AWA I know that you are just here as the company rep. We all appreciate the help that you give. You have a job to do and so do we. So here are some things for g to think about. I hope that you can pass it along to someone who cares. (Assuming of course that there is someone at google who cares.)
AWA said:
However, in a system in which many tens of thousands of advertisers rush to advertise practically everything under the sun, it's worth wondering if there may be a reason that virtually no one is bidding on a particular keyword.
This is a fine example of the "big brother" thinking that adwords (and yahoo) both have always had. "We know what's best for you little advertiser, we're only doing it for your own good. Just take your medicine and have a lobotomy on us."
I am sure that to the engineers and accountants that run google, everything you do makes sense. However in the real world things don't work the way they do in a computer model or a spreadsheet.
This is also a fine example of the A+B=W thinking that google often does. You said "it's worth wondering if there may be a reason that virtually no one is bidding on a particular keyword."
Yes the reason *may* be that it is not targeted but it is also possible that either:
A-no one ever thought of it before. (Not as rare as google apparently assumes.)
B-You're the only one with that product and thus the only one bidding on it.
C- 50 other possible explanations.
These are some things that g should consider even if it goes against their own google logic.
Instead of being arrogant and condescending maybe you should put a real internet marketer on the payroll and get some real world input from them. See what a real successful marketer does when they start up an account. See how they get KWs. See how they set up an account. See how bizarrely and illogical the adwords system can be.
AWA said:
The alternative to paying more for keywords that were once at a nickel per click is to actively explore other keyword options, that'll have a higher quality score, and thus cost less - while still returning a positive ROI.
More double-speak from big g. This is the same cr*p that g always says. This is talking out of both sides of your mouth. First the mantra is "targeted keywords" which by your definition is (theoretically) supposed to be "highly targeted". Then by saying "actively explore other keyword options" you kind of say to look for *less* targeted words. You can't have it both ways although I know that you want to. Google should just admit that this whole thing is just out of control and too big for them to handle. I think we could respect that. Making up the story of the minute doesn't help at all.
Most of the time G wouldn't know a "targeted keyword" if it bit them on the a**. In the old system I have had KWs with 10-14% CTR moved in trial and then disabled. When I emailed customer support first you get the stock canned answer. Then when you press for a real human answer it is still 80% scripted and canned. "You need to get more targeted KWs" I was told. How the heck can a 14% CTR NOT be targeted? If 14% of people click on it then they must think that it is (and isn't that what g wants, customer satisfaction). But in g's infinite wisdom they decide that it is not. Again, g considers itself smarter than the dumb ole consumer and the dumb ole advertiser. It's the same thing with the new system too.
I was once on an adwords focus group at the mountain view campus. It was really interesting. They asked tons of very detailed questions about things that we in the panel generally did not feel were relevant. We on the panel kept looking at each other like "what the heck are they talking about." It was like they had it in their heads what they wanted to know...reality and real world usefulness be dam*ed.
This is my opinion of google...especially of late (run by "smart" engineers and accountants) As we used to say back home..."Book smart but ain't got sense to come out of the rain."
It also seems that google is more and more becoming the "North Korea" of the business world. It's actually pretty hilarious sometimes the stuff that they say and the spin they try to put on things. "We will crush your imperialist non-targeted keywords and unleash our wrath upon your hegemony filled campaign."
Kim Jong Brin and company. If they were as smart as they think they are, they'd look back at history and learn from other companies' mistakes. But instead they choose to be arrogant, secretive, and deceitful. Those things don't generally make a successful company, at least not long term.
Google is like a cult. I say that in all seriousness. I've known people who worked there. The company and the "venerable leaders" Larry and Sergy are revered like gods. They work you to death, give you free food, have sports and activities there for you, you can do your laundry and dry cleaning there and more. So basically there is no reason for an employee (read slave) to leave the "plantation".
My point is that the employees live in a bubble. They live and breathe google and they spout off google propaganda. They are so disconnected from the outside world and that is why I believe that they say this junk to us...because it is what they have been programmed to say.
Google--Your customers are speaking to you but you're not listening. And Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
Problems with system? Sometimes.
Problems with people? None yet.
Why not take your biz elsewhere and stop complaining?
I reckon this board is a great place for google to read our suggestions/ideas for improvements (if they so choose), but ranting doesnt get anyone anywhere
There rae lots of things I would like Google to do for me... But in the end its their business, so I take from them what I can and understand the old world assumptions of supply and demand
Although I have had no problems with Google Adwords, or Adsense, I do notice that instead of giving advice to the "whiner", we brush them off as kooks, and reject everything they say.
Try to concentrate in his problems, instead of responding by telling him to go somewhere else.
Let's not become a group speak, a herd, where anyone with the wrong stripes get killed off swiftly.
1. Why should rarely-bidded-for keywords cost more?
2. What is a "targeted keyword"?
That's all I can get out of that post, looking past the vitriol and rhetoric.
On the first point, Google has decided that whereas it used to give advertisers the benefit of the doubt on whether new keywords would give as good CTR as established ones, it will now charge more for poorly patronised keywords. It's quite simple: If you want to establish a new keyword as having a high quality, you will have to endure some high prices at the start, but once you have proved that it works and gets good CTR then the price will go down, possibly to lower than it would have been under the old system. Advertisers won't want to spam 40,000 keywords into the system at a time to see what works, which is good since that sort of thing fouls up the system currently. If you don't understand this new system, it's your problem. It's short term pain for long term gain.
On the second point, I can't speak on that 10-14% example he gave. I'd like to know more details about it though... how many impressions is he talking about? 10-14% CTR isn't all that impressive if you're getting 0.1CTR/day. For how long had he been getting 10-14%? In any case, this new system should remove brizad's concerns, since keywords don't get put on trial or disabled any more so he can now buy ads for that keyword and see if he still gets 10-14% CTR.
"It's short term pain for long term gain".
We all agree on the pain of paying 5 bucks for nonsensical keywords. What evidence do you have this pain will result in gain?
HB
I hope that my points in the original point weren't missed because of my over the top analogy (there was some subtle humor in there). I was trying to make a point about google and the attitudes that I have observed.
I'm not complaining at all just making a point about google's know-it-all attitude and their corporate mentality. The public face that they present to the world is a lot different than what they really are (and getting more so each day).
There are some people on this board who are google apologists and just regurgitate the corporate-speak that they have been fed. These people are often new to the game and haven't yet experienced all facets of the google game.
As I said, I've been with adwords since the very beginning and have seen all of their changes. They do some things well and others not so well. Unfortunately they seem to do many things based on their closed-minded "we know what's best for you" attitude. Discussions with them are like talking to a zombie--you generally get the same rote "targeted keyword" spiel regardless of the facts of the particular situation. They don't want to hear facts. They just continue to believe in their "system" and cannot even fathom the idea that they are not correct or that they may have made a mistake.
Some people have not had issues with g, and so these issues aren't "real" to them. This does not mean that the issues don't exist in reality, just that they don't exist (yet) in this particular persons account.
I hoped that this discussion would be noted by google and perhaps even help them to improve.
Anyway, as I said, I'm not complaining (just observing). G has their business to run and I have mine. When it gets to the point that our business paths are no longer compatible and profitable, I'll move on. ;-)
There are some people on this board who are google apologists and just regurgitate the corporate-speak that they have been fed. These people are often new to the game and haven't yet experienced all facets of the google game.
True, but there are also some people here who seem to think that they are somehow owed something by Google, and some of us who have been with the Adwords program since day one don't understand that attitude at all.
I had at least one word today where a couple of days ago I had to raise the minimum CPC to ten cents, but the actual clicks I've gotten on it since then have been accrued at four cents ea. So maybe I just have to be *willing* to pay ten cents, I don't have to actually PAY ten cents...
Interesting. Can anyone else confirm this?
Google messed up with this. It can be tweaked, all they need to do is lighten up on the minimum bids. Then they need to start being specific about how this system works. How are we supposed to do what Google wants when they won't tell us what they want?
There are some people on this board who are google apologists and just regurgitate the corporate-speak that they have been fed. These people are often new to the game and haven't yet experienced all facets of the google game.True, but there are also some people here who seem to think that they are somehow owed something by Google, and some of us who have been with the Adwords program since day one don't understand that attitude at all.
If anyone thinks that google *owes* anyone anything they are misguided.
However, companies that treat their customers well generally last longer than companies that do not. As google is one of the main games in town people have no choice but to play by their rules. But given the choice, customers generally choose to go where they are appreciated and respected. As soon as there is another opportunity lots of people will move (lots of people apparently already are.)
Any person or company or organization can do whatever they want to do, and they will reap the rewards or the punishment for their actions. We'll see how it all plays out eventually. There is always another young and hungry company on the horizon to take advantage of another company's missteps.
I know that it is a monumental task to try to balance all of the data and systems that google has to. I just hope that they get their act together for the benefit of us all.
Their new system makes no sense because they refuse to tell anyone how it works. They tell us to "increase quality" yet they fail to mention HOW to actually go about doing that. If they actually explained the system in detail, who knows, maybe it would actually make sense to us why we now have to pay $5 for a keyword that was previously 5 cents. Then again..
While security-through-obscurity is not ideal, it is one of G's main protections against black hatters of all stripes. If G published exactly what was in their "Quality" algorithm it would be defeated tomorrow by every nickel-and-dime SEO in the business and the rest of us (and G) might be flattened in the stampede.
That said, it seems to me that G could be more proactive in keeping in touch with its business partners. For example, why can I still not see any mention of the "sections" stuff for AdSense or when it might be available or not for me, even though many others have clearly had it for a while. (Yes, I know this is the AW board; the principle still applies!)
Rgds
Damon
This isn't a firewall or an encryption algorithm we're talking about here, it's a system of doing business. An informed market is a healthy market.
