Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 3.93.75.30

Forum Moderators: buckworks & eWhisper & skibum

Message Too Old, No Replies

Adwords legal?

     
9:14 am on Jun 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 31, 2001
posts: 1357
votes: 0


In the old Adwords system I felt somewhat in control, I bid for position and didn't have to tell Google how much I intended to spend each day or what my maximum bid was.

Now I have to disclose to the company that will benefit from the knowledge what my maximum bid is and what my budget is. All of my competitors are forced to do the same. Now the Google Adwords system can rotate ads in order to maximise its income.

Its like going into a casino telling the croupier how much you have to spend and then playing Blackjack where you have to show all your cards and the croupier can select whatever cards he/she wants from the deck to make sure you lose as fast as possible.

Can this possibly be legal?

Cheers

Sid

12:26 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from GB 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member piatkow is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 5, 2006
posts:3462
votes: 68


err - without a limit on bids when does one advertiser finally outbid another?
12:56 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 31, 2001
posts:1357
votes: 0


Before the change that happened a couple of years ago I bid for top spot. I got top spot. Now I open my wallet and Google decides the best way to empty it by allowing me a mix of top to n slots.

The change was not for the benefit of users, or "advertisers" it was so that Google can maximise its yield from searches.

The problem is that Google controls both the sell and the buy and can therefore manipulate its own market. This simply would not be allowed in a stock market for example. There has to be a clear divide between the interests of those buying and those selling.

Cheers

Sid

1:26 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 31, 2008
posts:661
votes: 0


I'd say: why are you going in to play in such a casino?
While it's certainly not the nicest thing to do, you're not forced to advertise with google.
As always, the question shouldn't be "is it fair", but rather "am I making my cut", and that's all your decision wether to use their services or not should be based upon.
Can you blame them for wanting to increase their profits? Don't you?
If too many advertisers feel like they're wasting money and start buying ads someplace else, google will surely notice and change whatever they feel they'd need to change.
2:16 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Mar 30, 2005
posts:13012
votes: 222


Can this possibly be legal?

Of course it's legal.

There has to be a clear divide between the interests of those buying and those selling.

This isn't the stock market. It's Google's ad delivery system, on (at least in part) Google's property. They "buy" ad space from web properties and "sell" ad space to advertisers.

BTW, there are plenty of ways to make money from both ends in the market as well.

2:41 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 28, 2004
posts:1081
votes: 0


In the old Adwords system I felt somewhat in control, I bid for position and didn't have to tell Google how much I intended to spend each day or what my maximum bid was.

Now I have to disclose to the company that will benefit from the knowledge what my maximum bid is and what my budget is.

I'm not sure how the model you're describing would work. If not a budget and a bid, how would you propose defining your specific parameters?

At a blackjack table, you place defined bets (bids) per hand. And, you do so with chips that require cash pre-payments (allotted budgets).

2:54 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 31, 2001
posts:1357
votes: 0


Am I the only one who feels that there's something not quite right with Google controlling buying and selling of positions?

Did no one prefer the old system where you had a greater degree of control?

Sid

3:36 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Mar 30, 2005
posts:13012
votes: 222


I don't know what you mean by the "old system" - you always had to specify a budget and a maximum bid. The only thing even slightly "new" is quality scoring.
4:07 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 31, 2001
posts:1357
votes: 0


Now you are making me start to feel mad as well as daft.

My recollection is that I bid say $3, if the next highest bid $2.50 I paid $2.51 and was above the one bidding $2.50. Or have I been on another planet for too long. No quality scores just my decision to bid for the top slot.

Now I bid $6 and I get to #1 10% of the time even though I have a bounce rate of just 13%.

The point is that "Quality Score" is another term for "manipulation of ads to maximise Google income". And they keep changing it, testing a new mix of algo factors to see if they can increase Google income. Before "Quality Score" I could work out how much to bid to be #1 all of the time.

I'll give it a rest now.

Cheers

Sid

4:13 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 28, 2004
posts:1081
votes: 0


I think you're recalling the Yahoo/Overture system. Google did used to have a Sponsored Results program... back in 2002-3, if my memory serves... which, I believe was on a CPM basis? Outside of that, Netmeg is correct.
4:29 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 31, 2001
posts:1357
votes: 0


I am going mad!

Mind you I hate the Yahoo/Overture system as well.

Cheers

Sid

PS I spend over $100,000 a year with Google and about $30,000 Bill and Mr Yahoo.

5:08 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 26, 2005
posts:426
votes: 1


Hissingsid I can not go as far as to say what the old system is like, but i can most certainly agree with you that Google is squeezing everyone and anyone out of their money as frequently as possible. But I am sure you know that Google is in this to make money, not this whole stupid concept of Do no Evil. Thats just a pitch to the masses to give the false appearance that they are a good company. They are a compnay, bottom line, they will do what ever is necessary to survive in a weak economy. They already have the search market locked in for at least anohter 5 years and they know it, so expect advertisers to pay the price for that monopoly.

Someone said why play at a casino if you dont like the house rules, that makes sense, but when the rules are not fair to advertisers and the majority of the planet does not know or care about this, you are forced to play by their rules regardless if you want to or not, thats the way it is. This is about selling and money, not making people happy. I feel your pain, I spend close to 150k a month in PPC and Google is squeezing the profits right out of everyone. There are so many shady, unethical things that Google allows because of one reason, money.

I come to find out a month ago that one reason ads do not always appear is because if you run a tight budget and come within a certain percentage of your daily budget your ads wont be served 100% of the time even though you are hundreds and in some cases thousands of dollars away from meeting that budget. Why? Its pretty obvious to me, they do it because if they can't get people to raise their daily budgets and make money that way they will force them to raise their max bids and get them anyway.

5:31 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 31, 2008
posts:661
votes: 0


They already have the search market locked in for at least anohter 5 years and they know it, so expect advertisers to pay the price for that monopoly.

Apart from the unfair play you see, that monopoly-thing is true for most of europe, but not for the united states, is it? I mean, in germany, google is above 90%, that clearly is a defacto monopoly and every hour spent on optimizing for yahoo or bing/live in this market is wasted. but as far as I know, they're far from that in the states, more like 60%. while that is still a big lead, it's not even close to a monopoly. Is my knowledge on that outdated?

6:21 pm on June 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 26, 2005
posts:426
votes: 1


I suspect it is much higer than 60% depending on your niche. Who is the real competition in the US? Certainly not Yahoo or MSN/Live/Bing/Rebranding one year from now.

Yahoo is on its way out the door. It has been for years. Your right about Germany, I run localized ad to localized pages to a localized product across all major PPC platforms and Google crushes them.

I think your knowledge is right about market share from a very broad sense of statisical research, but i am willing to bet that market share is higher in certain niche's.

 

Join The Conversation

Moderators and Top Contributors

Hot Threads This Week

Featured Threads

Free SEO Tools

Hire Expert Members