Where do I put my broad match catch-all ad?

[pavlovapete]

I have 3 existing phrase-matched adgroups in a single campaign.

Each adgroup has one single phrase matched ad.

Each ad has one single phrase matched keyword/s.

Is it possible to make a broad matched adgroup that would not compete with the existing phrase matched adgroup? Is it as simple as the example below?

Example:

Phrase adgroup:
"widget instruction manual"

Broad adgroup:
widget instruction manual
-"widget instruction manual"

Thanks

[RhinoFish]

for search, that'll work. you might also bid the phrase higher (which i'd do anyhow) and leave the broad and phrase within the same adgroup (qs is on a keyword level basis).

[SanDiego Art]

I prefer the separate ad groups initially proposed as you have better control of the broad match term not being served over the phrase match with the use of negatives and have the ability to use different ad creative since you know the search query is slightly different that your actual "phrase" term.

Example, probably don't want to use DKI {Keyword:xyz} with Broad match ad group as you could display mispelled ads when the user has a typo -- especially if the broad keyword is related to your brand name.

[pavlovapete]

Thanks for your replies RhinoFish and SanDiego.

I'll let this run for a week and report back.

bid the phrase higher

Done

leave the broad and phrase within the same adgroup (qs is on a keyword level basis)

I know you've said something meaningful here - I just don't understand it. Are you saying that my Broad won't impact on my Phrase's QS and so I can put them together?

you have better control of the broad match term

Yep - I'll leave it in its own group for the moment.

Cheers

[RhinoFish]

yep, you can put them together and use the phrase's higher bid to steer phrase matched queries to the phrase keyword and away from the broad matched one in the same ad group. or, as others suggest, you can put them in separate adgroups altogether, do as you please with the bid (you'll usually get more value from the phrase, so you'll likely bid it higher anyhow) and have the ability to add negs to the broad adgroup without affecting the separate phrase adgroup at all.

here's my take though... too much segmentation can lead to insufficient data to draw reasonable conclusions. if you've got a neg list so that you know conceptually that your broad and phrase version represent essentially the same thing, i see an analytical advantage (aggregated stats) to combining them within the same adgroup. further, as the number of adgroups goes up, the attention each gets is less.

but here's the good news... if you're struggling with how much segmentation to implement, you're way ahead of most of your competition which ever way you go - the vast majority of accounts i see have insufficient segmentation. we're discussing a minor point here about the depth and extent of segmenting - trust me, you'll be fine either way. :-)

[pavlovapete]

Thank you for your kind and informative words RhinoFish.

as the number of adgroups goes up, the attention each gets is less

I am doing this very slowly. I currently have 4 adgroups running in one campaign. That is the sum total of my Adwords campaigns. So I'm not hitting a mental limit just yet :) But I do take your point and agree with it. For big advertisers there is no point segmenting beyond what is actionable.

trust me, you'll be fine either way

Ahh - if only I had your confidence in me!

OK - takeway:
- running phrase and broad in the same adgroup is a possibility, in some ways it depends on the number of campaigns you are running.

Cheers

[RhinoFish]

regardless of whether you split or run together, use the see search terms tool to see what is matching up with your broads, and from that, develop new positive and negative keywords. where it makes sense, split things out for finer control. keep in mind that ctr is a better reason for splitting than phrase versus equivalent broad control... meaning, the conceptual framework of each adgroup lends itself to certain ads performing better, so where you suspect splitting would benefit ad / ctr performance, lean towards over segmenting / splitsville. if it's just splitting for broad versus phrase control, you'd likely be better off building up your broad negs than splitting (since those broad negs need to be created eventually anyhow) - and once the broads are under neg control, leaving things together will be fine.

if you end up with only 4 adgroups for your business, then i'd go with what others recommended, because i assume these would be high volume keywords for each match type (wiping away my aggregate data argument) and also leaving you with a teeny number of hitter adgroups to keep an eye on.

so your takeaway is...

focus on ctr first. if ctr seems to call for splitting, split.

and...

don't use splitting as a proxy or excuse for not developing proper broad negs.

[joelrunner]

I agree with the feedback so far in that the best answer is "it depends".

Personally, I think the biggest reason to separate broad/phrase/exact into different adgroups is to take advantage of embedded match. (And the only reason to do that is if you have short-tail broad match terms that convert well, but not for the phrase itself. For example, if the broad match term "widgets" is converting at a $5 CPA, but "widgets" as an exact match term is converting at $15, you'd want them in separate adgroups so you can make sure broad match doesn't "contaminate" exact match when your broad match bids exceed your exact match bids. (Separate adgroups, however isn't enough. You have to separate adgroups AND use embedded match to prevent this from happening.)

The biggest downside to separating into 3 separate adgroups is that it takes that much longer to pick a winning ad (assuming you're split-testing multiple ads.)

In a nutshell, I'd say to choose one or the other depending on whether you want to
1) have a extremely precise control at the keyword level, and make sure your winning broad match terms don't "contaminate" your exact match terms,
or 2) run split tests between different ads and be able to determine a winner as quickly as possible.

PS - to have the best of both worlds, you'd do embedded match, and then compile the ad stats from the 3 different ad groups by using a pivot table, but that's taking "geekiness" to a whole new level. It's probably only worth going to this level of trouble for ultra high-traffic accounts.

You can read more about embedded match at:
[adwords.google.com ]

[smallcompany]

I would keep them separate for few reasons:

1. to be sure your existing (phrase) performance does not get affected
2. easier to control bids on ad group level (and to do a quick check)
3. easier to use and benefit from "See search terms..." feature (this is an important one)

In 3rd, basically you check search terms every some time, and you start adding negative keywords accordingly. You should also use this in your phrase ad groups as there may be some phrases that you don't want to waste money on.

What I do is that I check the broad match and add converting keywords to exact and phrase match ad groups. My goal is to have those keywords not to trigger ads from within broad match anymore. That's where negative terms and higher bids help.
This is a "cute" job for smaller campaigns. Can be a hassle for bigger ones.