Ah the mysteries that are Google.
Forgot to mention - that it seems the better your click thru the more you pay. I know that's contrary to the Adwords policy and everyting, but the numbers don't lie.
My recent experiences agree with BostonSEO's 100% - Soze posts next that s/he sees the opposite happen (like it did for years).
There are more factors (or bugs) at work here than we know about, it appears.
Israel
A thought (rare) just occurred to me.
Seems to me I used to read that the CTR shown in the Adwords interface included Search & Content clicks. However, as far as being "judged" by Google, the only CTR that mattered was the one that accumulated on google.com (which was essentially hidden unless you stayed off Search & Content).
The idea was that your CTR should not be hurt by participating in the often poorly performing Content Network (and by default that included the Search partners).
Is it possible that the huge CTRs many have seen, including myself - double what they were a year ago are coming from non-converting Search partners? I've avoided Content almost since Day 1.
My Google.com CTR might actually be lower than it used to be because of the increased # of often useless dynamic ads that now make up the majority of Adwords listings. I didn't change my methods except to become more skillful over time, IMHO.
---
Only way to find out for sure is to bite the bullet and turn off the good/bad Search Network for a while and see if my CTR drops from its often double digit recent performance. A number that does not appear to be helping my CPC, in fact seems to be doing the opposite to it.
---
Now a poster wisely suggested recently that there was no "technological barrier" to Google allowing one to pick and choose Search partners, much as it was forced to do with Content. According to my logs, Search referrals are split about 50/50 between "real" Search Portals and the junk that now qualifies as "Search". Many of us dumping Search would be a big revenue hit for Google, I would imagine.
By "junk", I mean sites that common sense tells me no one really uses to "Search" for anything. By "real", I mean cable/dsl home pages, AOL even Lycos. I can't afford to "support" both and make a good profit, perhaps others are in a better position to absorb the useless clicks.
Could all the "junk" explain my "great" CTRs of late, yet no reward in my CPC as we used to see?
Does anyone else remember my initial statement that it is only the Google.com CTR that "counts"? Do I have that part right, old timers?
Any thoughts on this theory, depressing though it is?
Israel
I try to stay out of the mudslinging that threads like these all too often turn into - but, IMHO, it is a very real issue. But, let's not only look at our own self interests as advertisers, but how about the quality search syndication partners themselves?
Why isn't AOL or Comcast more upset about this?
I'd be willing to pay several multiples higher than my current CPC for AOL's traffic, if only I could eliminate the junk that comes along with it...
Keep this in mind. When you increase you CTR, most other competitors' CTR are probably dropping. If they drop a lot, Google will make them raise their min bid. By making ads with very bad CTRs pay more, they are also making you pay more because the bids below you are now higher.
When you increase you CTR, most other competitors' CTR are probably dropping. If they drop a lot, Google will make them raise their min bid. By making ads with very bad CTRs pay more, they are also making you pay more because the bids below you are now higher.
So, what you're saying is... increasing your CTR ultimately increases your CPC...
