Google isn't dumb.
So it leads me to question the greedy intentions hidden under the auspices of "improving the user experience". Now with multiple SERPs with unique URLs, the user will click on all of them to get a wide range of results. Beforehand, one might assume that a user would only click on one ebay ad instead of all 7. With 7 ads clicked, google's profits rise nearly 7 fold. Yet all 7 clicks go to unique urls that are then linked directly back to ebay. The user goes away confused, yet profits rise for google. Plus, google is making the single lone ebay affiliate pay more than they ever would for their spot. Again enhancing revenue while superficially improving the user experience.
If they truly wanted to enhance the user experience why don't they provide a decent price comparison website rather than the defunct froogle? They're purposely changing rules at the peril of their customers to enhance profits, not necessarily the user experience.
Any other plausible conspiracy theories out there? Just because the results look diverse, doesn't mean they are. Google is up to something.
For affiliates who build their own landing page, this change is an improvement. Instead of competing with 5 "Ebay" affiliates, we'll only compete with one.
For affiliates who link directly, this can still be an improvement. They no longer have to include "aff". If they can write more compelling copy than the merchant (which often isn't difficult), they'll knock the merchant's listing out.
Sure, they want to remove the duplication such as the 5 eBay ads that might come up on a page. But is this really a bad user experience? These are ads afterall, not the SERPS. For example, we've all seen a company place a small ad on every page of say the sports section of a newspaper. No big deal. And the newspaper is happy too.
A user will probably only click on 1 of those eBay ads and then move on to other ads. No big deal. But if you force those 5 eBay ads to create landing pages and unique URLs, then the user WILL have a bad experience as he clicks on ALL of those ads, thinking they are unique merchants, only to find they all lead to eBay! The user will NOT be happy with Google for that. But Google will have made more revenue off of him as he clicks on more ads, thinking they are unique. So, did Google do it for the user or for revenue?
I say, let the market decide the success or failure of these duplicate ads. If there are 5 eBay ads running, then they must be somewhat successful and even useful as some people are clicking on this one and some on that one, depending on the ad copy, and people are finding what they want and buying it. Otherwise, the affiliates wouldn't be making money and continuing to run the ads. So they are providing a service to users and to eBay by providing additional, informational and enticing copy. What's the problem? Google wants a bigger piece of the action. I guess I would too if I were Google.
So, let the market decide the make-up of AdWords ads and just worry about the appearance and relevancy of the SERPS. Or at least just cut it back to allowing 2 or 3 ads of the same URLs, or 1 per page.
Also, why is Google allowing the removal of the "Affiliate" or "Aff" tag? I'm happy they are, but this may also show that they are making these changes for revenue and not for the user. Removing the affiliate tag and changing the URL will deceive more users into clicking on more ads thinking they are unique as I explained above.
I say, let the market decide the success or failure of these duplicate ads.
You've got to look at the bigger picture. Does Google want AdWords/AdSense to become known primarily as a venue for the kinds of ads that prompted the TOS change? Such ads may not be inherently evil, but having AdWords flooded with direct-to-merchant affiliate ads is like having the SERPs flooded with boilerplate affiliate sites: The results may be good for affiliates, but they don't provide any benefit to the user, and they make Google less attractive to corporate advertisers and advertising agencies.
After digesting it all, I think Google is doing it for revenue, not for the user experience.
Wide,
Of course this is simply a revenue generating scheme. As you imply, where the user could have scanned a column of adwords and seeing 1/2 dozen e-bays and doesn't want e-bay, they could move on.
Now they'll need to click each ad to determine it's just a secondary e-bay search being done on their search query. Wastes a little bit of the user's time, but the additional revenue for Google more than compensates for that.
This is the most cunning scheme since a shampoo marketing company years ago decided to print on the bottle instructions, "Lather, Rinse, then Repeat".
And that only doubled profits!
patient2all
