To provide a better search ads experience, we've been developing and testing a variety of new ad formats. These formats are focused on giving you the information you need, while retaining what you love about Google advertising: that the ads are relevant and useful.If you’re in the U.S. you may have already seen a number of these ad formats when searching on Google.
And starting today, you might spot ads that include images and prices for specific products. When shopping for the ski outfit your nephew has been hinting about all year, you might see pictures from the retailer’s inventory to help you quickly determine if they have the color and style you had in mind.
Still other ad formats may introduce new ways of presenting information, such as Comparison Ads, which allow you to specify exactly what you're looking for and to compare rates and prices in a single location. With the approaching new year comes resolutions to get things in order, so you might want an ad that lets you see side-by-side refinancing offers.
The bigger the relationship (aka the amount you pay) the more prominent you will probably be.
I also said that anyone who truly believes that they are going to always get a free ride for commercial sites and bases their business model on that is in for a nasty shock down the line.
So, no surprises here :)
However, in the settings field in Adwords under 'ad extensions', when I checked on "Connect to my Google Merchant Center Account", I got an error which read "Field too long".
Assuming that the 'field' here was the account name in Google Merchant Center Account, I tried modifying that, but it did not work.
Need help!
@makemetop:
"A long time ago, I said that the only way you can be sure of being seen on a search engine for commercial results is by having a commercial relationship with them (aka paying them).
The bigger the relationship (aka the amount you pay) the more prominent you will probably be."
Well d'uh, this is AdWords, the whole point is basically the more you pay the more / better advertising space you get...
Well d'uh, this is AdWords, the whole point is basically the more you pay the more / better advertising space you get...
He doesn't mean that. At long time ago (10 years plus), there was no differentiation between the organic and sponsored results on most search engines.
If there was 50 advertisers and 10 results per page, the first organic result was on page 6 and there was no easy way to tell who was listed for free and who was paying.
Then, there was a fuss that they should tell the users which results are paid for and which are free listings. This is when we began to see more organic results appear higher to make the search engines look like the 'good guys'. This is the reason that Google and others put "Sponsored Links" on the adverts and have them look slightly different.
Then came paid inclusion and even "organic" positions could be enhanced by paying for inclusion (although this was always strongly denied).
As above the fold is such valuable property on search it was inevitable that Google will capitalize on that fact and attempt to monetize the results while still trying to give the user a useful experience.
Why would they just give that revenue away if people are willing to pay for those clicks and they produce good revenue for both partners in the deal (plus the searchers who find what they want).
The mess up will come if it truly does negate the user experience - but, IMHO, this may not happen if they do manage to enhance things for the average user.
Complete, utter, downright spam.
No, Johnnie, it's advertising. Spam is unsolicited bulk messages sent indiscriminately.
The adverse reaction to this announcement is amusing because behind it is the frustration that another media channel is getting taken over by those with the money. And, that is a concern.
"Do no evil" is dead.Only if money is evil, Johnnie.
makemetop said:
...anyone who truly believes that they are going to always get a free ride for commercial sites and bases their business model on that is in for a nasty shock down the line.
Good point, well made. This is the kind of thoughtful analysis that brings me back to WW.
I'll make the obvious point and say if Google or any other search engine becomes only a place to find ads on a topic (not an awful concept, btw), then they risk losing their high status with their public.
They have a balancing act to perform. If they mess it up, someone will come in and take their business. It's the same problem The New York Times has. (See the debate about front-page ads, for example.)
It is fair to expect that Google will push the boundaries.
I, for one, do not think ads are a bad thing for the consumer or the market place. What's "popular" is not always the best. Allowing an idea to break out in front using the cash of someone who will "put their money where their mouth is" can serve the common good. Perfect? Hardly. But, I don't know of a better system.
No, Johnnie, it's advertising. Spam is unsolicited bulk messages sent indiscriminately.I partly agree on the strict defintion of spam. However, too much ad space on a page is also commonly regarded as looking 'spammy'. Maybe I should've said that.
Yes, my response is a sign of growing frustration. I know that being an SEO makes me terribly biased towards the organic side of the spectrum, but when I search on google, I want to see a list of relevant websites to dive into. If I want to see a list of business in my area, I'll consult the yellow pages.
1) Show Organics only
2) Show Organics & Ads
3) Show Ads only
Of course, let's not forget that this whole discussion only applies to google.com which is just *one* of the 3 Ad distribution channels: google.com, search partners, content.
I don't know about you, but I'm seeing that google.com is becoming a smaller and smaller component of my ad activity. I'm getting huge ad action from search partners and content.
I also said that anyone who truly believes that they are going to always get a free ride for commercial sites and bases their business model on that is in for a nasty shock down the line.
If 'free' is not paying google for the mere virtue of being found, then yes... I am on a 'free' ride. One for which I already paid.
Define a 'free ride'. I for one invest considerable amounts of time (and thus money; I could be spending time with my employer instead) into the generation of well-optimzied quality material. Sorry, but it really doesn't feel like a 'free ride' at all.
Not really relevant for Google though.
Define a 'free ride'.
Working on a site to get free traffic and avoid spending money on ads doesn't benefit Google in anyway. SEO work is not an indication of quality for organic results, and how much time you spend on it isn't relevant to anyone else but you. You either have a site with quality *content* and get organic traffic (like having unique products and descriptions) because that's what people are searching for, or you buy ads to convince them to spend money in your shop.
Google isn't getting paid to list the site on it's serps pages.
but when I search on google, I want to see a list of relevant websites to dive into. If I want to see a list of business in my area, I'll consult the yellow pages.
I think paid ads will be more relevant. If i pay for the click i want to make sure it's very relevant. If it's "free" traffic what do i care come on in.
Google isn't getting paid to list the site on it's serps pages.
You're refuting the very basis of Google's existence. Google was born out of the need to bring order to chaos; to be able to search through the web from one clean and accessible entrypoint. Google provides them this starting point exactly. Mind you that without organic results, there would likely be no Google in the first place: who'd go to a search engine if there's no content to search through? So while it may be true I'm not paying G to get my site in their SERPs, I am providing them with additional reasons for their users to come to them; quality content. In fact, one might even argue Google does get its piece of the pie; I have been a content publisher on their content network for quite a while now and have no intention whatsoever of cutting them out.
Monetization of search result pages is a logical step and being a marketer myself I'm not opposed to such at all. However, in my opinion Google is severely pushing the boundaries here. They're losing touch with their founding principles. They're a search engine.
They are a Borg. Data collection. We are Data to them. We are no more than Data. Define how much the Borg knows about self. It understands your site(Ads or a perfect way for them to have your site to collect data=you are listed)
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-12345687-9";
urchinTracker();
</script>
or it does not = blackhat, no good.
I am providing them with additional reasons for their users to come to them; quality content
Yes, but Johnnie, the times have changed. Now you are just 0.00000001% of their index. Probably less. So unless 1000s of other (major!) publishers agree on de-listing their quality pages from Google, YOUR quality content does not matter to Google at all.
They are a Borg. Data collection. We are Data to them. We are no more than Data.
Good observation, even if a bit dark for my taste. But in general I agree. Now, do I want to be "just data"?
Ads were very annoying when they showed up first time. People were not shopping online as much as they do today.
So (I guess), many that said "what!" at that time, now say nothing when they see ads.
But yes, some will go elsewhere as they will not like it, simple as that.
It's personal feeling about if something looks spammy or not. I haven't had a chance to see pictures besides ads, but tried to imagine, and it looked to me like database driven site solution for $10/month.
The more important point is about business sustainability for folks that don't use paid search or other paid solutions.
Bit of everything is way to go - but yeah - no time, so we pick what we think is the best part.
They have the money to become the biggest bidding affiliate on the Internet.
"Do no Evil", right......... There still are actually people who believe that nonense.
I hope the FTC gets their claws into them and makes their life miserable.
@arizonadude, just like any other company, google can advertise on AdWords. It doesn't link through to any bridge pages or affiliates so where exactly do any Google Ads break quality guidelines?
As a Google user I truthfully don't mind these ads (especially on shopping related queries). As an advertiser I really wish they wouldn't have shoved them in position 4 (the highest performing real estate in paid search). Most of my P4 keywords have now dropped below the fold, it's been a real annoyance.
