Landing Page Quality Now Influences AdWords Position [Archive]

shor

12-08-2005, 07:15 PM

Wow, AdWords is now factoring in landing page content into the AdWords Quality Score equation!

http://adwords.blogspot.com/2005/12/new-addition-to-quality-score.html
Today, we started incorporating a new factor into the Quality Score -- the landing page -- which will look at the content and layout of the pages linked from your ads.
...
Advertisers who are providing robust and relevant content will see little change. However, for those who are providing a less positive user experience, the Quality Score may decrease and in turn increase the minimum bid required for the keyword to run.

This is positive news for good PPC managers, since deep-linked pages with excellent content will receive a boost in relative Q-Score compared to the competitor with a single homepage destination URL across their entire campaign.

farees

12-08-2005, 09:10 PM

This is positive news for good PPC managers, since deep-linked pages with excellent content will receive a boost in relative Q-Score compared to the competitor with a single homepage destination URL across their entire campaign.

A lot of B2B marketers just use a single landing page with call to action on the same page such as a registration form to download a white paper or a demo. These landing pages generally have very minimal or no navigation at all. So I don't think the deep-linked page theory can affect the quality here. If the content is highly relevant and the landing page is properly designed by frequent testing methods, it will automatically lead to good CTR, thus getting higher rankings.

- Farees

sem4u

12-09-2005, 05:43 AM

Nice find. I am fine with all this but I would like to know exactly how a landing page is measured. Is this done manually or automated?

Also, things like this need to be flagged up in accounts. Not everyone reads at the blog and it isn't linked directly from accounts (that I know of).

fulton savage

12-09-2005, 09:44 AM

Nice find. I am fine with all this but I would like to know exactly how a landing page is measured. Is this done manually or automated?

I think its safe to assume the content will be evaluated the same way G indexes pages for search relevancy--or maybe there is no additional screening, but rather G's data on that page (that it has already) is just factored into the algorithm.

AussieWebmaster

12-09-2005, 02:07 PM

fulton savage

12-09-2005, 02:51 PM

This is such a load of.....

http://www.smart-keywords.com/2005/12/google-using-landing-pages-to.htm

I am finally ready to move on... PPC that has landing pages as an impact on cost... please why not factor in the personality of the advertiser....

AW I've learned so much from reading your posts here, but I am puzzled with this reaction. Why isn't this a good thing for those of us that have our acts together? I read this email from AdWords this morning and was thrilled because I know my landing page will help my ad placement.

I agree that keeping AdWords customers in the dark about charging schemes is pretty shady, but this move shouldn't hurt the se-savvies, right?

Marcia

12-09-2005, 04:44 PM

This is certainly a good thing for Adsense publishers who have had to spend excessive time blocking garbage advertisers from their accounts.

B-Double-U

12-09-2005, 05:06 PM

This is certainly a good thing for Adsense publishers who have had to spend excessive time blocking garbage advertisers from their accounts.

I have to agree with Marcia. I don't think that this is is targeted at adwords advertisers as a money generating scheme. I can't fathom that they would go to these great lengths to develop and implement methodologies designed to merely browbeat you into paying more $$$.

If that were the case, why would they drop the minimums? I think it is a necessary evil being used to combat the spammy advertisers and affiliate traffic that clogs up SERPS and generally lengthens the list of competitive advertising. Please don't jump on my case becasue I mentioned "affiliate traffic", because I am in no way referring to the majority of affiliates, merely the ones that use the cookie cutter approach and set up multiple accounts with some of the bigger fish out there, then submit their feed to Frooogle, G base and any other place that will accept them.

Has anyone noticed lately all of the television ads that are coming from the same companies offering "work from home opportunities" or "male enhancement" supplements? What a joke. You know it's a scam, they know it's a scam. The problem is that, without a quality ensurer, it's anyone's ball.

You should look at the bright side of it. Everyone's cost but yours is going up.

.... My assumption of course, is that you are taking the time to follow general best practices instead of looking for a way to beat the system.

Marcia

12-09-2005, 05:28 PM

PPC that has landing pages as an impact on costAs it should. Please remember that many advertisers are opting in to the content network, and many are specifically requesting that their ads appear on specific sites. In many cases, that may be a cheap way to develop their "branding" for the advertiser, but can be seriously mis-targeted for the sites that they're advertising on and totally useless for users who visit the pages.

I never did click on ads, but I did mouse over and go to the homepages of many sites - a good percentage of which had NO targeted landing pages on their sites whatsoever. For example, a search box to do a search through PPC listings for the same items as the pages visitors arrived from does NOT constitute targeted advertising and hurts everyone concerned - the publisher and the visitor, not to mention degrading the perception of quality of the Adwords/Adsense program itself. It is most particularly damaging to the perception of integrity of the content network.

There have been too many running that are clearly gaming the system, and it isn't fair that they be allowed to do that at the expense of everyone else.

GuyFromChicago

12-09-2005, 06:11 PM

I think it's great - a step in the right direction without a doubt.

spamfork

12-10-2005, 12:39 AM

I think in theory this is great move (Thanks Google).

But let us know if we now have to start SEO'ing our landing pages. Is a spider going to look at the title tag on a landing page? The page formatting? We build great landing pages that are in a constant state of rotation.... Will we be penalized if we are constantly rotating pages... Spill a few more beans please.....

Robert_Charlton

12-10-2005, 03:09 AM

B-Double-U

12-10-2005, 01:30 PM

Robert,

This is the exact question I have and am going through with the developers right now. I hope we aren't about to take a major hit because we are trying to provide a more relevant user experience.

Marcia

12-10-2005, 02:00 PM

How is Google in fact checking landing page content?Robert, I'm not so sure I'd assume they're checking ALL of them.

Disclaimer - Pure Speculation and Guesswork:

1. It may be that there's a hand check done if there's a complaint received about a particular site.
2. It may be that there's data gathered and analyzed, and then follow-up checking done, on sites they find in publishers' filter lists. The data and statistics are there, they can easily make use of it.

At that point I don't imagine it would be too hard to locate and check out other sites associated with the account if any are found lacking.

3. They may also be checking for sites that exhibit certain characteristics where CTR and/or usage statistics are concerned.

fulton savage

12-10-2005, 10:54 PM

Robert, I'm not so sure I'd assume they're checking ALL of them.

To me it seems like Google already has your page's content evaluated because they are Google and thats what they do?

Robert_Charlton

12-11-2005, 01:40 AM

To me it seems like Google already has your page's content evaluated because they are Google and thats what they do?

If it's evaluated, it's been done manually, not by spidering.

Let's just simplify the question and ask whether, in the future, they will want to be able to spider the pages.

B-Double-U

12-11-2005, 01:38 PM

My real concern is that if we have a dynamically produced page that has different content for different users, that it will be deemed a "cloaked" page or a "doorway" page.

For instance;

I could be selling a red truck and create several ads for that page. The first ad may be produced for people searching for "red 4x4 truck". When the user gets to that page, the page would read this is a "red 4x4 truck" in certain places to coincide with the readers search. The same page may also be viewed by a reader searching for a "red 4 wheel drive truck", at which time the page will be generated with the term "red 4 wheel drive truck" as the headline.

Although these are both synonymous terms, relevant to the product and descriptive of the content of the page, the fact that they are tailored to the user, may seem deceptive, when in fact it is merely to slightly adjust the terminology to to be congruent with the verbiage used by the searcher.

I would feel that this provides a better user experience and would help a conversion level because it has been tailored. I DON'T feel that this is deceptive in any way as long as the terms are still illustrative of the content.

Some people say SODA and some people say POP and some say SODA POP, but they are still taking about the same thing.

Do you think that this is deceptive or do you think G will condone such a methodology?

AussieWebmaster

12-12-2005, 11:00 AM

St0n3y

12-12-2005, 12:14 PM

I've got mixed feelings on this. I think Marcia has brought up some good pros. My problem is that this brings PPC marketing too close to optimization marketing, two totally different marketing paths, if you ask me. Optimization requires content, but content is not always required to make the sale. Sometimes, less is more and PPC (used to) allow you to create the "perfect" sales page without worrying about keywords, rankings, etc. That sales page could be 100% graphic, yet still does the job of selling. Now advertisers will have to worry about optimizing the content of the sales page instead of just creating a great page. I understand that those are not mutually exclusive, but sometimes they CAN conflict.

As to the spidering of the pages, I would assume that Google would in fact spider and analyze every landing page, just as it does any page. I would also assume that Google will use a different robot and very well might ignore the robot exclusions for that page. This could still keep it out of the general index.

On the other hand, maybe this is Google's way of trying to eliminate "landing pages" altogether. I would now be more likely to send my PPC ads directly to my main site pages.

AussieWebmaster

12-12-2005, 12:19 PM

Instead of helping they are just adding more work.

Marcia

12-12-2005, 01:04 PM

My feeling is that it isn't a matter of "optimizing" landing pages, but more likely whether or not the landing pages conform to the existing guidelines in the first place, which some don't.

B-Double-U

12-12-2005, 05:48 PM

Here are the problems that I see.

The following is a quote from the Adwords blog:

Advertisers who are providing robust and relevant content will see little change. However, for those who are providing a less positive user experience, the Quality Score may decrease and in turn increase the minimum bid required for the keyword to run. To help define site quality, we've created a general set of website design tips and guidelines that should help you evaluate and optimize your site.

This states robust AND relevant content.

The following is a quote from the Google AdWords Landing Page and Site Quality Guidelines:

Your should have unique content (should not be similar or nearly identical in appearance to another site).

I see this as being a great incentive for someone like CNET reviews or a small website dedicated to manually reviewing and writing copy for their favorite hobby or endeavor.

The problem becomes more apparent for someone who sells mainstream products, where their content is provided by the manufacturer and cannot be changed. You may have no control over the uniqueness of the content. Sure you can add a bunch of reader reviews, but then you end up with a biased list of people who liked it and nothing more. Nobody in their right mind is going to put up content and continue to spend marketing dollars on a product that people are giving bad reviews to.

I think it boils down to two questions:

1.) Are you advertising something?

or

2.) Are you educating someone?

Granted, there are times when you can do both, but for the most part, marketing copy and a user manual have very dissimilar ground.

If I am going to pay for the advertising of something, then I expect certain liberties. Some of those being, the ability to decide what is best for the user or the ability to provide a value that may not be prevalent without that AD.

If I wanted to sell "Ketchup" under and AD displayed in a search for "hot dogs" or "Mustard", then I should be able to do so without having to create an entire dissertation on why they are relevant to one another. If they are not relevant or cannot be easily distinguished by the end user, then I my ROI will diminish and I will stop advertising it. Otherwise, it can still be handled by the quality score and I will end up paying through the nose for a bottom placement.

Maybe I am just reading too much into this though.... It's possible that this is merely to get rid of the abundance of Junk and I am looking for an (all or nothing) constraint that is not available in the real world and most likely won't affect us in the slightest anyway.

AussieWebmaster

12-12-2005, 06:14 PM

This is going to be tough.... but I have to admit that Yahoo! has been doing it forever... they just make the page go through editorial before it can be posted... if Google went that way it would be less of a concern than how they presented the info to people this time.

If it was explained as a straight editorial process maybe people would not be second guessing where this could lead.

shor

12-12-2005, 07:25 PM

If it was explained as a straight editorial process maybe people would not be second guessing where this could lead.
I guess that's what AdWords needs to clarify - what is involved with a landing page assessment?

Are crawlers following keyword/ad text destination URLs and measuring the 'relevancy' of the content to the keyword?
Or are AdWords manually following up on landing page complaints?
Or is it a combination of both - are they manually following up on auto-flagged sites that, as Marcia says "exhibit certain characteristics where CTR and/or usage statistics are concerned"

St0n3y

12-12-2005, 08:18 PM

but if it's a human review editorial process, then there must be a scoring system in place. Lower scored landing pages then creates lower placed ads.

I just had a couple of landing pages rejected because we used a Google logo on the page (actually, in a flash animation). That logo is on EVERY page of our site and this is the first time we've had ads rejected. I wonder if this is a result of their new editorial process, or part of an old one?

AccuraCast

12-13-2005, 01:38 PM

We were using the Keyword Tool earlier today and it had a section on it saying:

Here are some ideas that we got from your website.
If they describe your product or service, click 'Add' to use them. See our important note below.
The "note below" read:

Important note: Please note that we cannot guarantee that these keywords will improve your campaign performance. We also reserve the right to disapprove any new keywords you add. Keep in mind that you alone are responsible for the keywords you select and for making sure that your use of the keywords does not violate any applicable laws, including any applicable trademark laws. For more details, please review our Terms and Conditions.
So my guess is, they spider sites via the AdWords URL, just like they would any other site, score it on similar terms, along with their conversion rate information and then decide the Quality Score for you.

Another important inference possible from these results is that Google is now really using some very good latent semantic indexing!!

PPC

12-13-2005, 04:08 PM

To me this seems like an unnecessary step. If pages don't have relevant content than they won't convert at the rate necessary to sustain position without losing money. Why mess around with this?

AussieWebmaster

12-13-2005, 04:14 PM

To me this seems like an unnecessary step. If pages don't have relevant content than they won't convert at the rate necessary to sustain position without losing money. Why mess around with this?

Pity that is so simple and true....

AccuraCast

12-13-2005, 05:18 PM

The question in my mind is "how important is the relevance / quality of landing page in determining the quality score?"

If you read the guidelines Google has issued, the relevance / quality of landing pages just seems to be determined by whether you're delivering what you promise in the ad - which isn't very different in principle than what the prior AdWords guidelines were anyways.

That said, it wouldnt be unlike Google to use a lot more factors when calculating this score, and just not tell anyone about it.

Hmmm... I wonder how most ad agencies would react if a magazine told them that their ad placement would depend on how good the magazine perceives their ad and service to be, and whether they are worthy of the page they desire!!
......... Amazing the amount of bollox we SEM's gobble up with mouths agape when it's thrown our way by Google! :mad:

Marcia

12-13-2005, 05:33 PM

If you read the guidelines Google has issued, the relevance / quality of landing pages just seems to be determined by whether you're delivering what you promise in the ad - which isn't very different in principle than what the prior AdWords guidelines were anyways.Exactly, which means if the ad reads for apparel, there shouldn't be dating services or modeling agencies advertising who don't sell apparel pushing apparel merchants out of the way.

To me this seems like an unnecessary step. If pages don't have relevant content than they won't convert at the rate necessary to sustain position without losing money. Why mess around with this?For one, some are looking for eyeballs & branding. For another, clicks may be cheap and it may be cost effective where their margin is high in case they happen to attract some who might be interested. Relevancy and worth can be for some nothing more than getting their service or deal in front of their target audience if the price is right.

swedish

12-14-2005, 10:42 AM

Exactly, which means if the ad reads for apparel, there shouldn't be dating services or modeling agencies advertising who don't sell apparel pushing apparel merchants out of the way.

For one, some are looking for eyeballs & branding. For another, clicks may be cheap and it may be cost effective where their margin is high in case they happen to attract some who might be interested. Relevancy and worth can be for some nothing more than getting their service or deal in front of their target audience if the price is right.
this is pretty much the definition of free marketplace.

I don't do any of the above, but eval of landing pages - especially with NO specifics given regarding dup content/spiderablitiy - is bad IMHO. Its subjective. As AccuraCast points out:

Hmmm... I wonder how most ad agencies would react if a magazine told them that their ad placement would depend on how good the magazine perceives their ad and service to be, and whether they are worthy of the page they desire!!

its overbearing.

I wouldn't have any problem with an up or down vote on landing page relevancy, but they're going to try to do it algorithmically.

Fulton Savage above asks:
Why isn't this a good thing for those of us that have our acts together?
because as others catch on, the difference is going to be measured in shades of relevancy, based on an algorithmic calculation, based on what Google thinks is "best", based on the info they can accumulate on their side- which is an important point; they watch interaction with consumer only on one side of equation.

Do you want Google to tell you what the most effective sales copy is? Do you think a small time bidder will benefit? Lastly, will clicks costs go up or down?

Mel66

12-14-2005, 11:12 AM

Do you want Google to tell you what the most effective sales copy is?
This is the problem I have with the page evaluation system. There is no way Google knows my business well enough to know what converts and what doesn't. I've tried using Google Optimizers' ad copy a few times, and it has converted universally *worse* than the copy I wrote myself, when tested side by side. They just don't know my business the way I do. Now of course I want my pages to be very relevant to what I'm advertising, and I always send people to deep-linked pages, but shouldn't *I* decide if the page is relevant?

I guess, like others have said, there isn't enough detail about the system to know if it's a good thing or a bad thing. I'd love to get rid of the "Buy Children at eBay" type ads, but I really don't want longer editorial reviews or rejections of pages that were previously acceptable and converting well.

Melissa

St0n3y

12-14-2005, 12:43 PM

There is no way Google knows my business well enough to know what converts and what doesn't.

I could not agree more. Bottom line is that Google needs to provide more information. Until then I'll have to site with the "don't like it" crowd, simply because not enough is known by what Google means by all this.

Now I sound like a politician at a Supreme Court hearing!

AccuraCast

12-14-2005, 04:00 PM

this is pretty much the definition of free marketplace.
I like Swedish's analogy here. It's true - the online marketing field is an open marketplace, and like any open marketplace, it will eventually settle and let demand / supply even out and find it's own happy median.

We have all seen the disastrous effects of over-regulating any open market. Google is in danger of going down that road by nanny-ing our advertising and marketing too much.

There will be a point when advertisiers won't tolerate any more b.s. and will switch sides to Yahoo! or MSN the very second they (or anything else) becomes a viable alternative.

Mind you, I am not saying the current change in scoring is a bad thing. Au contraire, if it is used in the spirit that they describe it to be, i'm all for it. However, if they do more than their guidelines reveal, that to me seems like they could be over-stepping the boundaries of non-disclosure of terms of services provided for the money we pay for them.

shilly

12-14-2005, 08:03 PM

I am starting to think that GGL is not using their index algo to find relevancy for the landing pages, but their "keyword tool" feature where you enter your URL and then it finds relevant keywords based on the copy of the page. If any of these found keywords match your keyword associated with the landing page URL in the ad, your ad will be considered more relevant and increase your quality score.

Anyone else feel this is a possibility?

If this is true, it is going to be even more important to use their tool when finding keywords to use in your campaigns.

AccuraCast

12-15-2005, 05:05 AM

I am starting to think that GGL is not using their index algo to find relevancy for the landing pages, but their "keyword tool"
Interesting possiblity - and it could well be one of the factors considered, though I doubt it is the only factor.

What are you basing your suspicions on, though?
(if i may ask)

shilly

12-15-2005, 09:13 AM

Interesting possiblity - and it could well be one of the factors considered, though I doubt it is the only factor.

What are you basing your suspicions on, though?
(if i may ask)

If have not done any testing (yet), but I am trying to think how they are logically doing it. Using Googlebot to index the page and find relevancy for the adwards ads would be a lot harder to get linked up and adjust the position of the ads. I believe it is too much of a coincidence that this tool came out just before the landing page criteria was added. It would be much easier for GGL to use this tool and associate it to the ad then link up with their spyder.

andrewgoodman

12-16-2005, 02:34 AM

I think its safe to assume the content will be evaluated the same way G indexes pages for search relevancy--or maybe there is no additional screening, but rather G's data on that page (that it has already) is just factored into the algorithm.

I'm not so sure it's safe to assume anything. :)

But we do at least know that Google do have data on hand from the search index.

There is more to it than this, I feel. Or less.

andrewgoodman

12-16-2005, 02:39 AM

Hmmm.... How is Google in fact checking landing page content? On some client sites I have the landing pages blocked from spidering (using the meta robots tag), because they duplicate other pages on the site and I don't want to worry about duplicate content. Is this now a concern?

Interesting. I think the answer has to be that "AdWordsBot" takes it upon itself to "spider" or examine your page, and because it isn't "indexing" it, it would not be subject to "noindex."

andrewgoodman

12-16-2005, 02:44 AM

Quality scores for Landing Pages do not concern me for myself - I know we will do well moving forward - but as an industry move it is a little worrisome especially as there are human evaluations which like DMOZ eventually will have the possibility of abuse.

Given that Yahoo already rejects listings for being too competitive with businesses Yahoo itself runs, that is the worst case scenario, for sure. On the whole I'm sure the quality evaluation is meant to weed out the most deceptive bait and switch type advertisers, but it *could* be used as a pretext for blocking out businesses Google just doesn't like. And as no editorial decision is made, no complaint is ever lodged, because the "$5.00 minimum bid" sits there mute, belying a poor quality score but giving you no indication that there is anything in particular wrong with what you're doing, and no invitation or cue that might indicate an appeal would be a good idea. Very interesting.

St0n3y

12-16-2005, 06:20 PM

I think the answer has to be that "AdWordsBot" takes it upon itself to "spider" or examine your page, and because it isn't "indexing" it, it would not be subject to "noindex."

This is the most logical scenario, IMO.

AussieWebmaster

12-19-2005, 03:33 PM

This is the most logical scenario, IMO.

We are talking computers here Stony they don't work on logic anymore.....

St0n3y

12-19-2005, 03:36 PM

hmmm... allow me to clarify...

This scenario is the one most logically to be implemented by the humans that make such decisions.

:cool:

Robert_Charlton

12-19-2005, 03:45 PM

Interesting. I think the answer has to be that "AdWordsBot" takes it upon itself to "spider" or examine your page, and because it isn't "indexing" it, it would not be subject to "noindex."

Not sure I agree.... It depends on what you mean by "index," what you mean by "no" (as in "noindex"), and what you mean by "robots."

A bot is a bot is a bot.

andrewgoodman

12-19-2005, 09:01 PM

Not sure I agree.... It depends on what you mean by "index," what you mean by "no" (as in "noindex"), and what you mean by "robots."

A bot is a bot is a bot.

I take it you're implying that Google is flouting the robots exclusion protocol.

I'm not sure I'd agree. By participating in the advertising program, you no doubt agree to a TOS that governs "destination" pages you explicitly point to within your campaign. Google says it has the right to examine those pages for relevance. (They also note if those pages are online at all.) This is hardly indexing and it is possibly not even fair to call it spidering. It is examining. And to stop Google from examining landing pages, of course, all you need to do is to not advertise on AdWords.

AussieWebmaster

12-20-2005, 12:34 PM

Many people set specific bot instructions for Google.

<meta name="GOOGLEBOT" content="INDEX, FOLLOW" />

seems to be getting popular.

Robert_Charlton

12-20-2005, 07:32 PM

I take it you're implying that Google is flouting the robots exclusion protocol.

I'm grumbling, Andrew. I really can't speak to Google's attitude, and I can only guess whether your description (with my emphasis) describes what Google is doing...

I think the answer has to be that "AdWordsBot" takes it upon itself to "spider" or examine your page, and because it isn't "indexing" it, it would not be subject to "noindex."

Your phrase, "takes it upon itself," does suggest, I think, that you might feel that there's maybe something slightly unusual or arbitrary going on. Maybe you don't.

Actually, I'd be happy if Google did do it this way. It would be helpful to know, though... from Google... that this is what will be happening. Then I could tell clients it's OK to keep their landing pages blocked and not worry about dupe content issues or about losing landing page quality points.

I'd be happier yet if Google, together with the other engines and with some web standards bodies, would sit down and come up with some standards so we don't have to keep guessing about this stuff. There's nothing about the mechanics of this that should be algo sensitive or secret. They really ought to tell us what's going on here.