It appears Google now mandates higher costs even on top-performing keywords

[hoffman457]

Like many others have posted, my campaigns are getting hit by that $10 min. bid. Is it coincidence that once my ad cost skyrocketed, my ad started drawing clicks?

At least I could comprehend when poor performing keywords require an increased bid but today a keyword which has been online for a year with an historical CTR of 7.5%, an avg. position of 1.7 and the keyword in the ad went offline and required me to increase the bid from $0.50 to $1.00. This is one of the top producing keywords in the campaign and will completely blow the budget.

It appears someone at Google needs to make Q1 revenue projections.

[AussieWebmaster]

This is going to be an issue.... I have had this happen for hundreds of terms ... some go up 10 cents others to $10... but there is no solid reason... though I had it explained to me by one of the senior people for AdWords tech and I am still dubious.

bottomline like most things lately - they err on the side of Google profits!!

[PPC]

It looks like they are squeezing all of their advertisers. Since for many advertisers there is no other place to get the kind of targeted traffic that search engines provide, they can basically charge advertisers whatever they like and as long as it is still even marginally profitable for advertisers, they will have plenty of business.

Its heading in the direction though that the profit margin for Google's advertisers are shrinking and shrinking every day. For example, maybe an advertiser would spend $100K through Google to generate $200K in sales a few years ago. Last year, maybe they would have to spend $150K to generate $200K in sales. Now, maybe they have to spend $190K to generate that $200K in sales. So now, they make $10K for providing the product and the delivery while Google makes $190K for providing the traffic.

Now, thats an extreme but certailnly not implausible scenario. And some of our campaigns are already gone far in that direction. In fact certain terms that have always been profitable for us have minimum bids raised too high for us to advertise on them now. Whether all of this is fair or not is irrelevant. Its Google's world, they make the rules and they make the profits. Their motto might be "Don't be evil", but that doesn't mean they are any less profit driven than any other corporation. They will continue to squeeze their advertisers until they make as large a profit as possible. I am expecting more higher bid minimums and until a large portion of advertisers reach their breaking point, I don't see this trend stopping.

[AussieWebmaster]

It looks like they are squeezing all of their advertisers. Since for many advertisers there is no other place to get the kind of targeted traffic that search engines provide, they can basically charge advertisers whatever they like and as long as it is still even marginally profitable for advertisers, they will have plenty of business.

Its heading in the direction though that the profit margin for Google's advertisers are shrinking and shrinking every day. For example, maybe an advertiser would spend $100K through Google to generate $200K in sales a few years ago. Last year, maybe they would have to spend $150K to generate $200K in sales. Now, maybe they have to spend $190K to generate that $200K in sales. So now, they make $10K for providing the product and the delivery while Google makes $190K for providing the traffic.

Now, thats an extreme but certailnly not implausible scenario. And some of our campaigns are already gone far in that direction. In fact certain terms that have always been profitable for us have minimum bids raised too high for us to advertise on them now. Whether all of this is fair or not is irrelevant. Its Google's world, they make the rules and they make the profits. Their motto might be "Don't be evil", but that doesn't mean they are any less profit driven than any other corporation. They will continue to squeeze their advertisers until they make as large a profit as possible. I am expecting more higher bid minimums and until a large portion of advertisers reach their breaking point, I don't see this trend stopping.

There have been a lot of people complaining about recent Google tactics... but you are very right about the decline in profits - and the fact that there is no where else to go...
once the profits are gone so are the advertisers....guess they will ease off the choke hold just before it reaches that point.

[dog24]

Guys, this way Google tells you that your page must be optimized for certain keywords in order to continue getting cheap clicks. Welcome to the world of the 'Google Slap'. In other words, your QS is poor.

[RBM Morgbert]

I just got off the phone with Google and my rep told me that they had a "technical glitch" on 2/15 that caused CPCs to improperly jump on many accounts.

As an example, we had a term that had been running for weeks at a CPC of about $0.35. In one day it shut off, demanded $10.00, and began running at $3.40. This happened to hundreds and hundreds of words in the account. I just now manually dropped some CPCs back down to where they had been and they stayed active. We are now starting the process of reviewing all our accounts to see where else we were hit.

[hoffman457]

And the refund is forthcoming???

I would imagine we're representative a larger segment who will be giving up on a fair share of previously-active keywords. Assuming the lost revenue is not offset by $5.00 and $10.00 clicks, this has got to be a revenue hit for Google. I wonder if the financial analysts are getting wind of this.

[AussieWebmaster]

Guys, this way Google tells you that your page must be optimized for certain keywords in order to continue getting cheap clicks. Welcome to the world of the 'Google Slap'. In other words, your QS is poor.

I like the concept of Google Slap but the QS is simply a yes or no as far as the landing pages go..... there are no degrees of QS for a landing page....

[WineGirl]

I just got off the phone with Google and my rep told me that they had a "technical glitch" on 2/15 that caused CPCs to improperly jump on many accounts.

As an example, we had a term that had been running for weeks at a CPC of about $0.35. In one day it shut off, demanded $10.00, and began running at $3.40. This happened to hundreds and hundreds of words in the account. I just now manually dropped some CPCs back down to where they had been and they stayed active. We are now starting the process of reviewing all our accounts to see where else we were hit.

This $10 min bs still has not been corrected. I got the same info from my account rep.

Has anyone else found certain keywords have been activated with the max CPC changed from what was entered? Example, I was just looking at one of my AdGroups and found keywords that were (set by me) to CPC's below the min bid required for reactivation (I wanted them inactive, but not deleted, to see if the min bids would come down)--and yet somehow many of them were activated mysteriously at something like twice what I'm willing to pay. This has happened sometime in the last 5 to 7 days.

[AussieWebmaster]

Had it happen at MSN when the system broke... not experienced it at Google but have had them reactivate at my bids

[dog24]

I like the concept of Google Slap but the QS is simply a yes or no as far as the landing pages go..... there are no degrees of QS for a landing page....


Oh, if you're thinking that way, then GOOD LUCK paying $10 per click.

Guys, you must optimize everything in order to get low CPC, G wants quality, that's why he says to you - 'Hey, your site sucks, make it better' by slapping you with high bids.

[hoffman457]

This $10 min bs still has not been corrected. I got the same info from my account rep.

Has anyone else found certain keywords have been activated with the max CPC changed from what was entered? Example, I was just looking at one of my AdGroups and found keywords that were (set by me) to CPC's below the min bid required for reactivation (I wanted them inactive, but not deleted, to see if the min bids would come down)--and yet somehow many of them were activated mysteriously at something like twice what I'm willing to pay. This has happened sometime in the last 5 to 7 days.


I had the same thing happen; a top-performing keyword with a very high CTR and ranking of 1.6 was deactivated by Google; my rep explained that the QS was good across the Google network but was performing poorly on Google (from which the QS is solely derived and is inaccessable to those outside Google).

I kept the keyword inactive because the min bid requirement was too high and I raised other keywords to help compensate for the lost traffic. Somehow over the weekend, the keyword became active so I ended up exceeding budget. No explanation from my Google rep - total bs.

[WineGirl]

I had the same thing happen; a top-performing keyword with a very high CTR and ranking of 1.6 was deactivated by Google; my rep explained that the QS was good across the Google network but was performing poorly on Google (from which the QS is solely derived and is inaccessable to those outside Google).

I kept the keyword inactive because the min bid requirement was too high and I raised other keywords to help compensate for the lost traffic. Somehow over the weekend, the keyword became active so I ended up exceeding budget. No explanation from my Google rep - total bs.

Glad to know I'm not crazy. I had to check through every friggin keyword in every friggin AdGroup to make sure that it didn't happen anywhere else. Guess I'll go ahead and report it, but if you didn't get any love I probably won't either.

Dog24 is right though--optimization is the only way to try and improve anything. But when you sell obscure products like I do, it won't necessarily work out. If not enough people search for them, the keywords get deactivated anyway. You would think they'd want to take the money for a few clicks rather than zero clicks. Pretty inconsistent philosophies seem to be in action.

[hoffman457]

Yup - but this one particular keyword I'm referring to had an 8% CTR and 1.6 position ranking, along with the keyword in the ad copy and visible URL (the keyword actuallly is the URL!). I then put it into it's own Ad Group but the history carries over; if I want a chance a keeping it, I may need make an indvidual campaign for 1 keyword. Insane.

[WineGirl]

Yup - but this one particular keyword I'm referring to had an 8% CTR and 1.6 position ranking, along with the keyword in the ad copy and visible URL (the keyword actuallly is the URL!). I then put it into it's own Ad Group but the history carries over; if I want a chance a keeping it, I may need make an indvidual campaign for 1 keyword. Insane.

The lack of transparency is indeed frustrating. What does "poor performance across Google" mean exactly? I can see that you had a high CTR and position, but are they suggesting perhaps that the term wasn't searched enough? (As in, not enough clicks to be worth server space?)

[AussieWebmaster]

Oh, if you're thinking that way, then GOOD LUCK paying $10 per click.

Guys, you must optimize everything in order to get low CPC, G wants quality, that's why he says to you - 'Hey, your site sucks, make it better' by slapping you with high bids.

We had it happen and gotten a credit....

But working terms down from $10 is not difficult.... may cost a loss leader but will eventually be made back when the terms are significantly lower