Unlikely geographic terms in search term report

Volumes are not realistic

[netfleet]

Over the last few months, I've noticed when I run a search term report, Google is suggesting some search terms with an really high number of supposed searches.

Say I have 'blue widget' in my campaign, Google is saying that one of the actual search terms that has triggered my ad is 'blue widget perth region' or 'blue widget sydney region'

There is no way that the reported number of searches can have happened - it's an unusual serach and there are just far too many. So I'm guessing these searches must have been forced somehow.

It's not through Google's search suggestions (from my browser anyway) - even typing slowly 'blue widget sydne..' it still doesn't suggest 'blue widget sydney region' (I am in Sydney btw)

Also, I've added the search terms as phrase match keywords and they still generate the same high number of reported impressions but the CTR is suspiciously low. When you are at average position #2, using keyword insertion and have matched 4 of the words in a search, you expect to get more than an 0.1% CTR don't you?

So I'm wondering what I'm missing - is there an opportunmity here? Or I am risking my QS by having such low CTR on these types of terms?

Many thanks for any help

David

[alexsel]

When you are at average position #2, using keyword insertion and have matched 4 of the words in a search, you expect to get more than an 0.1% CTR don't you?

That depends. Use the ad preview tool and check to make sure your ads are displayed above the organic listings. If you have an avg. position of 2, but your quality score is low, your ad may very well be on the right hand side. That coupled with sub-optimal ad copy could explain the CTR%.

Why are you using phrase match? I don't recommend it. Run a test, start off with exact matching these keywords and put them in a separate ad group so you're not impacting that ad groups quality score. Then bid up a bit so you can get desired CTR. Make sure your landing page is relevant to search query. If it's not, that could also be weighing down your QS.

Hope that helps

[RhinoFish]

some Google Search Network partners are the reason.

ex, if you go to Amazon, search for something particular, from a certain location, Amazon serves up a page that has Google Search ads displayed (not Display ads). the "keyword" tagged, and pulled thru into reporting, is analogously correct given the "search" situation.

[alexsel]

That's interesting. Never seen that in my search query reports.

[RhinoFish]

you've never seen some really long phrase with very high traffic, that your gut immediately asks your logical mind, huh? because of the way these flourish, look for things that specify stuff like "26oz", "12-count", "oil based" that are in with the name of the product... yes, people might search for this if they were reading the empty package, but when the volume os very high, and the way the report works reveals that they're all typing it exactly the same, you'll know it's stuffed, not natural.

if you turn off search partners, that may also explain never seeing it.

[alexsel]

you've never seen some really long phrase with very high traffic, that your gut immediately asks your logical mind, huh?

We do advertise in Google's search network and rarely do we switch it off for any of our campaigns. It may just be more pervasive for a particular industry that you're in. Retail for example. In travel, I haven't seen evidence of it yet.

[RhinoFish]

i'll find them for you, send me your password (kidding).

i've seen this in too many places for it to be a fluke or niche specific. but yes, certainly would be more pervasive in some niches, like any tangible products (amazon's impact there for sure). but i've seen it in some very weird, unexpected places.

as i think about it, G's reporting has to classify it somewhere, it does represent real clicks... bet they struggle with the best way to show it in reporting interface.

tell you what, skip the search term report, segment some high volume power keywords by top vs other, looking for huge imps and low ctr on search partner networks, you'll find the same reporting dilemma there sometimes too, where search partners don't absolutely align "right" with the normal pattern of 'matched to keyword' reporting.

in any case, am sure G's reporting dilemma doesn't impact your QS, you can see that in the reporting as well. smart noodles over there in g-land.

[alexsel]

tell you what, skip the search term report, segment some high volume power keywords by top vs other, looking for huge imps and low ctr on search partner networks, you'll find the same reporting dilemma there sometimes too, where search partners don't absolutely align "right" with the normal pattern of 'matched to keyword' reporting.

Good call. I'll try it out and follow up if I detect any unusual patterns.