Is anyone noticing a ranking problem on Google this weekend. We are usually number 1,2 or 3 with the majority of our keywords. Suddenly we are number 6 or 7 and other competitors that are usually very low are now number 1 or 2. Seems like everything has been reversed.
Anyone else with the same problem?
Thanks,
NF
Google may be doing whatever it's doing for the benefit of relevant searches, but the advertisers pay the bills, and if they continue to play queer with them, I'm sure advertisers will migrate to other sources of PPC advertising. Like I said, I don't know whether I want to even BOTHER with their advertising system, because it sounds to me like a very sure way to lose money.
If you don't know what you're doing wrong, how can you correct it? Now, I'm seeing a big drop in ROI but I'm not sure where the fault lies :(
Am already spending more on OV & less on G. Waiting for MSN's PPC & looking at other sources of traffic ...
[edited by: eWhisper at 3:13 pm (utc) on July 9, 2005]
[edit reason] Please don't drop programs. [/edit]
"Even though your ad's rank might be lower in some cases, your overall campaign results - such as average position, clickthrough rate (CTR), impressions, and spend - should be improved."
As you've seen through out this thread, the above statement is certainly not the case.
My own double digit CTR now means nothing as my ads aren't in the specific positions that have taken me years to ascertain.
"I strongly believe that it is the overall ad performance that matters most. . ."
I couldn't agree more, however along with the folks on this thread, my ROI has evaporated while my CPC has as much as tripled in some cases.
Any idea how much longer this will continue, or is it simply considered permanent at this point?
Thanks
Any idea how much longer this will continue, or is it simply considered permanent at this point?
I think the only think permanent about it is that some people are going to permanently remove their accounts from Adwords while the others suffer along until it looks too bleak to continue.
It's a shame really. I used to put a lot of stock into the Adwords statistics I was getting. But now with this regional diversification and, on top of that, the click fraud lawsuit, I can't really see people keeping the faith in what otherwise was a perfectly legitimate advertising medium (as far as our profit margin was concerned).
I'm a consultant with clients, so my situation is not one of being accountable only to myself. I'm accountable to clients, and I can't afford mistakes.
Before you count out Google completely, let me mention a couple of things.
Google is a great tool. Our company regularly makes over $100,000 profit per month with it (using Adwords), and even with the current and constant annoying changes we still continue to do so every month (including being on par to do it this month) so when I get all riled up about having to make another adjustment, it's really just me playing out my frustration.
However, some people on this forum have really been devastated by this most-recent algo change, to the extent where they have been let go from their jobs because the drop in traffic was just too significant to warrant the job being affordable. Note that this is just due to Google. If Yahoo or MSN commanded anywhere near the traffic potential, then people wouldn't put up with it and just switch over. Unfortunately that isn't the case. I consider myself lucky that our business just has that kind of staying power, not to mention the capital we are able to throw at our campaigns, which gives us somewhat of an edge to be able to tough out the curveballs that get thrown our way with the changes and updates.
I believe that if you want to be competitive, you absolutely need to use AdWords, or at the very least, try to optimize your website for Google Natural Results. If you do use Adwords though, relating to the basic point of this thread, keep in mind that the results will be different from every part of the country, based on regional CTR. Therefore, in order to get REAL accurate reporting, you have to log in to proxy servers throughout the country and obtain the results for yourself. While I do believe (warily) that the Adwords Reporting shows accurate data, it is an average of the different (sometimes radically different) listing positions you will find yourself in. For example, in our neck of the woods, for a particular keyword, we list at #10 in sponsored. In Denver we list at #1 for the same keyword. Personally what I don't understand is how they are coming up with the figure for cost-per-click when the listings are different.
On the positive side, since you would be just starting an account, you have the benefit of knowing this information beforehand, and therefore can explain to the people you are accountable to what really goes on. But the fact that it needs explaining is, in my eyes, a bit ridiculous. Especially when you've been doing it a certain way, expecting particular results and then the tables are just turned on you. I can understand doing this for natural results, since its free, but when people are paying for a service, you expect to have some stability.
My advice to you is to go ahead and start up an account, but when you do any type of individual SERP reporting, log into a proxy server independent of your area and check results from there. If you're ambitious enough, log into several servers and see if there are any differences in your ranking. This should keep the CTR in your area level enough so that any results are untainted.
I wonder if this is something that the U.S. government will get involved with someday. A lot of the stuff Google does seems to have a smell similar to that which Microsoft has gotten busted for. Monopolies, their power and all that. It's too bad advertisers couldn't band together in a national way and each agree to bid no more than $0.5 for each and every keyword.
My concerns are similar to another person's who mentioned that they based their whole bidding system on respective positions of various keywords. I don't WANT my keywords in number 1 position, because I don't want a lot of impulse clicks. Nor do I want my keywords on the second page. I wonder whether I would be paying for "worthless clicks" with a number 1 position (and possibly the relative cpc)and no clicks on the second page.
One thing I have noticed is that my relevant keyword prices HAVE gone through the roof in the last few days/weeks, and based on what I've heard in this forum, I can see why. YSM prices are about one-half of what they are at Goofy Google for my keywords.
Thanks for your keenful insight!
I wonder if this is something that the U.S. government will get involved with someday. A lot of the stuff Google does seems to have a smell similar to that which Microsoft has gotten busted for. Monopolies, their power and all that. It's too bad advertisers couldn't band together in a national way and each agree to bid no more than $0.5 for each and every keyword.My concerns are similar to another person's who mentioned that they based their whole bidding system on respective positions of various keywords. I don't WANT my keywords in number 1 position, because I don't want a lot of impulse clicks. Nor do I want my keywords on the second page. I wonder whether I would be paying for "worthless clicks" with a number 1 position (and possibly the relative cpc)and no clicks on the second page.
One thing I have noticed is that my relevant keyword prices HAVE gone through the roof in the last few days/weeks, and based on what I've heard in this forum, I can see why. YSM prices are about one-half of what they are at Goofy Google for my keywords.
Well with this new system you will not be able to figure out where your ad is going to be positioned. The only thing you are going to get out of this an average position. Mind you your still going to get charged the same amount no matter where your listed in the adwords positions...Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, etc..... This is why I am so furious with this change! If I'm paying the same amount per click why in the #$@# am I paying the same amount for that click on page 1-2-3-4? It's pure BS! I can't imagine that Google isn't getting an earful about this change either?! What they have done is the most absurd thing I have ever heard of! We all pay for position or there is simply no reason to pay for it! Why is there even a cost per click adjustment if we can't get the position we think we are paying for? We should all be getting charged .05/click bottom line!
I need to work with advertising companies that play straight -- not the ones that play like they're on LSD... At least until further notice
Even if the algo is fixed or reverted back to its original ways, you still never know when it will happen again, and it WILL happen again.
I definitely applaud your move. While our company would be seriously inhibited if we were to remove ourselves from Google, I can see why you would start with YSM. Personally, we don't have a choice. I envy you.
[edited by: eWhisper at 12:35 am (utc) on July 9, 2005]
[edit reason] Please don't drop programs. [/edit]
AWA –
"Even though your ad's rank might be lower in some cases, your overall campaign results - such as average position, clickthrough rate (CTR), impressions, and spend - should be improved."As you've seen through out this thread, the above statement is certainly not the case.
You may not have noticed, AWA is no longer participating in this discussion. I'm taking that as an "I dunno" or "I don't care" (can't say I blame him. The thread has gotten a little hostile toward google). Either way, weather it's a don't know or don't care, I don't think we're gonna get an answer to our questions. I believe google is saying "This is the way our program works now, like it or leave it." I'm with everyone else when they say it's time to look for other places to advertise. It's a shame really. I thought G was a real winner. Is this a case of becoming a victim of their own success?
As for my own ads, they have suffered greatly and has cost my company serious money. The boss is looking at me like it's my fault. I set everything to 5 cents per click to minimize damage. Still loosing out.
I think maybe G is trying to herd everyone in a specific direction (wish they would just frigin tell us what that direction is). I think it's:
1. one ad
2. specific kw's for that ad
3. for a specific reagon.
Move on to another reagon, wash rinse and repeat. So I'm seperating my ads now (and duplicating them) to run them in specific states (my product is US only). I would idealy make one ad group per state, but I don't think I wan't to do all that. Sounds like too much work and I don't think my boss wants to pay me to play with google all day when I can spend time doing something that isn't considered gambling with company funds. So I'll try to make as many ads as reasonably possible and as targeted as possible. It should make the stats a little more accurate. If this don't work, I'm just gonna abandon google all together, to back to tv and radio ads and be done with it.
good luck to all.
-Dr.X
I just did a search for a keyword (for linking purposes). I ended up with the same adwords ads appearing on 10 or more consecutive search pages. So one company, for instance, was in positions 1,8,15,22,29, etc. This was only the case with this particular search however. When I did a revised search for a slightly different keyword what we would call "normal" AdWords positioning occured where all bidders were listed. I have a special asp program that monitors and tracks AdWords advertisers, so I know that this particular search term has more advertisers than just 7. I think that with the current version of the AdWords advertising system, I'd need a super mainframe computer to figure out how to work with it, and I'm no dummy!
[edited by: skibum at 5:58 pm (utc) on July 9, 2005]
[edit reason] removed spcific keywords [/edit]
I've been running my aw campaigns now for 2 years. I spend 14K to 30K a month and it has always gone well. With each new change I have always noticed that it take about a month for things to balance out again...however in general our cpc is going up up up and conversions are going down down down.
A certain handful of hot keywords we consistantly bid on.... two years ago we would bid 40 cents and were in the top three... then it went to 75 cents for about a year and then February 2nd of the this year it jumped to $1.60 and currently is $3.60....
We no longer can bid on that keyword and make money.....(stopped bidding back on Feb 2nd)
But we have adapted each and every time. Here is what we have noticed.
1. Big Corporations are now bidding on hot keywords and don't care about ROI.....they just spend their advertising budget.
2. Click Fraud is a MAJOR problem. Now matter what Google says they are not catching it as good as they say. We have proven to them many times that at least 15% of all our clicks are fraudulent. (Most of our stuff is targeted to Content advertising) We have some click credit back but figure we have lost thousands of dollars.)
3. For those advertisers targeting Content the real concern right now should be the new Site Targeting. Our impressions are half of what they were a few weeks ago..... Site Targeting is bad bad bad.
I guess I'm kind of just rambling now......kind of got off topic.
It's all a game. Learn to adapt because Google will constantly change.
heyday
We no longer can bid on that keyword and make money.....(stopped bidding back on Feb 2nd)
heydey - great post - do you think it was just a coincidence that Feb 2 was a major Google algo update? Did you notice the upswing in bids on that term on that date or?
I think Google needs to be more transparent in these.
Yes. I have a lot of respect for all that Google brings to the table online, but "transparency" is lacking both on organic and PPC side of things. Too many good sites/good advertisers simply don't know what's hitting them these days.
Big Corporations are now bidding on hot keywords and don't care about ROI.....they just spend their advertising budget.
I hear this often.
I always wonder how people know this.
There are many large corporations (I can't speak for them all), that do monitor their ROI for PPC, CPM, eMail marketing, etc, etc.
You may not have noticed, AWA is no longer participating in this discussion. I'm taking that as an "I dunno" or "I don't care" (can't say I blame him. The thread has gotten a little hostile toward google). Either way, weather it's a don't know or don't care, I don't think we're gonna get an answer to our questions. I believe google is saying "This is the way our program works now, like it or leave it." I'm with everyone else when they say it's time to look for other places to advertise. It's a shame really. I thought G was a real winner. Is this a case of becoming a victim of their own success?
I will admit being at fault for some of the hostility towards this thread, although in my defense I try to make it a point to always mention that our ROI is holding up for the most part. Also I should mention that in most other parts of the country, our ad placement for our keywords is typically 1 through 3. I think our low placement in our own area is due to the immense amount of market research we do by individual listings. Therefore when Google applied this new regional CTR parameter, it took into account how many times (easily thousands) we had searched for our own keywords without ever clicking through. For the record, we never click on anybody's listing so I'm not sure how or why this put us in such a low position on the SERPs but I'm pretty positive it was the cause. So, my apologies for inciting or perpetuating any negativity (although you have to admit it was somewhat warranted).
We already have an account with YSM as well as Google, and its safe to say that Google leapfrogs YSM in terms of traffic potential, so whether or not people decide to leave G for Y is a moot point for us. We typically have no problems (outside of the editorial process) with our rankings on YSM. All I can really hope for at this point is that in a month or so things will even out as I've taken to doing all of our reporting on proxy servers throughout the US.
What I'm still confused about and would really like an answer to is how we are getting charged per click when I'm listed 10th here but 1st in Denver. I understand Google's need for relevancy to users...in the natural results. But when the service is paid for I believe it should be advertisers first, users second.
This thread needs an ice cream sundae...
In addition, the first thread of this post asked if:
Is anyone noticing a ranking problem on Google this weekend. We are usually number 1,2 or 3 with the majority of our keywords. Suddenly we are number 6 or 7 and other competitors that are usually very low are now number 1 or 2. Seems like everything has been reversed.Anyone else with the same problem?
I for one haven't seen this problem at all. I've seen a few CPC spikes in areas where there are new competitors or foolish bidders - but that's nothing new, it's been happening for years. As for sweeping changes - nothing.
But when the service is paid for I believe it should be advertisers first, users second.
Copy of another post I made a while ago when a similiar argument came up like this one about the affiliate policy. This post was made about the policy, however, it seems to work here as well. I still fully belive it's Google's take on the advertiser/user situation:
I like to think I'm pretty neutral about AdWords. I try to criticize Google when they deserve it, and praise them when they do something right (which I can assure you is actually more often than not).
In this instance, I'm just going to provide an alternate view point instead of being opinionated in either way.Google gets a lot of flack from many advertisers on this board. Although, it's usually that those who don't like what's happening are louder than those who think everything's ok.
The majority of advertisers I've talked to are happy about the change.
Those who aren't are either.
1. Affiliates
2. Merchants with large affiliate programs.The majority of people I deal with on a daily basis don't fall into either category. They might not be the really large spenders, but their money quickly ads up, and provides a lot of diversity on the web and alternatives to the larger corporations in terms of products and service.
It's the diversity of offerings which have made the web grow. If only 3 companies made up most of the web - think this forum would even exist?
This seems to be the aim that Google is going for - diversity & quality. You rarely see more than 2 urls for the same website in any one SERP. Yet, that same diversity isn't present in the same ads with often the same site taking up 5 or more ad spots. In order to improve quality of the ads served, isn't moving to a more diverse set of websites more desirable from Google's perception?
The reason they have grown is by listening to users. They cater to the users. AdWords might provide the majority of their revenue, but in the long run, if they can't keep users - then their revenue stream would dry up as advertisers would go elsewhere.
So, who does Google really rely upon for money?
1. Advertisers who follow the users around as thats who they want to reach?
2. Or users who create a property where advertisers wish to spend their money?I'd vote that number 2 is a more powerful motivating factor for change.
AWA has made it clear that there are several ranking algos he can't discuss, and I fully support that position.
I don't recall anyone asking AWA for algo details. I did see some one ask (and I would like to know too) how we're supposed to use the info in the average positions to make informed decisions on our bids. Or maybe I asked that. Anyway it's not a question about the algo, it's a question as it reads. The feedback that Google gives us has changed. I don't know how to take it. Especially if I'm in Florida and the majority of my customers are else where. I see bad positions, I try to make adjustments to correct it. But now, I don't' know what the positions are. I don't need to know the algo to have an answer to that.
I also mentioned that Google could warn it's 'customers' that they are going to make a change on or around some date. That does not disclose anything at all about the algo, but it could help prevent so many customers from over reacting to the change. It's been noted before that it's easy to believe you have a bidding war going on when the guy that's usually below you is suddenly way above you in position. Not warning the customers only costs them (me) money with no return on investment.
Google doesn't have to give us
No, Google doesn't have to give anybody anything, but they offer a service for money. If they change that service without warning, that's a bait and switch in my book. If I get a chicken sandwich every Friday at a local restaurant for a year, then they suddenly change the ingredients and make it different without warning me. I'll probably go in and order the sandwich expecting what I usually get. I would hate to think that my usual waitress wouldn't warn me about the change. I'd be pretty ticked off at her.
So, it don't matter what Google "doesn't have to give", they changed my chicken sandwich without warning. I'm no longer getting what I was paying for originally. Google has put up warnings about the system maintained schedules before. So what's wrong with a simple "we're making a change this week. Don't panic!"? AWA, if you're still reading, put that on the wish list for me (for about the third time). ;-)
The reason they have grown is by listening to users. They cater to the users.
The advertisers cater to the users too. Some of the advertisers have been in business since long before the creators of Google was a twinkle in momma's eye. It's this simple: Google keeps ticking off the paying customer, then the paying customer takes his money elsewhere. I'm sure young Google understands that, but they sure act like they don't.
Don't get me wrong, I think catering to Google's users should be the number one priority. It is that witch brings them back as well as advertisers. But where in the priority list does the advertiser, (the PAYING customer) fall? Second? Third? Fifteenth? Dead last? Are we on the priority list at all? How does that priority list affect MY roi?
You can even look at Google <-> advertiser as a partnership type of relationship. But if my partner is going to make changes that's going to affect my wallet, without warning me, the partnership will not last long.
Sorry, these are just my opinions. I get very opinionated when something costs my company thousands of dollars needlessly.
-Dr.X
PS: WOW! Preview shows a pretty big post. I've cut a big chunk out of it so I don't bore anyone to tears. If something don't make sense because of it, please say so and I'll try to clarify. I'm really sorry about that. :-\
I think we think along the same lines. In the world I've always known, the customer, i.e., the one who pays the bills, always comes first. The problem with Google is that they have too many options until the market -- or the states' attorney generals -- take them down a notch or two. I'm frankly thinking of writing to several of them, because I see the situation as the typical big corporate "can't be bothered" attitude facing off against SME America. Right now, I know of at least a few people who handle many ppc accounts who are tearing their hair out because the have a responsibility to produce results -- and they're dealing with Google in Wonderland. By and large, big corporations are all alike -- and that's sad.
Google doesn't have to give us some very nice first hand info here, but they do.
I would hate to see Google and AWA stop participating in it because the board has been turned into a flaming forum.
I don't think anyone has to worry. First, I don't see any flames. Second, Google gets as much out of it as readers do.
Have you ever asked yourself what advantages they gain from having this back-channel support mechanism? It's like a leak from a confidential source--she can convey information informally and satisfy knowledgeable users while helping douse the fires of rebellion. It's like good cop/bad cop, without the bad cop (maybe tech support fulfills that role here).
Sorry if this sounds unflattering--nothing personal. No doubt AWA provides a valuable service here, but I'm sure it's at the behest of her employer, and they wouldn't continue with it if they didn't see it as being to their benefit. And if she did leave, there's always SEW and AdWordsRep (the same person).
I think Google has a lot of good qualities--I agree that they're light years ahead of Overture--and I've defended them in another forum, but this business of pulling the rug out from under people, especially without any warning, has got to stop.
I think we think along the same lines. In the world I've always known, the customer, i.e., the one who pays the bills, always comes first.
Onlinethrills, the one who pays the bills really is the google users.
... take them down a notch or two. I'm frankly thinking of writing to several of them, because ...
Then no. We're not thinking along the same lines. I'm not here to threaten google. I'm not using google adwords to get into a wrestling ring with them. I'm using it to (try) to make money and get my product out there more. It's just another avenue of advertising.
I don't want to see google having to go to court over such silliness. I just want them to warn us when they are screwin' around with the system making major changes so my company don't end up taking a big hit every time google gets a wild hair up their pitute. That's all. I don't think that's much to ask. I certainly don't think it's enough to warrent leagal action. It's our decision to stay or leave google.
-Dr.X
Put another way, if I advertise with you and you needlessly cost me large sums of money or time, don't be that surprised if I do call SOMEBODY...
the one who pays the bills really is the google users.
Well, the advertisers pay the bills, the users decide who pays the bills
I don't want to see google having to go to court over such silliness.
Me neither. I just want them to put it back the way it was. However, if they don't provide either a system of reporting for your region of choice, or some way to furhter control cost-per-click, then there will be an issue of accountability to be resolved. Thankfully, more and more of the tech-savvy press are picking up on this unfortunate situation. If it continues to pick up speed media wise, then hopefully that will be enough to force them to act.
