PPC video ads on Google Display network

Is there still any way to do PPC video display network ads?

[La_Valette]

Until last year it was possible to create a display network ad on Google Adwords (now Google Ads) that featured just a video and was paid for on a pay-per-click basis. It was one of the ad types available in the "ad gallery" that was available at that time. These kinds of ads (along with the rest of the ad gallery) appear to have been phased out around July - August 2018.

Does anyone know if there is an equivalent way to create these kind of ads today?

Display network ads now seem to be required to be "responsive display ads" which can feature videos as an optional item, but it seems to be up to Google to decide whether or not the video is actually shown. In most cases they only seem to display the mandatory static images, not the video. Performance of these kind of ads is therefore much closer in aggregate to static banners rather than video ads.

[RhinoFish]

Video RDAs is correct, and yep, G decides.
[marketingland.com...]

But TruView InStream will show on GDN video partner sites, which are pretty numerous.
If you have TruView InStream video campaign running, look at your ads, see the preview there for "Google Video Partners".
And under Placements, under WHERE ADS SHOWED, use the filter to view Display sites.

[La_Valette]

> But TruView InStream will show on GDN video partner sites, which are pretty numerous.

In-stream video ads cannot be set up on a ppc basis, as far as I can see.

The sequence for creating in-stream video ads in Google Ads is now to choose a video campaign, as you also mention, and then choose the in-stream video option. Available bidding strategies for those kind of ads are Maximum CPV or Target CPM. But not PPC.

Certainly not equivalent to the old ad type I mentioned in my original post.

[RhinoFish]

If you're certain that CPC bidding will yield you lesser outcomes than CPV and CPM, then yep, you're right, not equivalent, or even synonymous.

There's more here too, like walled garden discussion of traffic quality, tactics to use embedded LP videos, TruView for Action, and TruView for Shopping, but since you're looking for an equivalent solution only, have fun!

[La_Valette]

Not sure I understand your reply.

With CPC bidding it used to cost us around $3-$5 to get a conversion on average.

With CPV or CPM it costs about $60, which is not sustainable for us.

[RhinoFish]

For every Imp, all bidders are converted to the same effective bid... let's say there is one CPC bidder, one CPM bidder, and one CPV bidder. How does G decide who gets the Imp? All 3 would be converted to an equivalent bid, like all are effective CPC, or effective CPM, or effective CPV... it doesn't matter which really, though let me assert it's effective CPM. The conversion to effective CPM, from CPC, involves CTR. The conversion to effective CPM, from CPV, involves the interaction rate. In other words, G is selling Imps, 3 folks, each using different bid mechanisms are competing for that Imp, so their bids are converted to an effective CPM bid, so they can compete for the spot.

In other words, no matter which bidding mechanism you choose, it alone doesn't get you cheaper Imps, Clicks or Views. Your targeting and creatives determine the costs.

"With CPV or CPM it costs about $60, which is not sustainable for us."
Assuming your targeting is the same, I'd conclude your CPV Views aren't compelling, or CPM Ad Impressions aren't persuasive, Their low View Rate (on a CPV bid) or low Click Rate (on a CPM bid), leaves your costs (to win auctions) so much higher to compete with others, who in their eligible bid mode, are more effective at winning the auctions for the best converting traffic.

[La_Valette]

> For every Imp, all bidders are converted to the same effective bid... let's say there is one CPC bidder, one CPM bidder, and one CPV bidder. How does G decide who gets the Imp? All 3 would be converted to an equivalent bid, like all are effective CPC, or effective CPM, or effective CPV... it doesn't matter which really, though let me assert it's effective CPM. The conversion to effective CPM, from CPC, involves CTR. The conversion to effective CPM, from CPV, involves the interaction rate. In other words, G is selling Imps, 3 folks, each using different bid mechanisms are competing for that Imp, so their bids are converted to an effective CPM bid, so they can compete for the spot.

Agreed 100% that this is the way it should work.

> Assuming your targeting is the same, I'd conclude your CPV Views aren't compelling, or CPM Ad Impressions aren't persuasive,

Same exact videos, same targeting. Doesn't make sense really. Something is going on in the innards of Google that is making the old and new ads have very different outcomes. There's no question that the old CPC video ads in the display network ad gallery were giving far superior results to the options available today.

[tangor]

G's ad product(s) have changed over the years. This is to be expected.

When g started ad servicing there were pricing marks designed to get players (customers/bidders/advertisers) and margins were low. Now that the product is mature (and g has a lock on the market) those margins have been changed to up the profits to g. This is to be expected. Aall companies do this over their lives, particularly if there are stockholders involved.

You will not return to the hey day ROI once enjoyed.

That said, there's a reason one should look to direct sales in addition to third party inserts. I left g many years ago for advertising income because the hand writing was on the wall and each iteration of the product removed more of what was there originally and at the same time the split got that much thinner.

... and the advertiser had to pay "just that much more" ... and the publisher got "just that much less" ... (sigh)

YMMV

[La_Valette]

> You will not return to the hey day ROI once enjoyed.

It's one thing for ROI to go down by 10 or 25%. It's quite another when it goes down by 2000% pretty much overnight when an ad type is eliminated.

By the way, when this happened, our existing display ads were all automatically deleted by Google. No advance notification that this was going to happen, and Google support were totally clueless as to what was going on. They actually claimed we must have deleted them ourselves intentionally! - they said "Google never deletes ads". They also had no idea that this kind of ad gallery display video ad ever even existed to begin with, and somehow maintained that it didn't even when directed to look at the deleted ads.