Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
- How about a general repository for us to share filters? I'm thinking of something along the lines of the way Google offers widgets and gadgets and whatnot for iGoogle and Desktop. I've created some and gone out and found some out there that did things I didn't even realize were possible; why re-invent the wheel?
- I find the breadcrumb navigation somewhat lacking. There's a lot of times where I'm digging down deep to the keyword level, and I want to go back just one step, and I end up back about four levels, or worse yet, where I started.
- Much more help on setting up to track other types of campaigns (MSN and Yahoo PPC, online campaigns, offline campaigns)
- For those of us who are working with clients (as opposed to just our own accounts) it would be really great to be able to set up some kind of a demo account with some demo stats (or have one available) to show to clients. To be honest, they'd rather have me show them the benefits step by step with an account that looks like their traffic and their sample products than sit through your presentation. I can't show one client another's data, and they just don't seem to get how useful and important this information is unless they can see it and click on it and I can explain it in terms of their business.
Ok, that's for starters. I have more.
I dont know if this is still the case, but it would be very helpful to put the information about why ads are disapproved that can be found in the 'tools > disapproved ads' section directly available from the campaign.
[edited by: Seb7 at 8:20 am (utc) on May 13, 2009]
I like the CPA bids, but on some compaigns I would prefer a CPC bid (without loosing the conversion optimisation).
Looking at where Google is putting the ads highlights areas where ads are given tens of thousands of impressions without a single click, and areas where I've had thousands of clicks without a single conversion.
Google's approach seems to be to slow down compaigns which dont produce a good CTR, but Google can easily optimise the comapaign to produce better results themselves.
Would be nice to stop wasting Ad impressions on URLs where it has become very obvious its not going to produce a result, and increase impressions where high results are being returned.
[edited by: Seb7 at 8:40 am (utc) on May 13, 2009]
Most our locations are in latitude and longitude format such as 40.434436, -80.024817...
It's like we have campaigns specific in match type and share exactly the same ad groups, keywords and target the same geo-locations.(blue-widgets-phrase/blue-widgets-exact).
Now we have the location list:
We have to put in them one by one in the custom targeting option and check them manually every campaign setting.
Is that clearer?
Aside to whitneycia: when I asked '*forms?' above, I had totally missed your initial post in which you had the typo 'froms' in the last sentence. Which explains why I had no idea what you meant in your follow-on post in which you just said '*forms'. I thought that was a stand-alone post. ;)
Anyway, the Advertiser Feedback Report goes out in about 6 hours - and additional feedback will happily be included from anyone who cares to post it here.
how about a "whitelist" of domains and webpages for an Inclusion list?
When running a Placement Report, I keep on checking domains for placement quality, that I had already checked in the past.
An option to exclude my whitelisted domains in the placement report would help out in the tedious weeding process of those thousand urls.
Same for whitlisting just a directory or specific webpage(s) but blocking the rest of the domain
Large informational sites such as about.com, encyclopedia type sites and patent gatherers can be excellent to advertise on, but could be easier to whitelist just that one directory, instead of blocking 32 directories for that site. Furthermore, not every site has their content organised in subdirectories or subdomians -> so I could just whitlist the 10 most interesting informational pages/patents etc..
When creating a new report, one can manually select campaigns you want to estimate from a list, but the list table is so narrow that I can not figure out which is the campaign I want(as a result of organized long campaign names :P). Please widen the table or put some funtion like mouseovering and display the full name.
Thanks a lot.
- In Conversion Optimizer, when setting the CPA, it shows me all the deleted ad groups and sets a minimum CPA; if I try to remove it I get an error message.
- When I click on "Dismiss This Message" would like it to actually dismiss this message. I can't get rid of messages saying "Upcoming changes for creating Click-to-Play Video Ads" in my video campaigns.
This doesn't seem to work in the new interface if there are bids or urls attached.
Further, the old edit keywords box would let you see all the existing keywords and paste right over them. So if I have a list of 953 keywords (and I do), each with unique bids and landing pages, and I changed the bids, I could view them all, select them all, and paste the new list, and be done. In the new interface, I have to first delete them existing keyword entries and I can only do that 50 at a time (or edit them manually one at a time, YUCK!) and then pasting the updated ones in, with keyword level bids and urls specified doesn't look to be possible.
Help, the old method was vastly superior to what I see now.
In fact, the new interface, it's too much work to do things this way. I paused it.
Could you please consider making it like the old one? Or let us delete more than 50 at a time and provide a way to upload a file (or better yet, paste away like we used to be able to do!)?
a "whitelist" of domains and webpages for an Inclusion list on Campaign or maybe even Account level:
Add to that the possibility of giving weighted percentages per whitelisted domain or url.
So for my content network based advertising bids, the actual $-bids will be increased or lowered per domain/url:
similar to the % bid adjustement mode in the time of day based Ad scheduling.
but when i come back, the second metric is still selected, but it isn't visible on the graph.
to get it to show again, i have to select a different second metric (which i then switch back to my original choice).
There are still five or six hours before I hit 'Send' on this week's Advertiser Feedback Report - and I'm happy to include late-breaking additions. I'll check back a time or two before it goes out.
By the way, last week's report was #300. Basically sent weekly for the past six years - with a great deal of the (verbatim) feedback coming directly from this excellent forum.
PS: an example of advertiser feedback at work (including your feedback) was posted about by engine, in this thread:
Google AdWords Enhanced Search Query Reports
We have a campaign that targets France and the campaign targets all 41 languages. We do this because there are always some people whose settings are different that the host country. For example, English is a common search setting all over the world, so there is a decent amount of traffic to be had by targeting English as well as the native language of the targeted country.
A real example. I'm targeting France and Spain, and my targeted languages are English, French, and Spanish. When I hold my cursor over the tool, it gives me the diagnostics results for "keyword" in "Paris, France" with language setting "English." Not very useful. What it should do is run the diagnostics with French. This is a more useful diagnostic.
[edited by: Soze at 7:18 am (utc) on May 22, 2009]
* For the Networks view, the text for the sites in list should be clickable links allowing the advertiser to easily open the site in another window to investigate it.
* The feature from the previous interface allowing one to look at campaign and adgroup results by either search or content network should be added to the new interface.
* There is a scrolling bug that causes several lines to be passed by when scrolling down. (In Firefox; other browsers not tested.)
* The graph function has a bug causing it to display metrics other than what was specified. It only happens when opening the page, not when changing metrics.
i REALLY need that feature, please put it back.
not having it seems to be causing other these problems.
right now i'm clicking back to the old interface and pasting into that old edit box and that works fine. and my keywords i just processed have appended keyword urls and keywords bids.
when i switch back to the new interface i see several things wrong with my entered, existing keywords...
(1) the count is wrong (because the ad group negative keywords disappear in the new interface)
(2) if i filter my existing keywords by match type, negative isn't a choice. i do realize that negatives also have exact/phrase/broad types to them, but that doesn't show them either. further, forgetting the negative keywords in this ad group for a second, if i filter non-neg keywrods by either exact, phrase or broad match type, it finds no keywords. perhaps it chokes on the appended keyword urls and keywods bids (which i'm begging you to put back into the edit box process, and to make the interface understand the appended data information).
however, the filtering on the non-negative keywords by match type remains an issue though.
and did i mention i miss the ability to paste all ad group keywords at once, with appended keyword urls and keyword bids? :-)
[edited by: RhinoFish at 7:47 pm (utc) on May 22, 2009]
It feels like the data window is sooooo small (and we're primarily in the interface to access data!).
I hope the analytical folks within G do a comparison of the old interface, versus the new, and look at the 2D data area that contains data, as well as volume of data presented. An above the fold analysis, as well as full page, should be an interesting, compelling, additional way to judge the new interface's efficacy.
when the new interface shows you the edit box for the new ad, the dest url it shows has converted characters like "&" to "&", which confuses the user. if G wants to internally convert urls in this way, that's cool of course. but showing us the url that's been modified will lead to questions and mistakes, in my opinion. so either force url character conversion upon entry or hide it all in the background - but be consistent about it please.
this is true in both the new and old interface. suggest during the copy process, you add an option to also copy these things. at the campaign level, users are thinking about broad conceptual issues that do very likely apply to all campaigns. a campaign level neg or exclusion might, for example, be a competitor's trademark or site that you've chosen to avoid in all things. have the analysts look at the nature of the c-level negs and exclusions - i think G should make them copy over to, by default.