New keywords will no longer be disabled or have a minimum clickthrough rate (CTR) threshold. Instead, your keyword will trigger ads as long as it has a high enough Quality Score (determined by your keyword's CTR, relevance of ad text, historical keyword performance, and other relevancy factors) and maximum CPC.
Is the bolded text a typo?
To me, that passsage suggests that aside from the new sliding scale minimum bid, there is also a minimum Quality Score required to trigger ads.
Is this effectively a new unpublished minimum CTR?
Due respect to your knowledge of the subject matter (and all other things AdWords) . . . but I have followed both of those threads with interest over recent days prior to posting the message above. The fact that the support site information quoted in my post seems to contradict the information in those threads is precisely the reason why I bought it up for discussion.
The new formula isn't so simple ... it uses the "Quality Score" instead, and there are to be no more "In Trial" or "On Hold" statuses.
Your ads will run at full-strength as long as (a) you bid enough to stay above the group-calculated "minimum" and (b) your ads meet the requirements of the new "Quality Score" formula.
If either of those two benchmarks are not met, your ads will simply stop showing until you (a) up your MaxCPC bid and/or (b) make changes to the terms and/or ad copy and improve one or more of the elements in the "Quality Score" formula (higher CTR, etc.)
Note that, as before, these factors are not applied to your AdGroup/terms in isolation, but in the context of the larger group of advertisers who compete with you. You will still be measured against the greater whole.
And eWhisper's comment, below, is also correct ... except (I think) there is a point where throwing money at it won't keep it from being dropped due to low performance within the group of advertisers. (I hope!)
[edited by: StupidScript at 10:05 pm (utc) on July 29, 2005]
Therefore a high quality score means lower minimum bid.
A low quality score means higher minimum bid.
It doesn't seem like you have to meet a quality score, you just have to pay more the lower it gets.
and (b) your ads meet the requirements of the new "Quality Score" formula.
Indeed . . . that is what I believe the quoted support site excerpt suggests.
But I note that no discussion or confirmation has been forthcoming to date as to what those requirements might be in a measureable sense.
eWhisper said:
As I understand it (open to interpretation) the minimum bid is inversely proportional to your quality score.
Agreed, I don't believe that's in dispute. However, I believe that's a separate issue. That pricing system can exist alongside a minimum Quality Score requirement . . . if one exists. They are not mutually exclusive.
StupidScript said:
(I think) there is a point where throwing money at it won't keep it from being dropped due to low performance within the group of advertisers. (I hope!)
I agree . . . I too think it would be desirable. Is it a stretch to speculate that failure to meet a minimum Quality Score requirement is the threshold at which an ad gets dropped regardless of bid amount, as you suggest?
Again it's just conjecture . . . there has been no confirmation to date, but it would be consistent with what the support site says.
There's really no way to evaluate how well you're doing within the group, as you can't get data relating to the other advertisers' numbers.
Lots of people say stuff like, "A 1.5% CTR is fantastic for me, so why was that term disabled?". I've even had terms with double that CTR disabled .. apparently because others within my competitive group were doing so much better.
While the formulae are oriented to the group, the data available to any individual member of the group is limited to that individual's data. As of now, I haven't heard of anyone being able to use measureable data with regard to the Google formulae, except to use their own individual data and extrapolate from that. It's incomplete, that's certain, but what other options are there?
Google will never tell, so ya gotta git on with your own figgerin', I figger.
If there is to be a minimum Quality Score, the evidence to date would suggest that it will go undeclared (which shouldn't surprise given the nebulous nature of the Quality Score itself).
