Everyone is buzzing about it now, here is the Yahoo! AP article Ask Jeeves Launches Advertising Network (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050801/ap_on_hi_te/jeeves_advertising_1).

Here is a good quote as to the "why"...

Diller views Ask Jeeves as the glue that will help bind together IAC's eclectic mix of Web sites, including Ticketmaster.com, Match.com and LendingTree.com. IAC recently spun off online travel agency Expedia.com and several related Web sites into a separate company, but Ask Jeeves is widely expected to be integrated into those properties, too, since Diller retained a major stake in those operations.

Here is an embarrassing quote, which was probably taken out of context.
Chris Bowler, media director of online advertising firm Agency.com, doubts Google will feel too threatened, based on his preview of Ask Jeeves' system. "Ask Jeeves isn't presenting anything new: it's a copycat service," he said.

I am actually excited to see how they roll this out. AJ is far from a copycat company, IMO. So lets see what unique ideas they bring to the PPC game.

New Ask Jeeves Sponsored Listings Program Lets More Advertisers Buy Direct (http://searchenginewatch.com/searchday/article.php/3524141) from SearchDay today also has coverage.

just a thought,

1. if this world is going more and more towards niche marketing, where small, vertical sites are winning the eyeballs - then AJ made a good move. in the long term they will make more money

on the other hand

2. if we are going more and more towards consolidation and merging of small companies into the big players, then AJ are going to find the hard way they were better off with Google adwords.

I personally, thinks it hard enough to manage adwords campaign in Yahoo! and Google as it is. Especially when you have hundreds of keywords in dozens of different ad groups...

Handling one more ?! well, I might just drop that and convince my client its not worth it.

if this will happen.. AJ might be better off with Google....
...too late now... ha ?!

Who said PPC management should be easy. ;)

I hate to say this but I hope the conversion is better than the branded response we still run as a loss leader!!!

We are a very large PPC advertiser and tried an Ask Jeeves Premium Listings campaign in June 05. The results were very poor. Before signing the contract we required a 30 day out-clause. Good thing we did, we ended up paying 4 times as much per conversion as we do with either Google or Yahoo (Overture). The lesson for us? Ask traffic is not nearly as valuable, in our space, as its larger competitors. We'll still try a sponsored listings campaign, we just won't be willing to pay much. This experience also helps me realize Ask traffic through my Google ads hasn't been worth very much either. If Google were to split out the traffic from Ask many of us advertisers probably would have abandoned Ask some time ago.

PPC is going to price itself out of the game. It's a temporary strategy that we should utilize now on the major engines, but be planning for "what's next" as well.

Advertisers cannot continue to pay more and more for PPC. In my four years of PPC advertising, I have seen costs skyrocket and while we are still making sales using PPC, eventually click fraud, media contests, affliations and plethora of other "click situations" will make ROI almost nonexistent.

Eventually advertisers will begin looking for a better solution. Something with stronger, more reliable measurement. In my opinion, this is called PAY PER ACQUISITION.

With PPA {pay per acquisition} you only pay when you have made a sale. To me, this is a no-brainer. No click fraud. No competitor crap clicks. No contests nor affliate clicking would matter.

The only true judge of success is a measurable and concrete end result be it a newsletter signup, a widget sale or a request for information.

PPA is already here in a limited capacity and really most affliate deals are PPA in nature ...but when the big traffic pushers can offer us PPA, that will be the turning point for Internet advertising.

Keeps everybody honest.

Someday we will all look back, as we do with high priced banner ads sold on impression, and say "wow man - I can't believe we used to pay for any click regardless of source or outcome"

We are a very large PPC advertiser and tried an Ask Jeeves Premium Listings campaign in June 05. The results were very poor. Before signing the contract we required a 30 day out-clause. Good thing we did, we ended up paying 4 times as much per conversion as we do with either Google or Yahoo (Overture). The lesson for us? Ask traffic is not nearly as valuable, in our space, as its larger competitors. We'll still try a sponsored listings campaign, we just won't be willing to pay much. This experience also helps me realize Ask traffic through my Google ads hasn't been worth very much either. If Google were to split out the traffic from Ask many of us advertisers probably would have abandoned Ask some time ago.

There is that ability to do that now....

With PPA {pay per acquisition} you only pay when you have made a sale. To me, this is a no-brainer. No click fraud. No competitor crap clicks.While Im in favor of a PPA model I think it would be slow adapting to the big PPC networks. I say this not just because of the time/expense it would take to overhaul the complex and intricate systems in place now, but also because the current perceived loss of revenue. How much of G's billions would dry up on a PPA model?

This would allow advertiser to set a specific price based on the profit margins and might help advertisers from getting into bidding wars or letting their ego of being at the top get the better of them. The CPA model is a definate plus for the advertiser.

Maybe the architecture of PPA would change if more widely adapted. After all G, Y!, MSN and now Ask will want to make sure they are getting their due cut.

the current perceived loss of revenue. How much of G's billions would dry up on a PPA model?

Exactly. And that should scare you. It's a round-a-bout admittance that PPC is a cash cow for engines regardless of return. For every success story in PPC there are hundreds of companies slammed with huge PPC bills that were either unexpected or due to Internet conditons that do not even understand. (like click fraud and contesting and affliate clicking)

In other words, the engines make money - a lot of money - off of activity that couldn't possibly drive a sale nor even equate to genuine interest in the advertisers products. They know this and it's part of the strategy. It's a numbers game - just like banner ads sold on impressions was - It's a forecast of how long will the market endure these costs to make sales? How long can we keep charging them more and more each month before they start to drop off?

There is a threshold which I guess is the basis of captialism. Eventually, we'll all wise up and think, "damn ...I am dropping some serious money on this pseudo-tackable product and I need something better"

BUT, none of this PPA will come to fruition as long as we continue to embrace our beloved PPC and continue to buy into brand infatuation. If you are a Google customer you have most definitly received the cute little notebooks, pens, Google backpacks, t-shirts, radios and plethora of goodies they send out. They want to turn their users, advertisers and customers into Google adjourning brand lovers.

Think about it. There is one in every office. That girl or guy with the google paraphenalia hanging up everywhere, always bragging about owning Google stock (usually a whopping 10 shares or so...) and pretty much trying so hard to associate with the hip, trendy brand that they lose site of the fact that Google.com, behind the cutesy and periodic artwork, is a business and a public business at that absolutely dead set on turning a massive profit.

These aren't the people you see. This isn't the brand image that they like to exhibit ...but look at your logs. Look at your spend over time. Look at your sales. Have you grown as much as Google has? No? ...didn't think so.

Rambling a bit here, but the point is PPA is not only the best and most fair solution in Internet Marketing - It's also the most measurable - creating a true level playing field between the advertiser and media.

There is that ability to do that now....

I've been told by our account rep that they don't break out traffic by source in a way that's available to advertisers. Would you explain what you mean? Thanks.

I've been told by our account rep that they don't break out traffic by source in a way that's available to advertisers. Would you explain what you mean? Thanks.

I was referring to content. You can exclude publishers in that area.

OK, thanks for the clarification. I opted out of all content matching for Google and Yahoo long ago due to poor conversion rates. I don't know whether Yahoo's new system will help but we're looking in to it.

Eventually advertisers will begin looking for a better solution. Something with stronger, more reliable measurement. In my opinion, this is called PAY PER ACQUISITION.

With PPA {pay per acquisition} you only pay when you have made a sale. To me, this is a no-brainer. No click fraud...

... that will be the turning point for Internet advertising...

"

PPA cannot be the answer to PPC frauds and ROI problems.
In a perfect world, with perfect sites and marketing people, when you know each site and each landing page is maximizing the potential to convert prospects into buyers - your suggestions will be great.

But the truth is that most of the site has very poor landing page, and lots of misconceptions on how surfers walkthrough their site.
In almost every project we did (and we are doing mostly large corporations in Israel), I hardly had any company that actually had someone going through its Webtrend (or any other stat. software) reports and then DOING something about it.

You cannot expect the traffic seller (e.g. SE or Content Site) to be responsible for conversion into money which is also influenced by Usability, Landing Page, PRICING (!)etc…
…and since Marketing is not a "clear cut" methodology and its not a "Science",
And since every marketing person (including me) think they have the right answer how to increase ROI and reduce PPA....
I don’t see any way these two sides of the equation agree on anything regarding PPA.

As a SEM expert –You can say I am also a kind of a traffic reseller. Its my job to bring more quality traffic to my customers site. So why shouldn’t I work also on “Success Fee”?
Well, I am not willing to earn less for my efforts, just because my client has a poor pricing policy, poor landing page etc.
Unfortunately, in the real world, not all our clients agree to give us full control of the way their site is looking and the way their landing page are designed.

I don’t think PPA is the way to “normalized” CPC or handle click frauds.
Eventually, the market itself will balance prices. (part of the problem of high pricing is that hi bidders don’t have a clue about their PPA!)
About the frauds: maybe if someone would take it more seriously and we will have law enforcement here as well as in any other fraud in the real world, people will think twice before they do that.

flying tomorrow to SES,

See you all there

Shoko

I don’t think PPA is the way to “normalized” CPC or handle click frauds.
Eventually, the market itself will balance prices. (part of the problem of high pricing is that hi bidders don’t have a clue about their PPA!)
About the frauds: maybe if someone would take it more seriously and we will have law enforcement here as well as in any other fraud in the real world, people will think twice before they do that.

Though there are a certain number of high bidders that do not know their PPA - the majority do. You can't be spending that type of money without some tracking and ROI analysis especially now that the major engines offer it for free.
I have been dealing in a high bid area for three years and in the beginning had the edge as I used thorough tracking while others didn't.
I agree that there needs to be more strict consequences to click frauders - but until we start getting phone bill like invoices with IP info etc. it becomes moot.
Though you can track income IPs it is a much bigger undertaking when ytou are dealing with millions of visitors a month.

Though there are a certain number of high bidders that do not know their PPA - the majority do.


what you say only strength my point:
PPA is not a substitude to PPC (as Sebastian suggested) ?!

Its here!

http://sponsoredlistings.ask.com/

Is there anything unique in the PPC from ask?

Welcome to Google 2....

Seems AJ is using the same method as Google for determining PPC and ranking. As shown here:
http://sponsoredlistings.ask.com/pricinginfo.php

I also spoke to my rep who said though similiar there are a couple of differences... he claimed Google has a popularity element to their PPC pricing tool... don't know about that.

Since they are still back filling with Google... I personally think they have licenced the technology but have no confirmation yet.

Has anyone started using it yet? What type of results are they seeing so far (and yes I know it is too short to make real judgements)?

We just signed up for our account and the similarities between the Looksmart console interface and the AJ console are very scary!

I have just started a small campaign with ASK's new program. Everything looks okay and the ads should be going live in the next couple hours. The only problem I have is that I have to set a max CPC in order to get some ads to run, as high as $2.14 a click for 1 spot, even though I don't want the number one spot. They do say that once you submitted your sponsored listings you can go back later and edit the CPC's for individual keywords (??).

There interface is definately missing some of the nice features and reporting Y!SM has and Google too, but its a nice start. I hope the traffic good.

Does anyone know that if you are the only one bidding in a particular industry or keyword will the Google Ads at the top disappear and be replaced by ASK sponsored listings or is going to be combining both in some type of hybrid sponsored results?

Phoenix, check the results for DVDs and you will see already the top three spots are ASK sponsored ads. It looks like AdWords have been relegated to the bottom of the page. Anyone else see this?
Interesting.

Phoenix, check the results for DVDs and you will see already the top three spots are ASK sponsored ads. It looks like AdWords have been relegated to the bottom of the page. Anyone else see this?
Interesting.
Confirmed, I see it too.

Yeah I seeing this too. Works really nice because you can place twice on the page for the same keywords. However some ads from competitors that are placed in Google at the bottom are also at the top with the exact same title and description. The only reason I think the top can be a mix of both Ask and Adwords is that they are using "!" exclamation points in descriptions that Ask does not authorize, except for brand related terms. Could be wrong, will check it out more, just for curiousity sake.

Yep, appears to be combo Adwords and Ask at the top for keywords where there is only one to two advertisers in using the Ask Sponsored Listings. You can check by looking at the properties of the link and seeing the following:

http://tm.ask.com/r?t=an&s=a&uid=0B1F8DD00CCC9B124&sid=10A47D64031166034&o=0&qid=78C390DE6528AE0E0DB1DA0DB2E88422&io=1&sv=0a300513&ask=....&uip=4674016b&en=gg&eo=&pt=....&ac=26&qs=1&pg=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fpagead%2Ficlk%3Fad url%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.domain.com%26sa%3Dl%26ai%3D BGLc8OmQGQ6rbDJb2sQG-kqyiB4fm7Qmt4safAcbF7wiwp0EQAhgCIPv-gQMoBUiMOVCLxPCX-v____8BoAGYyLv_A6oBBHJlYWzIAQE%26num%3D2

I would never use Ask Jeeves as a search engine and definitely will not be advertising with them. The serps are all paid listings with little relevance if you are searching for something obscure and technical.
Ask and Jeeves are little more then spam sites and will probably be banned by corporate network admins who dont want their staff wasting time. I welcome competition in the PPC field but I suspect Ask will be similar to Kanoodle who give useless traffic for advertising.

I think it is morally bad to support institutions that survive on peoples ignorance.
I am surprised that these sites pass Google's terms and conditions for adsence.

If you have shares in these companies dump them now. They can only get worse.

I would never use Ask Jeeves as a search engine and definitely will not be advertising with them. The serps are all paid listings with little relevance if you are searching for something obscure and technical.
Ask and Jeeves are little more then spam sites and will probably be banned by corporate network admins who dont want their staff wasting time. I welcome competition in the PPC field but I suspect Ask will be similar to Kanoodle who give useless traffic for advertising.

I think it is morally bad to support institutions that survive on peoples ignorance.
I am surprised that these sites pass Google's terms and conditions for adsence.

If you have shares in these companies dump them now. They can only get worse.

LOL... nothing like coming in swinging.... may want to turn on the lights before flaying away with the axe though...
I agree AskJeeves is not yet a Tier One Player but I would not go so far as to relegate them to the disregard pile...

as much as it is "morally bad to support institutions that survive on peoples ignorance" it is equally bad to post put downs using wording that relies on people's ignornace to sound convincing....

Sorry for being a bit negative in my first postings here. But I like to say things how I feel them.

On a more positive note I would say to people contemplating doing a PPC campaign to also consider affilliate advertising followed up with direct approaches to websites to place your ads.
(Cut out the middleman)

Ask Jeeves had an interesting idea when it started and it used real editors (what search engines did they use?) to find SERPs for the most popular searches. It doesnt do this any more. It now has a bit of an AltaVista feel of graceful decline and elderly incoherance to it.

The Yellow pages should have become Google but couldn't break their addiction to ad revenue and concentrate on results. Google is successful because it is not percieved to be full of ads and the ads are clearly marked.
(Not that Ad revenue isn't important to Google)

I would love to know how many members of the public -'ordinary joes' could distinguish between paid and unpaid listings on AJ? 1-2% I would imagine if that.

Mind you I live in a country where the most popular newspaper is 'The Sun' - a moron tabloid - and the most popular TV program is 'Big Brother' - a dare I use the word, 'reality' show.
So on those demographics maybe there is hope for Ask Jeeves.

I would not advertise in 'The Sun' on moral grounds either.