Anyone is welcome to answer.
If you are charged less than your bid then you are receiving a discount. Google are not obliged to give you a discount.
If you think you are paying too much, then reduce your bid.
You have had answers from people who are in a position to know what really happens. It is clear that you are disregarding or denying any answers that don't fit with your view of how things should be.
If you don't like how Google charge you then quit whinging and go elsewhere!
It is blatantly obvious to me that you do not have an overall good grasp of how Google Adwords works. If you had, then you would not have posed this question.
To my reasoning there are a whole number of reasons that could and would result in you not paying the minimum bid. Why do people pose questions then just continue to misinterpret and criticise. You are chosing to believe in a grand conspiracy theory. I for one do not think this is the case.
For sure, Google makes mistakes, but IMHO this is not one of them, and the problem lies in your continued inability to interpret what you are reading.
Now a user does a search for "blue widgets". Your advert should appear. However, there may be (lets say 4) other people who are bidding on the word "blue". In this case you are now fighting for position of your advert. It may be that Google will increase your price to get a higher position for you (over the minimum but up to your maximum bid per click).
[edited by: PCInk at 12:10 pm (utc) on Feb. 2, 2007]
If you guys "know" the answer, then why bother asking the question?
AWA2 (and others) have given various answers and explanations. However, it appears clear that the OP is convinced that he has been overcharged, and is rejecting or ignoring all those answers that do not fit with his/her view. It appears that the OP is only interested in answers that support the OP's view that Google is overcharging. To me, it is not evident that Google is getting anything wrong here.
If there are multiple bidders in an auction, the winning bid pays just above the second highest bid. If there is only one bidder in an auction, the bidder pays what is bid, unless it's below the reserve. If the bid is above the reserve, then the bidder pays what is bid - not the reserve!
It has been stated (very clearly in my view) that it is not possible to confirm that anyone is "the only advertiser" in an auction, and any statement from Google support to that effect would be in error. Bidding on a trademarked term is no evidence that no one else is bidding on it. I doesn't even guarantee that no one has used it within their Ad Copy (albeit in violation of the trademark).
Various reasons have been given as to why Google would charge over the "minimum bid". No reasons have been given as to why they should be obliged to charge any less than the actual bid.
The so called "minimum bid" that is being referred to, is is the minimum bid that Google will consider before enabling ads to be displays on search. I have seen nothing to suggest that it is what Google would or should charge in the event that there are no other bids. But if you believe that Google is ripping you off or breaching some contract, you are free to go elsewhere.
[edited by: Pengi at 2:23 pm (utc) on Feb. 2, 2007]
Look again. Read the first paragraph again. Done? Well did you see the words Min and Max?.
What does those words imply!? a RANGE
Yes, Google may charge you anything in that range and then factors like QS may come in and decide to charge a little higher than min bid, if Google consider that your QS is not 100%.
The only other relevant point of contention was brought by other posters who questioned whether I'm really the only ad showing on the keyword (and that is also dismissed because G Technical Department has determined that for the period of time in question for the given keyword - my ad was the only one showing).
G Technical Department has determined that for the period of time in question for the given keyword - my ad was the only one showing
Are you sure that this is the same as being the "only Ad elegible to display".
You seem to be choosing the only bits of answers that fit the view that you were overcharged not the whole answer.
AWA2 also said that it was not possible to know whether yours was the only Ad eligible and that whoever it was at Google who told you yours was the only elgiable Ad was not in any position to know.
But since you seem to have all the evidence you need to "prove" your case, I reckon you should give the courts a go and see what they think.
An ad is either showing or it's not. If it's not showing then it's not supposed to effect my pricing.
If you say so.
What the hell is "elegible to display"?
Advertiser "BIG" bids on the keyword "green yellow affiliate widgets" with the ad "buy affiliate widgets here". Advertiser "BIG" is the only advertiser in the world biding on this specific keyword.
Advertiser "eBay" bids on the keyword "widgets" with the ad "buy {keyword} here".
A searcher does a search for "green yellow affiliate widgets" and the Googleloompas determine that both advertiser's ads are "eligible to be displayed" for this query even though "BIG" is the only advertiser bidding on the specific keyword.
If for example I bid on the word "ewshnu746sykjlhasdfiu23417asiuasliuwe423", then for sure I'd be the only one bidding on that keyword, agree?
If google determines my min bid at $.06 and I set my max bid at $1 then I should be billed $.06, correct?
If google charged me more than $.06 for that keyword then would it be correct to say that google overcharged me?
I haven't have the time to do the experiment myself, maybe someone here would and enlighten us all.
peace!
If google determines my min bid at $.06 and I set my max bid at $1 then I should be billed $.06, correct?
This is being stated here (and elsewhere in this thread) as a fact. But where do the Google terms actually say that you will only pay the minimum bid if there are no other eligible bids?
If for example I bid on the word "ewshnu746sykjlhasdfiu23417asiuasliuwe423", then for sure I'd be the only one bidding on that keyword, agree?
If this were to be the case, then there would be no searches for the keyword either - for the same reason that you are the only bidder! The word is too "unusual" for anyone else to either bid for it (as an exact match) or to search for it.
If the word is that rare, why bother with AdWords at all - rely on natural search and you should get a Googlewhack!
I just logged into adwords help center and here are the things I read...
Maximum Cost-Per-Click
Your maximum cost-per-click (CPC) is the highest amount that you are willing to pay for a click on your ad. You can set a maximum CPC at the keyword- or Ad Group-level. The AdWords Discounter automatically reduces this amount so that the actual CPC you are charged is just one cent more than the minimum necessary to keep your position on the page.
AdWords Discounter
The AdWords Discounter monitors your competition and automatically reduces your actual cost-per-click so you pay the lowest price possible for your ad's position on the page.
I think bigdealioo has some good points in his questions but I don't like the way he attacks it. No offense bigdealioo. Peace :)
The keyword "ewshnu746sykjlhasdfiu23417asiuasliuwe423" was just an example. It just means that there is a way someone can say that they are the only one bidding on a keyword.
I think it's better if we change the keyword. In google adwords there is an exact match correct?
If I'm a maker of my own brand of say guitar then I would bid on [humblebegginings 100 string guitar]. Now, I think I would be the only one bidding on that exact keyword because I am the only one with that kind of guitar.
Maybe this can all clear up if someone do the experiment. Say I bid on the keyword "ewshnu746sykjlhasdfiu23417asiuasliuwe423" and someone search for it on G. Click the ad and we all see the result.
peace!
But what I would like to know (and I think the OP also) is about google pricing and if it holds to what it states in adwords help center (adwords discounter).
If you're the only ad eligible for display, you will pay your minimum CPC.
Somehow that just seems to go against the "don't be evil" saying.
I'm thinking of this way...
Let's suppose that Christies's runs their auction like the quote above. All the people in the room are bidding on a painting by Leonardo da Vinci with a reserve of $1.00. The highest amount in someones pocket is $2.00 and someone else has $10.00 in their pocket and it is known to Christie's beforehand.
As the auction goes on the person with $10.00 has to take a phone call. Still in the room, still eligible to spend the $10.00 but takes the call. The auction continues. Going once...going twice...SOLD to the guy who bid $1.00 but has $2.00 in his pocket.
But wait...there's more...the guy goes to get his painting and Christie's says thanks...that'll be $2.00. Why he asks? Because there was someone else in the room who was eligible to pay more says Christie's. The new policy from our new owner Google is to charge you what we know someone else could have paid.
Next week Google buys eBay and shill bidding becomes mandatory :-/
JAG
fischermx, you do not have a basic understanding of how Adwords pricing is *supposed* to work.
Exactly which part is totally out of wacko to say that I don't have the "basic" understanding?
Please delight me with your knowledge.
Don't forget you're the one asking for help.
Your maximum cost-per-click (CPC) is the highest amount that you are willing to pay for a click on your ad. You can set a maximum CPC at the keyword- or Ad Group-level. The AdWords Discounter automatically reduces this amount so that the actual CPC you are charged is just one cent more than the minimum necessary to keep your position on the page.(Thanks HB)
So if the OP is correct about being the only advertiser, this suggests that the charge should be what? 1 cent, 2 cents or one cent about the indicated minimum for the keyword to be enabled.
But the other part of the question is: "How can the OP know that there is no other advertiser?"
We haven't been told anything about the nature of the keyword concerned. Was it a single word, or was it a phrase? Was it Broad Match, Phrase Match or Exact Match? These could all affect whether there were other ads that would be elegible for display in response to a given search.
Clearly if the average position is anything other than 1.0 then there must be other advertisers - but we're told that the Average Position is 1.0. This doesn't establish that there are no lower bidders though.
The OP or Google could do a search on the keyword - presumably no other bidders appeared - but this was just a sample. What about searches at other times or from other places? These could produce different results. So again, while it would be possible to prove that there are other bidders, it is not possible to prove that there are no other bidders this way.
I cannot see how any empirical evidence can prove that there were no other eligable ads for each of the searches covering the keyword concerned. The only means of proving the OP's case that I can think of would be to examine Google's code and demonstrate the error - not a lot of chance of that happening.
At the end of the day, we are all dependent on the Google data and algorithms for calculating who pays what to who. That's the rules of this game. It's Google's game, their ball, their rules and they're the referee. If you don't like that then, sorry, you need to find another game.
I do not understand why no-one here is mentioning QS
I did it!, I did it!
And now they say I don't have the basics understandings :(
bah!
My point is that QS would allow Google charge you whatever they want within the range of the Min Bid and the Max Bid. And then it is totally irrelevant whether there are more advertisers or not.
Have not enough QS? Pay 10.00, no matter what.
[edited by: DamonHD at 7:58 am (utc) on Feb. 7, 2007]
