Not knowing what the exact nature of the celebration was (birth/death/anniversary of the day he made his only sale), I clicked through.
The first thing that caught me eye was not the serps, but the Adwords ads; from the UK, three of them.
The top one, for a well known search engine, struck me as being a bit weak, "Find out all you ever wanted to know about Vincent van Gogh - Click through now" - you know the sort of thing. But, I am on Google am I not, so why would I want to click from one engine to another at this point?
The second ad was for aptly named holiday accomodation - in Spain, and the third ad was for a ubiquitous, almost omnipresent, auction site.
Later in the day the ad offering accomodation stopped showing and in its place there appeared an ad for another holiday resort - with very little in connection with Mr V.G, I felt. Perhaps if he'd had the opportunity of a break, history might be different, I conceded, but that was as far as I could stretch any link between the two.
I felt sorely tempted to add the artist to my kw list, knowing full well that my ads would be even less relevant than the ones I'd seen earlier, but, just for the sheer hell of it, I could do it if I pleased. It wouldn't have done me any good, of course, but, sometimes we do silly things. Likely the artists' name would, in my account, have been disabled straight away; perhaps after a few hundred impressions or so...
Seeing these ads really disappointed me. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the companies and/or individuals offering their services; it's the fact that the ads are showing in the first place; it is Google that disappoints..
Relevancy is one of the key watchwords of the Adwords system - and quite rightly too, but these just did not strike me as being greatly relevant at all.
Just an observation.
Syzygy
Again, just to doubly reiterate and reinforce, I have absolutely no problem with any of the advertisers whatsoever.
Does google think its a way to make extra extra money on some keywords so they will allow highest bid no matter what for the day or so? Has anyone ever gotten the special keywords then be disapproved right away on that day?
...Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the companies and/or individuals offering their services; it's the fact that the ads are showing in the first place; it is Google that disappoints..
I'm guessing that I've been posting here long enough to be allowed the occasional opinion. So here goes.
AdWords offers advertisers what amounts to the chance to run ads of their choosing, on keywords of their choosing, and to have them run on Google.com where there are tens of millions of searches done every day, before being reviewed. This does require a certain amount of trust that our advertisers will do the right thing, no?
Then, once the ads are running, the keywords will become disabled if they prove to show ads which are not judged as relevant to our users - and/or they can be disapproved once reviewed.
But bottom line, if irrelevant ad/keywords have been created, and if poorly targeted ads are then shown to users, I'd argue that the advertiser has to share at least the tiniest bit of responsibility. ;)
(Yes, yet another post in the 'AWA Keys to Keyword Responsiblity' series. Heheh.)
AWA
The traffic today, which caught me by surprise (I didn't post ths ad with the buzz in mind), has been greater than the past 3 months combined - with no sales. Which isn't shocking, as somebody clicking on a new Google logo does not compare to the qualified nature of somebody actually typing in "Vincent Van Gogh."
You spoke of the advertiser's responsibility, AWA, but isn't it a bit questionable for Google to count this as a search, and an Exact match to boot? My cost for today (in this market) is well above the revenue generated.
You spoke of the advertiser's responsibility, AWA, but isn't it a bit questionable for Google to count this as a search, and an Exact match to boot? My cost for today (in this market) is well above the revenue generated.
Poster-boy, I was speaking more in general terms - about the over-arching subject of minimally targeted keywords/ads. Which is a subject I'm liable to run with, when given half a chance. ;)
You raise an excellent point, however, about these 'special logo' days in particular - and I'll use your post to start a conversation about it on this end. This may be what Syzygy and others were getting at too, and I missed it. So thanks to all.
AWA
Patrick wrote:
Vincent Van Gogh?
People Looking For Van
Gogh Save Money At e*ay!
www.e*ay.com
This would be 'more' targeted...
Vincent Van Gogh?
Lost an ear? New and
used ears now at e*ay!
www.e*ay.com
:)
I'm surprised this thread hasn't had more traction. I think the real point hasn't been discussed. The point, IMO, isn't that advertisers have responsibility for running irrelevant ads (which, of course, they do). But I think the real point is that it's disappointing to see ads for a hotel when the search is on a famous artist, when some of us who sell Blue Widgets can't get an ad to run on Blue Widgets bacause the kw Blue Widgets goes On Hold as soon as we start the campaign.
Things are getting worked out (for the most part) and we're all going to survive. I just think the point of the post was missed!
I think the real point is that it's disappointing to see ads for a hotel when the search is on a famous artist, when some of us who sell Blue Widgets can't get an ad to run on Blue Widgets bacause the kw Blue Widgets goes On Hold as soon as we start the campaign.
Well said. That was exactly what I was getting at; am glad someone got it. Obviously didn't express myself well enough at the time.
Syzygy
