Here's the skinny.
Yesterday we ran a ad for a keyword which yielded almost 400 clicks at 10 cents per click. We had a 3.1 % ctr which isn't too shabby and a 3.8 ad position. However most searches for this keyword will not show any advertisers as it's a popular keyword but difficult to convert to profits.
For years we ran this same ad at 5 cents and were barely profitable at a nickel. Needless to say, we are losing big time at double (10 cents)but the keyword will show inactive calling for a dime if you bid less.
Since there are seldom ads ran on this keyword, why on earth doesn't Google help advertisers by accepting whatever the market will bear --- after all they now have an official 1 cent minimum and if they would help advertisers they would be helping their bottom line --- albeit ever so small an amount.
I'm not one to whine and most often just prefer to operate in the given guidelines cuz it's a waste of time to try and effect change. But there is really, really something that could be done here to make this a win-win deal for everyone involved.
It's easy to see how advertisers and Google could benefit from a true-free-market-whatever-the-market-will-bear approach.
Now it could be argued that publishers might suffer a bit, but that's why we have the option of excluding sites as publishers.
To sumarize:
Setting a higher value per keyword is all well and good ... if you have a page full (or even multiple advertisers) ... but if you have no advertisers (or perhaps only 2 or 3) ... why on earth would you not let the market be determined by auction with a 1 cent minimum?
In closing:
There are many keywords / keyword phrase that don't have a single advertiser and yet they require a 10 cent minimum. Google is cheating thier selves ... not so much in revenues as in goodwill. Yes the point can be made they are cheating their bottom line, but these small priced ads could earn them much goodwill from advertisers. Google could add to their reputation as being the very best buy for advertisers and get paid to do it.
Maybe they don't want to clutter their screens with too many ads unless they can earn a certain amount for them. Maybe they are afraid that if they reduce to $0.01 minimum they will attract all sorts of bottom feeders bidding on irrevelant words (to get people to their sites) and AdSense arbitrageurs.
Maybe they don't want to clutter their screens with too many ads unless they can earn a certain amount for them
That is a very perceptive idea. Google ads on every results page will result in ad-blindness, so it may be better to have only well paying ads and leave it blank if nobody can pay enough.
It was stated that the search term in question was a high traffic term. High traffic means a high contribution to ad-blindness, so they'll be looking for more compensation for the damage showing your at at $0.01 will do the the rest of the network.
In closing:
There are many keywords / keyword phrase that don't have a single advertiser and yet they require a 10 cent minimum. Google is cheating thier selves ... not so much in revenues as in goodwill. Yes the point can be made they are cheating their bottom line, but these small priced ads could earn them much goodwill from advertisers. Google could add to their reputation as being the very best buy for advertisers and get paid to do it.
I don't know, it seems to me that Google has decided that relevancy for these ads is much more important than the little bit of revenue they might bring in by allowing them to go for cheap. They probably figure if your ad is relevant to the term, and people click on it, which will (hopefully) lower your CPC, then you'll be willing to pay the extra few cents, and in these cases, they're more concerned with serving up relevant ads to the searcherse than they are with making the advertisers happy.
Of course, I don't work for Google, so what do I know.
Why would they set a minumum of .10 cents or .25 cents on some of those keywords?
It's just a theory, I dunno if that's what they're thinking. It's close to what I'd be thinking.
Also it's possible google think the people who NEED to make a living on a keyword might be prepared to pay a bit upfront to build up their click history, then get it cheaper later. Most of the irrelevant ads and adwords/adsense arbitrage people will have given up almost immediately.
Dont assume because a keyword with no competition costs you $1 per click now that will be the case in a weeks time.
Absolutely, probably reduces the number of very cheap irrelevant ads, including those annoying ebay ads targetting verbs and other silly stuff.
Yea really. Since I work with a lot of drug rehab terms for one client, every now and then I've had to send in some email to Google to remind them that while it's theoretically *possible* that one can obtain heroin on eBay, it's probably not something they want to be advertising...
not something they want to be advertising
Spotted an ebay ad today with this text:
Discount London Boy
New & used selection. aff
London Boy for sale.
It's an affiliate, obviously, but although it's a chuckle it can't be good for ebay's brand.
best, a.
Google is pricing themselves out of the game; they've gotten too greedy ...
I keep seeing this statement in various forms in this forum and others. Honestly, I don't see it happening in the foreseeable future; things would have to get a LOT worse before it did. Sure, some of the smaller advertisers will get squeezed out, as well as some of the bottom feeders - but there will always be someone to take their places and make up the revenue.
Look, for the past three years or so, three of my PPC clients have basically given me orders to keep them on top for their keywords, no matter what it costs. These are not the huge companies spending six figures every month either, but smaller companies spending maybe four or five figures (each) each month. It's worth it to them to pay pretty much whatever it takes to stay on top of the Google page, even if those clicks cost upwards of ten bucks ea, because Google is still the search resource of choice, and Google is where the eyeballs are, and Google is where the traffic (and sales) come from. And if my smaller clients are willing to do that, the bigger companies with the bigger sites and much bigger budgets are going to be even more willing. In the grand scheme of things, even the mid five figures that my combined clients spend per month is the smallest of potatoes to Google, compared to the other advertisers. I can say I'll take my ball and bat and go home, and that wouldn't even elicit a shrug, because there will be plenty of others to take my place.
That's not to say that Google can't (eventually) be knocked off its perch at some point (some of us have been around long enough to remember when Alta Vista was the end-all be-all of search engines) But if that ever happens, it's going to be driven by the USERS, and not the ADVERTISERS; where the USERS go, the ADVERTISERS will follow.
In that context, I don't think there's any such thing as Google pricing themselves out of the market.
Just my two zlotys worth.
Good speculation all around by all parts on the reasons as to why.
As for the ad blindness theory --- that old dog won't hunt. I'm not saying it don't exist. I'm just saying Google wouldn't likely keep ads off a popular keyword results page because they were low bid, in order to lessen ad blindness.
After all, their search results page today, puts less distiction between free and paid listings than ever and it enhances the user experience and overall ctr to have ads on all pages --- or so it would seem to me. The ads crealy are a integral part of the search results and users depend on them in an equal measure (for info) as they do free listings.
So the question still remains, if you have a one cent minimum bid --- and you have advertisers bidding 5 cents on English speaking / USA targeted traffic --- and the ads are completely and highly relevant, with exact match keyword ad titles --- how in the name of all that makes sense can you not have ads showing to USA visitors for this given keyword?
Of course, with the above given scenario --- where you are required to bid 10 cents and can't get a visitor for less --- you should be able to get one for a penny just as quickly as a nickel, but neither will work on popular keywords.
