thanks
- Squirrelradio
