Up The Creek With Google AdWords Broad Match [Archive]

tonerman

01-26-2006, 08:27 PM

:mad: I recently noticed some Google clicks on keywords that were not in any of my campaigns. I sell toner cartridges on the web and I've been a satisfied Google advertiser since the days when Google charged per thousand impressions. My highest spend in any one year was 145K.

Yesterday I saw 3 clicks on the search term "NEC Supersrcipt 860" and that term is not in any of my campaigns. The 3 clicks were on my ad for the "NEC Superscipt 870 toner cartridge." at an average cost of $3.32 per click - $10. Of course they didn't buy anything from us - we didn't have the item they needed or were looking for. $10 down the drain.

Then I found another click the same day for the search term "Samsung ML-1430" and that was another term we did not have active in our keywords. The ad that displayed was for the Samung ML-1450.

Then I saw a click for the search term "Minolta 1300 drum" -another item we don't sell and the ad that displayed was for a different model number (1250W). More money down the drain! I didn't look hard - these examples just leaped out of my log files.

Googles comment to me was "I understand that due to the specificity of your keywords, expanded matching may not yield the most relevant results. Therefore, I suggest changing all of your keywords to either phrase or exact match."

So how do I fix this? Phrase Match with a bunch of scrambled phrases that allow for different search term sequences, plurals, alternate spellings, etc. What's the problem with that? My established key words with high CTR's are going to be dead and that's going to be expensive. How about negative keywords? That's a good tactic in this instance but given the clicks coming in on for products we don't sell, and the thousands of products out there, I wouldn't even know where to begin.

The moral of this story is that if you advertise technical products like computers and computer components. medical equipment, consumer electronics, or any other technical product that is part number, brand and model specific in use, and you have invested in broad match like I have, you are up the creek my friend if you try to fix it by changing your keywords to pharse and exact match! Kiss your CTR's goodbye.

My last letter to Google was my question about what they estimated the cost to me would be as a result of losing all my established CTR''s and starting over. They haven't answered that one yet, but my best guess is a 20% cost increase along with a huge drop in sales as a result of lower ad position.

Following Google's advice to advertisers over the years has lead me into a box that I can only escape by giving Google more money for less in one big gusher, or just letting them slowly bleed me to death with irrelevant ads and visitors who don't find items on the landing page that match their search query. Isn't it a Google rule that your landing page has to contain the item advertised. Apparently, that only applies to advertisers, not Google.

Expanded match in my opinion has just become an unadvertised conduit for content advertising at search term rates. Google doesn't count Expanded Match impressions in your CTR's. What does that remind you of? What ever happened to the value of relevance at Google?

Of course Google could solve this problem for me and all of its customers who have established campaigns using "Broad Match" simply by making Expanded Match an option under the previous functionality of Broad Match. All it would take is one off-on Button in the Ad campaign settings. Do I think they'll change it? No.

I hope Adwords Rep takes a look at this and responds. I woiuld be interested in his/her feedback.

Tonerman

integramed

01-26-2006, 09:06 PM

tonerman

01-26-2006, 09:18 PM

Yeah, you are right today, but not when Broad Match was originally established. I have installed Analytics at a lot of expense on a custom cart site so I know how to watch conversions. My gripe is with the little noticed change in functionality Google made to Broad Match with Expanded Match. Google isn't helping me or searchers when it shows ads that are not relevant to the query and the item is unavailable when the searcher clicks on the ad. You call that "helping"?

I do blame myself for not noticing the subtle change to Broad Match whenever Expanded Match came into being. However, it never occurred to me that Google would show a "search only" ad with no keywords that matched the query term!

tonerman

01-26-2006, 09:38 PM

tonerman

01-26-2006, 10:10 PM

I hear exactly what you're saying. But, at the end of the day, if you have a very specific product such as a "NEC Superscipt 870 toner cartridge" then you are best off with phrase or exact match rather than let Google make decisions for you. Don't blame Google for "trying to help" with broad match. As regards losing position and CTR, remember, it's conversions that really count, not CTR. I assume you are using conversion tracking and are carefully monitoring cost per conversion. That's the number to watch. I would not worry about losing CTR, I would come back with specific matching, and clean up on conversions! Good luck.

In terms of a specific keyword like "NEC Superscript 879 toner cartridge" that was only one of many keywords in that product's ad campaign key words. Other key word broad match phrases as example where "Nec 870 toner' "Nec 870 cartridge" "Nec 870 toner module" etc - "Superscript 870 toner" etc etc, maybe 40 50 key word phrases in all. Of course the purpose was to hit every possible search term that was relevant to the product.

sem4u

01-27-2006, 04:25 AM

I see two choices really:

1. Change all of your groups to phrase or exact match. This will take a lot of time and effort and your CTRs will start from the default amount again. Click prices may be more expensive at first, but as your ads will be more specific you may receive higher CTRs and have lower bid prices in the long term.

2. Add in as many negative keywords as you can. Use information from your stats and any keywords that come up in the Overture and Google keyword tools.

tonerman

01-27-2006, 08:29 AM

Thanks. For the moment I'm going with adding negative keywords. Analytics makes it easy for me to see any keywords that display ads for items we don't carry. With Analytics I might catch them looking at keywords that have impressions but no clicks. They are easy to spot if they generate a click. For new campaigns I'll use phrase or exact match.

There is another factor I forgot and in fact I posted about it a longtime ago and forgot about it. Expanded Match also uses all the keywords in your campaigns to generate ad results. I have a paused campaign for ML-1430 and it is linked to the same URL as my ML-1450 campaign. Expanded Match saw a ML-1430 query and popped up the ML-1450 ad. Pause for the ML-1430 keywords got overridden by Expanded Match.

Let me tell you I was angry as a hornet when I first noticed this. It really isn't the end of the world, but once you get caught in my situation there are only two ways out - exactly the two you suggested.

Some peoples lives serve merely as a warning to others. Motivation poster showing large ship beginning the final plunge to the bottom of the sea. :)

Alan Perkins

01-27-2006, 11:25 AM

I do blame myself for not noticing the subtle change to Broad Match whenever Expanded Match came into being.I have noticed lately that the Expanded Match net seems to be being cast wider and wider, lowering the relevance of the ads that are displayed. This does not seem to be in anyone's best long term interests and I hope Google fixes it.

One answer is to use negative matches on words and phrases you don't want to match (e.g. -860 in your NEC Superscript group). The problem is

a) this is a lot of work to fix what is often, IMO, a Google bug
b) knowing you don't want to match certain words before you have matched them a few times!

cline

01-27-2006, 11:30 AM

tonerman, several of my clients are experiencing the exact same targeting problems you are. I began noticing them in August 2005. I've set a stack of email to my Adwords rep giving specific examples of the problem. It keeps happening over and over. And, like you, I get back the same essentially useless advice about exact matching and negative keywords.

IMHO when an advertiser specifies to Adwords what keywords they want targeted and Adwords decides to target different keywords, this is a serious and fundamental breach of the trust the Advertiser can have in Adwords.

Yes, expanded broadmatch makes some sense, esp. with the many users who are not good at keyword targeting. But taking away the advertiser's control over targeting is unconscionable.

Adwords needs to do one of the following:
* Allow the advertiser to turn expanded broadmatch off
* Inform the advertiser of *exactly* what terms expanded broadmatch will trigger
* Get rid of expanded broadmatch.

jbgilbert

01-27-2006, 02:36 PM

Adwords needs to do one of the following:
* Allow the advertiser to turn expanded broadmatch off
* Inform the advertiser of *exactly* what terms expanded broadmatch will trigger
* Get rid of expanded broadmatch.

Broadmatch (as it was first introduced is NOT a problem) -- It's the "expanded match" that is the problem!

Broadmatch can be used very successfully if you know that your broadmatch keyword of colored widgets will get matches for cheap colored widgets, large colored widgets, variety pack colored widgets, etc. And you employ negative keywords.

The problem is when the expanded match comes in and displays your ads for searches that DO NOT contain your broad match keyword --- like cyan widgets, pumpkinseed widgets, gold widgets!!!!!!!!!!!

Adwords really needs to do THIS:
* Separate Broadmatch and Expanded match
* THEN allow the advertiser to elect which ones to use!
* AND inform the advertiser of *exactly* what terms "expanded match" will trigger
* OR keep broadmatch (as it was originally introduced) and GET RID of Expanded match.

cline

01-27-2006, 02:43 PM

jbgilbert, what part of "expanded" is missing from "expanded broadmatch"? ;)

Adwords needs to do one of the following:
* Allow the advertiser to turn expanded broadmatch off
* Inform the advertiser of *exactly* what terms expanded broadmatch will trigger
* Get rid of expanded broadmatch.

jbgilbert

01-27-2006, 02:51 PM

cline,

Not disputing your recommendation -- agree totally.

Just wanted to make the point that Google needs to take this a bit further. If they want "expanded" to stay around separate it out.....

If we are lucky, Google reads this and cares they may do something. So far, I have not gotten my rep to take this as seriously as I'd like.

tonerman

01-27-2006, 04:25 PM

It can't help Google or any of us for searchers to click on a Google ad link and then not find the item on the page or anywhere else on the site. Long haul, expanded match mis-used (I have no heartburn with tennis racquets versus rackets.) is going to lead some people to shy away from ads, versus being a satisfied user who believes the ad represents a match for their query term.

It also bugs me that my ads have to be relevant and Google's mis-use of my ads don't. Expanded match is a long way from Google's excellent SERP's. A friend said to me that if Google's organic SERPS were as bad as some of the expanded match results Google shows today they would have never gotten out of the starting gate years ago.

fulton savage

01-28-2006, 07:02 PM

tonerman I recently turned off campaigns with 6 months of good CTR and data history. I flat out launched new campaigns from ground zero, and I had the same worry as you. It took only 2 weeks until everything normalized and allowed me to start fine tuning. My CTRs are good again and I'm glad I didn't wait before I made the switch.

I don't think its such a big deal now looking back.

tonerman

01-28-2006, 09:09 PM

That's good info Fulton! Thanks. I'll pick a couple of my campaigns and make the switch and see how it goes. Curious if I can get the CTR's up. I will have to be sure I don't screw up the phrases. I can look at my own Netracker files (they let me isolate every keyword for any page that triggered a click, or a click and a conversion. Guess I've got my own personnel wordtracker for my products with several years data.

I can do a custom query in Netracker and "BOOM" every keyword for any product page.

andrewgoodman

01-29-2006, 12:24 PM

The Google answer to the impact of changing to Phrase Match from Broad Match was: when a keyword matching option is changed, the history of that keyword is lost. Please note your ad's position is based on both your maximum cost-per-click (CPC) for the matched keyword and your Quality score on Google and the Google Network, both in relation to other advertisers running on the same or similar keywords. Therefore, your ads' position with these 'new' keywords may vary. "

As to my question regarding potential cost impact of changing the matching options the answer I got was Google was "unable to predict the change in cost to these keywords, I suggest using the recommended amounts given by the Keyword Traffic Estimator (located under the 'tools' tab in 'Campaign Management') and altering them accordingly as they accrue history."

Like I said - up a creek. Try to stem the bleeding with negative keywords when you notice unproductive clicks (fairly easy with Analytics - very hard otherwise) or prepare yourself for a bloodbath.

Up the creek? I'm sorry, I don't get it.

You seem to place a pretty high expectation on an advertising medium. Unreasonably high, IMHO.

Don't like broad match results? You can opt out. Where's the harm?

It would help if you gave examples of the broad match phrases you were using, that mapped to searches you didn't like. Otherwise we're just guessing.

I've heard the sensible suggestions on this thread that Google could make expanded broad match an opt-out. Well, technically they have done this by allowing you to use phrase match. And certainly they have done too much playing around with the expanded matching without informing advertisers of this. But on the whole, it's not causing that many problems. I can't believe three unwanted clicks is something you'd allow yourself to get "angry as a hornet" about. You'll be a very angry guy for a very long time if you set your expectation so high.

Just adjust, as others have done, and keep at it.

Part of my perspective though is shaped by the fact that I've always advised advertisers on the specifics of this platform. When expanded broad matching was terrible, my colleagues and I advised clients accordingly. When it got a little better, I advised and wrote about that, also. On pgs. 150 and 213-214 of my book, I talk explicitly about expanded broad matching. That's just one of a number of places advertisers have been have been warned, and given the pros and cons, by third parties. (I discuss pros and cons, not just cons.)

The information is not a secret, and this just in, too: you can't learn everything from (a) your Google reps and the Google blog; (b) from forums. Both are great resources but typically you will find Google staff too positive on the features of AdWords (built in bias), and forum posters, generally too negative (unwilling to present both sides when they feel they've been wronged).

In the end, how much money has this cost you? Not much. A much bigger cost is built right into your market -- very competitive. Facing your competitors in the auction is scarier than the prospect of losing a little CTR history by changing your matching options. I'm glad someone talked you out of this worry because it is always important to build a good campaign structure as opposed to obsessing with your saved keyword history. In any case, your history remains saved on the previous keywords, especially if you don't delete them but instead bid them down to .02 or something, where they will be merely deactivated.

In other words, by emphasizing more phrase matches, and turning bids on some of your broad matches way down, you get the benefit of better targeting without technically "losing" the history on the broad matches in your account, should you wish to try them again later by raising bids.

tonerman

01-29-2006, 01:52 PM

"Don't like broad match results? You can opt out. Where's the harm?"

A lot more money is the harm for starting all my campaigns from ground zero. Not to mention the time required to allow for creating new terms. Think I don't have a lot of other things on my plate?

OK - in the interest of full information for the forum. here are the exact broad match keywords from my NEC 870 Toner Cartridge campaign:

high capacity NEC 870
nec 20-120
nec 870 cartridge
nec 870 cartridges
nec 870 toner
nec 870 toner cartridge
nec 870 toner cartridges

As for 3 measly clicks, the total for the month of January was 25. At an actual average CPC of $3.41 that would be $85.25 in January.

Here are the actual queries that triggered the ad and incoming clicks:

nec superscript 860 toner
nec superscript 860 cartridge
nec 860 toner
nec superscript 860 toner cartridge
toner superscript 860
superscript 860 toner
superscript 860 cartridge
nec 860 toner cartridge
ned 860 toner
toner nec superscript 860
nec superscript 860 tonerd
nec superscript 860, toner
nec 860 cartridge
nec superscript 860 superfine cartridge
nec superscript 860 laser cartridge
nec 860 compatible cartridge
toner for nec superscript 860

This all started in January this year. The campaign and above keywords have been unchanged since the campaign started with the inauguration of Adwords - in other words several years. Obviously Expanded Match went fishing for more clicks in January so I'll look at my keywords report in Netracker for January and see where else I am getting hurt so I can add more negative keyword matches where needed. I'll post the results I find later today.

Maybe $85 down the drain in one month is measly to you, it ain't to me.

tonerman

01-29-2006, 03:03 PM

Here's another piece of Expanded Match brilliance:

Broad match term: Samsung ML-2150

Queries:

samsung ml-2250 toner
samsung 2250 toner
ml-2250 toner
samsung ml 2250 cartridge
samsung ml-2250 toner cartridge
ml 2250 toner
samsung ml-2250 cartridge
samsung 2250 cartridge
toner for samsung 2250
ml-2250 micr toner
ml-2250 replacement toner
ml 2250 micr
remanufactured samsung ml-2250 laser printer toner cartridge
rebuilt toner cartridge samsung 2250
printer cartridge samsung ml 2250
samsung ml-2250d5/xaa black laser toner remanufactured
samsung ml-2250 10000-page toner
cartridge samsung ml-2250
samsung 2250 toner d5 d8
toner for samsung ml 2250
toner cartridge samsung ml 2250
samsung toner ml 2250
black toner for samsung laser printer ml 2250
price of cartridge for samsung ml-2250
samsung ml-2250 toner $99
samsung ml-2250 ink toner
samsung toner ml-2250
ml-2250 laser toner
samsung ml 2250 toner
sam ml-2250 cartridge
"ml-2250" and "ink cartridge"
"ml 2250" samsung toner price
cartridge for a samsung ml-2250
printer toner samsung 2250

Total clicks on these? 62

Cost? Average cost per click: $4.09 $253.68

Broad Match did not make these errors when it operated as originally founded. It didn't do this when Broad Match first became Broad Match with Expanded Match. It's obvious that Expanded Match is creeping outward like a freight train.

It's one thing for Expanded match to show an ad when there is a slight spelling variation like raquets versus rackets. It's entirely another when it decides that 2150 is 2250, or 870 is 860.

Broad Match allowed very precise targeting when Adwords was originally inaugurated. Then, after years of being very successful Adwords said "Broad Match is now Broad Match with Expanded Match." This was a change to an existing match structure that there was no opportunity to opt out of unless you changed all of your broad match terms to phrase or exact match and created match terms that allowed for plurals, etc.

I believe at the time Expanded Match was inaugurated Adwords said something like if you are happy with your ad campaigns you can do nothing and your ads will respond to more queries based on your keywords.

Changing 2150 to 2250 or 870 to 860 isn't correcting a spelling error. It's probably occurring because I have other campaigns with 860 and 2250 in the keywords. In one campaign 2250 is used in my keyword "Canon imageclass 2250".

Let's see, $85 + $253 = $348 That's a long way from measly. Now I'll go find the rest of the Expanded Match clicks in all my other campaigns with Netracker and figure out the total damage from Expanded Match Creep.

tonerman

01-29-2006, 05:10 PM

The last example I'll provide is Adwords showing ads for the Phaser 750 Toner in response to the query "Phaser 780 Toner". This is a highly competitive term with an average CPC of over $6.00. There are a gazillion campaigns out there built around model numbers. When Expanded Match changes your Broad match term to some other model number you have in your campaigns for that brand, and the term it responds to is a term with a lot of traffic, you are going to get slammed big.

After reviewing several thousand query keywords for the month of January I think Broad Match even with Expanded Match generally works. However, when it turns a keyword phase into a term you don't have that has a lot of traffic you can quickly get dinged several hundred dollars as I illustrated above.

It can also display ads for campaigns you've paused because it grabs one word of one broad match keyword phrase and finds a similar phrase in another campaign somewhere. It did this when it displayed ML-1450 ads to the query "ML-1430". I had an ML-1430 campaign that was on pause.

To be fair to Google, the ML-1430 and ML-1450 are the same product so expanded match displayed an ad that was related. What bugs me was I paused a specific ad campaign and keyword list for the keyword term "ML-1430" because it had a poor ROI and ads still kept being displayed.

Adwords FAQ on Expanded Match says the following:

"What is the expanded matching feature?

With expanded matching, the Google AdWords system automatically runs your ads on highly relevant keywords, including synonyms, related phrases, and plurals, even if they aren't in your keyword lists."

I've bolded the part of Expanded Match's FAQ that bugs me. What's "highly relevant" about "860" versus "870", "780 versus 750", "1300 versus "1200"?

I have no doubt Google isn't going to change its use of Expanded Match just because some guy with the handle "Tonerman" on SEW isn't happy with it. However, the best cure to this whole problem was the suggestion made earlier by cline:

" Adwords needs to do one of the following:
* Allow the advertiser to turn expanded broadmatch off
* Inform the advertiser of *exactly* what terms expanded broadmatch will trigger
* Get rid of expanded broadmatch."

Italics added for emphasis. Your most obedient servant, Tonerman

Alan Perkins

01-30-2006, 10:21 AM

Thanks for posting those great examples, tonerman.

Don't like broad match results? You can opt out. Where's the harm?I often do like broad match results. But I can't opt out of expanded broad match while remaining opted in to broad match. The harm is that expanded broad match appears to be matching further and further afield, to the detriment of relevance and profit, which ultimately will benefit nobody.

I have some good examples of this too, but we'll stick with tonerman's:

nec 870 cartridge

As a broad match, that matches a huge number of phrases, e.g.

nec 870 cartridge
nec 870 printer cartridge
nec 870 colour cartridge
nec 870 cartridge supplies
nec 870 cartridge supplier
ink cartridge for my nec 870 printer
cartridge supplier for nec 870

etc. etc. thousands of combinations that all match nec 870 cartridge using a huge variety of extra words, many times a unique phrase that you simply will not have thought about in advance. Now we are asked to give up all the benefits of broad matching, and go instead with phrase or exact matching, simply because of what can only be described as a bug. Really, if somebody searches for samsung ml-2250 toner and

a) you don't sell it and don't advertise on it or
b) you do sell it but don't want to advertise on it or
c) you do sell it and do advertise on it but the ad is currently paused(!)

then why should you have to completely restructure your account, removing all broad matches or adding an infinite number of negative keywords, simply to cope with the fact that Google is widening their expanded broad match algorithm to areas where it no longer works? You should at least have the opportunity to moan loud and long about it! :)

tonerman

01-30-2006, 10:35 AM

Quote Alan Perkins "why should you have to completely restructure your account, removing all broad matches or adding an infinite number of negative keywords, simply to cope with the fact that Google is widening their expanded broad match algorithm to areas where it no longer works?"

I think you have summed up this issue perfectly Alan! Tonerman

jbgilbert

01-30-2006, 04:32 PM

Yes... yes....
Adwords really needs to do THIS:
* Separate Broadmatch and Expanded match
* THEN allow the advertiser to elect which ones to use!
* AND inform the advertiser of *exactly* what terms "expanded match" will trigger
* OR keep broadmatch (as it was originally introduced) and GET RID of Expanded match.

I'm sure this has been discussed at Google and I'm sure technically they see it is technically the right/better way.

But, these days Google (as a public company and hot stock expected to blow out earnings for the rest of their existance) has to weigh the financial impact of every little technical decision made.

If you look at things this way, it may mean that they know they should/could change it, but it may (likely would) have at least some minor negative impact on financials.

Not trying to start an argument here, so don't attack me (please). I'm in the technical camp!

tonerman

01-30-2006, 04:53 PM

If this problem existed just because Google knows it isn't perfect, but users have been warned and have alternatives, and fixing it would reduce revenues (it certainly would have cut my bill!) then that's drifting over towards the "E" word.

I don't think Google intends harm. One way or another, though, that's exactly what is happening to people like me and anyone else using Broad Match.

tonerman

01-30-2006, 11:06 PM

You can't kill expanded match with one negative keyword in the particular Ad Campaign it has taken hostage! It just takes another hostage!

I paused an ad campaign as reported earlier for the Samsung ML-1430 over ROI issues. Expanded Match started showing an ad for the ML-1450 in response to the "paused" keyword ML-1430.

So I made entered a negative keyword -1430 in the ML-1450 campaign. So what did Expanded Match do? It started showing ads for the ML-1440 in response to my entering -1430 in the ML-1450 campaign.

So now I've added -1430 in the ML-1440 Campaign. Wonder what ad campaign it will grab next in response to the ML-1430 queries?

Then when I added negative keyword -780 to stop it from showing ads for the Phaser 750 when the query was Phaser 780 Expanded Match started showing ads in response to query "Phaser 7750". SO I have now added -7750 to the Phaser 750 campaign.

This isn't expanded match - it is a free for all grab for clicks out of my account. The Phaser 780 and Phaser 7750 are real products but we do not sell or advertise them and I do not know how this BS is happening - I just know it is! :mad:

I am going to have to find a bigger stake to drive through Expanded Match's heart!

andrewgoodman

01-31-2006, 01:07 AM

For the record, I do disagree with Google expanding their broad matching, if that's what has happened. It's never been our preference that expanded match exists at all.

Except that as things have evolved, it is in fact the case that for many advertisers, volume -- not precision to this degree -- is their biggest challenge.

There are some admittedly imperfect ways to deal with this:

recognize that broad match is not worth the same amount as your phrase matches -- bid lower on it;

emphasize phrase matching;

OK, those would be the main ones.

Tonerman, I know at first it seems what Google's up to is rather heinous. But I've gotten the hang of it myself, seeing account after account working just fine -- if you take the time to adjust, and bid correctly.

I'm sure you do have a lot on your plate. Doesn't everyone. Rightly or wrongly, Google using expanded matching is an attempt to perfect a broadening of your reach to SAVE YOU TIME. Advertisers have a lot of conflicting requests that have to be weighed in the design of the platform. You can't please all the people all the time, etc.

No, I didn't say the dollars you spent on unwanted clicks were "measly." But whether it's for a small client or a big one, I do know that everything comes with a cost. Bad clicks come with a cost. Overly-targeted campaigns create opportunity cost. Working too hard on your campaign costs money and time. Not working hard enough: same thing.

So whether it is a small client or a larger one I actually do have a responsibility to assess whether mountains are really molehills, in comparison with other business issues to be dealt with. It's not a matter of thinking the money is trivial. It's a matter of how to best manage reality. The reality is, it's us advertisers, playing by rules created by a $120 billion company. Your comments will no doubt be listened to as long as they're shared by many advertisers. Perhaps Google will eventually alter their broad match policy.

Speaking of perspective: offhand, anyone want to guess how Yahoo deals with or documents its matching options?

And let's take a step back in time and imagine if Google AdWords had never come along. Before AdWords Select, in Overture world, it was all exact match, all the time. Google brought the world phrase match and broad match. Overture and Findwhat later followed suit... well, sort of. Google's is still easier to figure out. At least they *have* a phrase match option.

tonerman

01-31-2006, 11:02 AM

Hello Andrew:

Let me briefly comment on my use of broad match. 99.9% of the clicks I am correctly receiving are right in target. It is only Expanded Match showing ads for query terms and products that are not in my Adwords account or on my website that is a problem. Now that I am aware of Expanded matches propensity to "create campaigns on its own" I know what to look for and I can deal with it.

I have a lot of negative key words for all my campaigns that filter out most of the queries I do not want - like "-Review", "-Service", "-driver", etc. If my clicks were for queries I don't want I would consider changing my strategy, but that is not the case except for Expanded Match's clear "bug".

I seriously doubt that if I bid with exact match "NEC 870 Toner", phrase match "NEC 870 toner", or broad match "NEC 870 Toner" combined with negative campaign keywords to filter out most of the junk, that I am going to see any difference in the CPC, CTR or anything else. Yeah, I might have slightly higher CTR and conversion rate by reducing impressions, but I am probably going to have fewer conversions overall. A conversion rate of "100%" isn't wonderful if you only have one conversion per month.

It's obvious to me that Expanded Match as it is currently implemented rips people off and there's no excuse for it. However, a lot of people out there do not read this forum, do not have as much as experience as myself and others who have been using Adwords for years, and are simply going to get hosed.

I am surprised (why I don't know?) that the Adwords Rep didn't offer some insight somewhere in this thread. I'd love to see a post from Matt Cutts or Google Guy or someone with some technical insight to why this occurring and how to stop it.

Is this whole issue "Evil" or "Incompetence"? I don't know. I just know Google doesn't care one way or another. I'll post any additional Expanded Match misbehavior as it occurs just for the heck of it - but you have not convinced me of anything unless you can tell me how I would benefit from a different match option for the same keywords at the same ad position.

Alan Perkins

01-31-2006, 11:28 AM

For the record, I do disagree with Google expanding their broad matching, if that's what has happened. It's never been our preference that expanded match exists at all.Yep, agreed.

Except that as things have evolved, it is in fact the case that for many advertisers, volume -- not precision to this degree -- is their biggest challenge.I think you have hit the nail on the head here. I'm sure that for many naive advertisers, with small accounts and small keyword lists, expanded match provides a great exposure to extra volume.

Google brought the world phrase match and broad match.Which is why I'm so disappointed they are slowly breaking broad match, because I love broad match.

Please, Google, provide the ability to opt out of expanded broad match! Instead, just suggest the words to me directly and I'll add them if I see fit!

I just know Google doesn't care one way or anotherOh, I think they would if they knew just how bad things were for advertisers and searchers. Ultimately that won't help their bottom line. But I think many advertisers don't even realise how bad things are.

tonerman

01-31-2006, 01:19 PM

Oh, I think they would if they knew just how bad things were for advertisers and searchers. Ultimately that won't help their bottom line. But I think many advertisers don't even realise how bad things are.
Yeah, I was probably being rash when I said Google just doesn't care. Guess my frustration is fraying me around the edges.

Expanded match may grab other keywords in your account and start showing ads since it looks in all your campaigns for "expanded matches." Yesterday it started showing "Phaser 750 Toner" ads for the query "Phaser 7750 Toner". I don't have the term "7750" in any campaign. SO I suppose expanded match said, "well it has phaser in the query, and it has "750" even though it is only part of the query, so I better show the Phaser 750 Ad. Maybe there is some brilliance in that logic somewhere.

tonerman

01-31-2006, 09:22 PM

Key Words:

Minolta Pagepro 1100 cartridge
Minolta Pagepro 1100 toner
Minolta Pagepro 1100 toner cartridge
Pagepro 1100 toner
minolta 1100 toner
pagepro 1100 cartridge
pagepro 1100 toner cartridge

Expanded Match displayed an ad for the above Minolta Pagepro 1100 campaign from the search query "Konica Minolta 2300 Toner" resulting in 3 wasted clicks at an average CPC of $3.00 and change.

Added negative -2300 to the above Ad campaign and the ad still appears for the query "Konica Minolta 2300 Toner". Seems obvious that what is causing it is the words "Minolta" and "toner". The term "1100" gets thrown out so it appears that hitting 2 out 3 keyword terms is good enough for expanded match to put up an ad. The ad text doesn't match the query, but people click on it anyway maybe thinking that if we have one minolta product we must have them all.

Adding negative keywords doesn't seem to matter either - both at the Campaign Level and at the Ad Campaign Level. Time for an email to support again.

Other Expanded Match clicks today:

1. Query: "sharp printer drum cartridges AM-900" Displayed another Sharp Product Ad "Sharp Al-1000 Drum". I do not have "AM-900" anywhere in my campaigns.

2. Query: "MICR for hp deskjet". I have "-deskjet" as a negative keyword in my "HP Laserjet MICR Toner" Ad campaign Ad and clicks still occur.

3. Query: "INK CARTRIDGE FOR LEXMARK Z810". I have a campaign for the Xerox Z810 cartridge. There are no campaigns in my account with the keywords "Lexmark Z810".

As I said, if you sell brand, model, part number specific products it appears Broad Match with Expanded Match is a ROI Killer. It will show ads for products that do not match the query based on some of the query words matching other keywords in your account regardless of where they appear (even in different campaigns), regardless of pause campaign, and regardless of specific negative keywords in your campaigns that match a term in a search query.

I'm done with this. None of this behavior is documented in Google Adwords anywhere that I have seen. It's simply content advertising at search term rates. Regardless of any other consideration I am going to have to convert all my campaigns to exact or phrase match.

I feel sorry for all the Google advertisers who like me established large campaigns built around the original functionality of Broad Match. It worked fine for me for many years. These problems started mostly in January for me. I hope the other Adwords users with Broad Match keywords combined with negative keywords learn about this issue somehow so they can take some action to protect themselves and their wallets.

This is a sea-state change in my view of Google. Tonerman

Mel66

02-01-2006, 12:37 PM

Scary stuff, Tonerman. I'm gonna run some reports and see what's happening with my broad match terms. Like you, we've had good luck with broad match - not across the board, but definitely for certain ad groups.

Melissa

tonerman

02-01-2006, 12:52 PM

With no reasonable method of preventing the above mayhem I just used the Google keyword tool and converted over 6000+ keywords to Phrase Match from Broad Match. I'll go back in later and use exact match where useful. With that many keywords and campaigns I couldn't tweak my keywords - I needed to use a bulldozer.

cline

02-01-2006, 04:27 PM

Tonerman, I know at first it seems what Google's up to is rather heinous. But I've gotten the hang of it myself, seeing account after account working just fine -- if you take the time to adjust, and bid correctly.

Andrew, I think you are being dismissive of the problem. I can understand how that could be, because for most of the accounts I manage, there are no noticable problems with expanded broadmatch. However, I have a few acounts that, like the situation tonerman describes, depend heavily on model number targeting. And with targeting like this, the errors introduced by expanded broadmatch are significant.

For simplicity, consider 2 models of widgets, BrandX 123 and BrandX 456. You set up one adgroup for 123 and another for 456. 456 is a high-end model, worth lots of bucks if you make a sale. 123 is a low-priced accessory. Consequently, you bid high on 456 and low on 123.

What's happening is that Adwords is IGNORING the targeting for 123 and instead delivering ads for 456. This prevents you from reaching the market for 123 and it creates expensive clicks that don't convert well for 456.

The user gets screwed because the ads have low relevance. The advertiser gets screwed on both opportunity and out-of-pocket costs.

I've been through this situation several times with my Adwords rep. Adwords thinks that on balance expanded broadmatch is great and that these problems are not important.

I must respectfully disagree with Adwords on this. I'm glad to see that other advertisers such as tonerman are starting to realize how they are getting screwed by expanded broadmatch.

AussieWebmaster

02-01-2006, 10:34 PM

tonerman

02-01-2006, 10:48 PM

I hate to be the one asking this but are you also measuring ROI on these terms?
Is there any return on them... do you offer any of these other items... or have the chance to add the miss searches to other products to offer?
If they convert in one way they may offset this.

If that was happening I would have loved Expanded Match. The ROI for the terms being displayed against my wishes was $0.00. Just because an ad is generating clicks doesn't mean it is a good product opportunity. It's a good thought.

If someone were the Amazon of toner cartridges they might get enough "pure luck" business to put up with it, but I think the more model numbers, names, and part numbers you have in your campaigns the more Expanded Match is going to advertise for stuff you don't have. I don't think it's a game you can win.

Broad Match means more impressions, lower CTR's and higher CPC's. However, as originally implemented with the right negative keywords it was a money maker because it covered more queries. If I didn't mind the burden of the wasted clicks Expanded Match was creating I would have lived with it. However, it was rapidly spinning out of control and that was it for me.

Always good hearing from you Aussie. Tonerman

cline

02-02-2006, 08:38 AM

I hate to be the one asking this but are you also measuring ROI on these terms?

Yes, I do, and that points to another part of the problem, because expanded broadmatch is screwing up the ROI measurements. I'm measuring ROI on both models 123 and 456, as per my above example. The ads for 456 are showing on 123 terms, diluting ROI, and since 123 is targeted, I have no easy way of tracking the ROI on mistargeted 456 ads going to 123 terms.

Alan Perkins

02-02-2006, 08:47 AM

The user gets screwed because the ads have low relevance.Certainly in the cases I've examined, even when the advertiser sells the product, the user is being taken to the wrong landing page!

To use your example, an expanded match on BrandX 456 shows the ad for BrandX 123. The ad includes the landing page for a BrandX 123. So when the user clicks through, they can't (necessarily) find what they were looking for. This is Adwords breaking its own rules!

tonerman

02-02-2006, 11:20 AM

This is Adwords breaking its own rules!

That really frosted me also! Technically however, the ad will say "ML=2150" when their query was "ML-2300" for instance. When the user clicks on the ad for "ML-2150 they do not see an item that matches their query. If they get confused (who wouldn't get confused?) and then enter the search term "ML-2300" in our website search engine they waste even more time looking at product listing that in the end won't be the ML-2300's either because we don't sell that item.

It may not be breaking the rules about the ad matching the landing page, but it sure breaks the spirit of the rules.

Tonerman

AussieWebmaster

02-02-2006, 11:58 AM

I isolate most of my terms and have also had problems with overzealous broad matching but we do have the ability to provide for the peripheral terms.
I have not tried this but will look into it now - using the keyword insert in the destination url - MSN offers it (parameter 3).... if Google is offering it (if they are it is well hidden fact that I have someone running down and will post when I get info) I would add it and use that to forward the traffic to other landing pages.... or trade the traffic.....

losloslos

02-02-2006, 03:07 PM

tonerman

02-02-2006, 04:49 PM

Tonerman,

I would suggest that you set all 3 types of matching (broad, phrase, and exact) to run at the same time. Then you can set the max bid prices higher on the match type that you think is more relevant.

nec 870 cartridge ** 5.0
"nec 870 cartridge" ** 6.0
[nec 870 cartridge] ** 7.0

You would have to build the history for the new match types, but if you place them in the same adgroup, you will still have the creative history.

Since I am at ground zero I can live with whatever the stats are now. I was thinking about that strategy but having never done it I didn't know if you could do that. The creatives havn't changed. I'll give it whirl.

What does Adwords do - pick the most relevant keyword for the query?

I had my log analyzer pull the keywords for me from the most recent Google Adwords online orders. They've are being sorted by brand and product and they I was going to decide the matching option for them. What you are saying is I can use them for all three matching options at different bid amounts correct? If that is true (and I have no reason not to believe you) them when I have my best keywords identified I'll pare them down and bid them with all three match options like you suggest. Thanks, killer idea! What's the downside or "gotcha" in this strategy? :confused:

AussieWebmaster

02-02-2006, 05:26 PM

You catch the phrase and exact searchers and the broad does not run as rampant since you are bidding lower than your competitors... though Google does not give the nod to one match type over the other they generally do get better CTR and thus move up through that.

tonerman

02-02-2006, 05:39 PM

Aussie, I'm helpless.

If I have one search term "NEC 870 Toner", and let's say I have an Ad Campaign called "NEC 870 Toner", to bid all three match options would I have 3 ad groups under the NEC 870 Toner Campaign with one match type in each of the three ad groups?

Tonerman

AussieWebmaster

02-02-2006, 05:46 PM

tonerman

02-02-2006, 06:02 PM

Yes that is how we do it.....

Thanks for taking this dumb bunny by the paw. Sounds like a great strategy and I am going to implement it.

Alan Perkins

02-03-2006, 07:50 AM

Note that this will not fix your problems with expanded broad match. You're talking about something completely different now. :)

You can actually use all three match types in one Ad Group (I do). You'd only want to use different Ad Groups if you needed to do so for another reason (e.g. creatives, negatives, pausing, etc.)

My Google account manager recommended that within one account (note "account", not campaign or ad group) you should not use different match types on the same key phrase. When I asked why she said that I'd get better results if I used just broad match and let the system work things out for itself (i.e. use broad match instead of all three, or phrase match instead of both phrase and exact match). I tested her answer but found I could get better results (for our clients, at least) if I worked things out instead of letting the system do it!

tonerman

02-03-2006, 09:03 AM

Hi Alan- it is off topic but your input brought it back on topic - the problems with expanded match!

cline

02-03-2006, 09:19 AM

AdWordsRep said this in What are your Top 5 AdWords feature or tool requests? (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=786&page=5) but I'm responding here to keep the two threads on focus.

... expanded broad match has been around for quite some time now - more than two years. It was announced back in October 2003 (the announcement is archived here: https://adwords.google.com/select/news/oct03.html), along with instructions on how to use negative keywords and phrase/exact match to prevent expansions.

That's true, but some things have changed since then. When expanded broadmatch was introduced, the keyword tool told you what the match would be expanded to. I recall going through all my adgroups checking this and negative matching, and specifically adding the expaneded matches to the targeting so that they could be tracked better. My observation at that time was that expanded broadmatching seldom affected my targeting, and when it did it was undesirable only about 10% of the time.

But now, the keyword tool does not tell us what the expanded broadmatches are. Go back to telling us what the expanded broadmatches are and I'd be copacetic again with expanded broadmatching. I don't mind putting in some negative matches. I *do mind* having to use a ouiji board to identify what negative matches are needed.

The problems tonerman and I are experiencing with expanded broadmatch occur -- as far as we've been able to see -- only with model number targeting. And when they do occur, they are hard for the advertiser to see. Tonerman picked it up from his logs. I started noticing it in August 05 when I was doing competitive analyses.

tonerman

02-03-2006, 10:44 AM

AdWordsRep said this in What are your Top 5 AdWords feature or tool requests? (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=786&page=5) but I'm responding here to keep the two threads on focus.

The problems tonerman and I are experiencing with expanded broadmatch occur -- as far as we've been able to see -- only with model number targeting. And when they do occur, they are hard for the advertiser to see. Tonerman picked it up from his logs. I started noticing it in August 05 when I was doing competitive analyses.

That is exactly what is wrong with Expanded Match. If it would quit playing with model numbers it would work very well. ALL of my heart burn was with model numbers. My problems also seemed to start around August also. I do a lot of log analysis and I only saw a few instances previously that I had to deal with using negative keywords.

I also had a problem adding negative keywords. If I added a negative keyword to one campaign to shut off ads for a particular query Expanded Match would just go find another campaign to display for the same undesireable query. The only way to detect this was thru log analyzers. This behavior was always associated with model numbers also.

Alan Perkins

02-03-2006, 10:47 AM

The problems tonerman and I are experiencing with expanded broadmatch occur -- as far as we've been able to see -- only with model number targeting.No I've seen it in other areas too.

Here is an example:

The phrase 'renault clio pre-reg' did not trigger the keyword 'clio pre-reg' in an ad group that was targeting pre-registered Renault Clio cars and delivering searchers to listings of those cars.

Instead, the phrase 'renault clio pre-reg' triggered the keyword 'renault automatics' in an ad group that was targeting Renault automatics and delivering searchers to listings of that type of car - despite the fact that they were looking for pre-reg Clios. Note that every keyword trigger in this ad group contained the word "auto" or "automatic", yet it was still triggered in preference to the previous ad group.

Here is, verbatim, the reason we were given for this occurring: "In this case, the Quality Score of the 'renault' keyword is higher so it showed the ad most relevant to it."

IMO this reason does not tally with most normal people's definition of "most relevant". This is an example of the kinds of places that expanded broad matching is now going, and it's not good IMO. We fixed this particular problem by adding 'renault clio pre-reg' to our list of keywords in the respective ad group, but IMO this was just fixing a bug in Google's system.

I do not take kindly to being told that "renault automatics" is a better match than "clio pre-reg" for "renault clio pre-reg" and that I should change my entire account to make sure the right ad is shown!

AdwordsRep, I can provide the conversation thread with Google and details of the account in question if you would like to look into this further.

AussieWebmaster

02-03-2006, 10:57 AM

The problem with expanded match is the all or nothing aspect of it. Though it does appear to offer the expanded options to the higher ranked advertisers, I will do a little testing to see if that is true - as well as the impact of daily spend limits have on the application.

Obviously if you have set your spends well over what you are being delivered then you have a greater chance of Google delivering expanded keywords in an attempt to fill your order - though I have not tested for this yet.

The use of the exact and phrase matches allows you to bid less on the broad match and not miss the prime searches in the broad you were looking for but get out there for the more exotic (and the fact that most searches are not the same).

AussieWebmaster

02-03-2006, 11:10 AM

In another problem we have encountered we will get traffic for currency exchange when the person is searching for money conversion.... hey they are close. But we also have money conversion as a term and it is not getting that click.

This we would not complain about if money conversion was more expensive a click - but in most of the cases it is the opposite. We pay more for the click this way.

Add to that the fact that our analytics go out the door.

cline

02-04-2006, 09:13 AM

No I've seen it in other areas too.
OMG, you're right! I completely forgot about another dramatic instance of it because I've got so many model number problems. At the end of November 05 Adwords expanded match decided that "cordless" and "wireless" were the same thing. Impressions for our Cordless adgroup suddenly exploded, quickly reaching 5x of what they were before. Cost/conv began to crash. It was only because this adgroup had run so well for so long, and because I was already alerted to problems with expanded broadmatch that I suspected the problem. I inserted "-wireless" and impressions fell back to where they used to be and profitability was restored.

tonerman

02-04-2006, 11:36 AM

OMG, you're right! I completely forgot about another dramatic instance of it because I've got so many model number problems.

I was in the same boat as you Cline! I had so many model problems I haven't looked for other keyword problems. I'll take a look as soon as I finish going out of business from converting all my campaigns to phrase match in a fit of frustration. :)

ApogeeWebLLC

02-07-2006, 02:58 PM

I would suggest that you set all 3 types of matching (broad, phrase, and exact) to run at the same time. Then you can set the max bid prices higher on the match type that you think is more relevant.

nec 870 cartridge ** 5.0
"nec 870 cartridge" ** 6.0
[nec 870 cartridge] ** 7.0
Yes, this is precisely what you want to do. Keep them in the same ad group. As well as paying less for the expanded broad match phrases, you'll have the added benefit of more clarity in the stats reported. You'll know the ad position for your exact phrase, for example.

See my Exact Match Bidding article via searchengineguide.com/ball/ for more details. I use this strategy in all of my Google PPC ad groups and all of my clients' ad group. It's been particularly useful since Google's broad matches have gone astray.

ApogeeWebLLC

02-07-2006, 03:07 PM

And let's take a step back in time and imagine if Google AdWords had never come along. Before AdWords Select, in Overture world, it was all exact match, all the time. Google brought the world phrase match and broad match. Overture and Findwhat later followed suit... well, sort of. Google's is still easier to figure out. At least they *have* a phrase match option.
I'd have to strongly disagree here. I'll gladly go back to the days before AdWords existed and Overture was the only game in town with 5 cent clicks and all exact match. For advertisers like myself who would take the time to submit hundreds or thousands of keywords, this was fantastic. Now, a big advertiser can buy 1 keyword, set a ridiculously high bid and have better placement for my huge set of keywords.

My strategy is to use broad match initially, track the results, and then evolve an ad group over time to layer in new exact and phrase matches and set those bids higher than the broad matches. At the same time, I layer in negative keywords. Eventually, I can drop all broad matches entirely or set those bids ridiculously low. So, yes, broad match has been a useful tool in helping me evolve an ad group. Beyond that, it's more money in Google's and Yahoo's pockets and a way for lazy, deep-pocketed advertisers to win.

andrewgoodman

02-07-2006, 05:11 PM

I'd have to strongly disagree here. I'll gladly go back to the days before AdWords existed and Overture was the only game in town with 5 cent clicks and all exact match. For advertisers like myself who would take the time to submit hundreds or thousands of keywords, this was fantastic. Now, a big advertiser can buy 1 keyword, set a ridiculously high bid and have better placement for my huge set of keywords.

My strategy is to use broad match initially, track the results, and then evolve an ad group over time to layer in new exact and phrase matches and set those bids higher than the broad matches. At the same time, I layer in negative keywords. Eventually, I can drop all broad matches entirely or set those bids ridiculously low. So, yes, broad match has been a useful tool in helping me evolve an ad group. Beyond that, it's more money in Google's and Yahoo's pockets and a way for lazy, deep-pocketed advertisers to win.

What are you disagreeing with? I assume that we can't put the genie back in the bottle, so it wasn't a hypothetical "let's go back to when no one else knew what they were doing" argument I was making. Today's reality is that things are very competitive, so I'll make that assumption. No one's getting by with 5 cent or 20 cent clicks very often on either Google or Overture nowadays. Nice fantasy, but exploiting a short term loophole is all it was back in the day.

My specific point was, Google has phrase match. Overture does not. Google documents their matching options -- although from what I am hearing on this thread, advertisers are more unhappy with expanded broad match than I had realized. (I'd argue it's worse on Yahoo... again... but... it gets into anecdotes and conjecture unless you're looking at the same accounts.)

Are you disagreeing with the specific point I just made, or rather changing the subject and engaging in nostalgia?

Again, the point is that Google has phrase match. Yahoo doesn't.

As for going back to the days when there was no AdWords, guess that means you don't want to advertise on Google, then. It has 60% search market share. "Wouldn't it be nice if..." doesn't make client campaigns any better.

I still believe the question revolves around how much heat do you give Google for building their platform in a specific way. I could reprint everything I've ever written if that would convince you that I've taken them to task many, many times on their various features. But how to argue they don't have a history of upgrading their product and responding to such feedback? There have been a great many enhancements to the platform. Isn't it fair to point that out? Google can't make every business better, and they don't dictate the terms of every industry. It's competitive out there. A lot of the less vigilant larger advertisers will go broad, and eat the cost of the nonperforming terms, unfortunately.

ApogeeWebLLC

02-07-2006, 05:43 PM

What are you disagreeing with? I assume that we can't put the genie back in the bottle, so it wasn't a hypothetical "let's go back to when no one else knew what they were doing" argument I was making. Today's reality is that things are very competitive, so I'll make that assumption. No one's getting by with 5 cent or 20 cent clicks very often on either Google or Overture nowadays. Nice fantasy, but exploiting a short term loophole is all it was back in the day.
It is entirely possible to get good traffic on Google in the 5-20 cents range. Their innovation of combining CPC with CTR is useful, in that sense. It is possible to compete with larger advertisers by writing very, very focused keyword ads. (BTW, I skimmed your book and I know you cover these sorts of strategies.) Here's what I disagree with:

Google brought the world phrase match and broad match.
I'm not so sure this is a good thing. If exact match was the only option on both Google and Overture, I think ads would be better for consumers. Yes, advertisers would have to work a little harder, but that's ok. As long as the keyword tools are robust enough to show the full extent of the "long tail" then this works. I'd rather capture the long tail the hard way.

Sure, you can counter this by saying go head and use exact match only. That works with Overture since standard matches display before advanced matches. Not so with Google. A lazy advertiser with a handful of broad matches and high bids will trump exact matches. Does this make the ads more relevant? No. In this area, Yahoo's system is actually better. Sure, there are pros and cons to both systems. Clearly, you have to advertise on both. And, there are different strategies that work on the two systems. I wouldn't argue, though, that all of Google's changes are innovations.

AussieWebmaster

02-07-2006, 06:40 PM

I have to agree with Andrew here mate... if you are getting 5-20 cent clicks you are in a rather competitiveless industry. Now you can get them if you want to be average position 17 or more.... but then why bother.

I disagree with Andrew when he touts Google because they have more traffic.... yes it gets you more clicks but I have noticed over the past 3 months that volume is not the only difference.... Yahoo and MSN seem to convert better for me.... I do not have the luxury of all the testing I can do with Google, but the others have been better on bottomline CPA... but Google has more traffic so generally lower profit per unit but more units sold is a basic...

The rub is I buy it all so long as it is profitable.... I play with position, ads, landing pages, match type of keywords... anything I can manipulate and measure is up for examination.

Hey international traffic is cheaper right now.... if you offer things that can be done globally you may find grabbing all the international traffic may be a good start - here Yahoo's separation comes in handy - makes the competitors work a little harder to get the account open etc.

There are ways to restrict expanded keywords and maybe if the issue remains in the industry eye Google may do something about that - after all they are trying to "Do No Evil".

ApogeeWebLLC

02-07-2006, 08:02 PM

I have to agree with Andrew here mate... if you are getting 5-20 cent clicks you are in a rather competitiveless industry. Now you can get them if you want to be average position 17 or more.... but then why bother.True, these days you have start out bidding high or your ads won't be seen. However, over the course of a few weeks or months, it is still possible to get well under 50 cents per click by layering in negative keywords, gradually bidding lower on broad matches (and/or higher on exact and phrase), keeping keyword lists in ad groups very small so all the keywords are in the text of the ad, etc. Think about this: with broad match becoming so expansive, if you eliminate it or severely reduce bids on broad matches (once you've used it early on in a new campaign to help identify a wide range of exact and phrase matches) you are seriously reducing the denominator in the CTR calculation. OTOH, the bigger (I like to call them lazy) advertisers who are blindly using broad match and higher bids have an enormous number of impressions on keywords that are not necessarily all that relevant. So, yes, by generating very high CTRs through these sorts of methods, the CPC can be driven down very low without sacrificing ad position. IOW, it is possible to adapt and thrive in this new environment.

andrewgoodman

02-07-2006, 08:48 PM

I have to agree with Andrew here mate... if you are getting 5-20 cent clicks you are in a rather competitiveless industry. Now you can get them if you want to be average position 17 or more.... but then why bother.

I disagree with Andrew when he touts Google because they have more traffic.... yes it gets you more clicks but I have noticed over the past 3 months that volume is not the only difference.... Yahoo and MSN seem to convert better for me.... I do not have the luxury of all the testing I can do with Google, but the others have been better on bottomline CPA... but Google has more traffic so generally lower profit per unit but more units sold is a basic...

The rub is I buy it all so long as it is profitable.... I play with position, ads, landing pages, match type of keywords... anything I can manipulate and measure is up for examination.

I think we can all agree... campaign ROI / quirks depend on the industry you're in.

AussieWebmaster

02-08-2006, 12:01 AM

I agree the quirks of each industry make you adapt to it more than the machine giving the traffic - but at times the ghost in the machine can get anyone... that is why it needs someone keeping an eye on it - otherwise it would be turnkey which everyone would have to agree it is not.

abbottsys

02-08-2006, 10:11 AM

I know this does not solve tonermans problem, and indeed there probably is no solution, but just to recap this whole "product ID as keyword" thing for anyone that might be starting a new adwords campaign:

If I were selling a product with a specific model ID such as NEC Superscript 860 I would not use NEC Superscript 860 (broad match) as a keyword. Instead I would add the following 2 keywords to my ad:

[NEC Superscript 860]
"NEC Superscript 860"

where [] is exact match, and "" is phrase match. Google treats these as 2 separate keywords. I would then monitor conversions on each of these keywords and of course delete any that did not perform.

AussieWebmaster

02-08-2006, 10:42 AM

jbgilbert

02-08-2006, 11:08 AM

Do we all agree that "expanded broad match" is bad?
(not broadmatch, "expanded broad match")

Would we all be happy if:

Adwords did THIS:
* Separated Broadmatch and Expanded match
* THEN allowed the advertiser to elect which ones to use!
* AND informed the advertiser of *exactly* what terms "expanded match" will trigger
* OR kept broadmatch (as it was originally introduced) and GOT RID of Expanded match?

I'll start... YES AND YES

Please, explain it to all your adwords reps. Maybe your complaints (excuse me: suggestions) will get us further than mine have.

AussieWebmaster

02-08-2006, 11:17 AM

I like the ability to have both options though would not give away the extra traffic....

Also bring back the expanded keyword list in the keyword tool may be a bigger step... give people the chance to safely negative out

dannysullivan

02-08-2006, 11:18 AM

I set up a poll for the thread now, so everyone can vote. The percentages won't make much sense, since it's multiple choice. But you should get a feel for the opinion on it.

jbgilbert

02-09-2006, 10:34 AM

It surprises me that more people don't chime in here.

What it tells me is that many people don't know what the heck is happening to them because of the "expanded" part of broad match.

Roxyyo

02-09-2006, 11:39 PM

It's too bad that searchers click on "Model XYZ" when they are looking for "Model ABC" in the first place. :confused:

cline

02-10-2006, 11:00 AM

It surprises me that more people don't chime in here. What it tells me is that many people don't know what the heck is happening to them....

Yes, they don't know what is happening to them. I first discovered this problem and started a thread onAdwords Mistargeting - Expanded Match Gone Wild (http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum81/6243.htm) back in August 05, but no one else seem to have noticed the problem at that time.

They don't know because it's relatively rare and quite hard to see. You have to be doing pretty detailed targeting for it to happen, and even then it affects only a small portion of that targeting.

It's really hard to see because Adwords doesn't tell you what it is doing -- you have to find it either by doing searches, like I found it, or by careful reviews of your logs, like tonerman found it.

It's almost hard to even believe it when you do find it, because we've grown accustomed to placing such trust that Adwords will deliver ads targeted to our instructions.

Perhaps this chart will give people an idea of how bad the problem is. Here is a search impressions chart of an adgroup that got expanded broadmatched to death.

http://www.aderit.com/expandedbroadmatch.png

This is only search traffic. There were no significant changes in the targeting over the period shown in the chart, excpet for one thing. That big drop is from when I figured out that the targeting had been corrupted by a new out-of-control expanded broadmatch. I put in a negative for the expansion term and traffic levels returned to normal. Profitability for this targeting crashed corresponding to the explosion in impressions.

And yes, these data and more were provided to Adwords immediatly after I discovered the problem.

The problem may be rare and hard to see, but if you're affected by it, it can be really bad.

tonerman

02-13-2006, 08:44 AM

Quote Cline: "It's really hard to see because Adwords doesn't tell you what it is doing -- you have to find it either by doing searches, like I found it, or by careful reviews of your logs, like tonerman found it."

That's the problem-most people trust Google with their money and do not question the validity of the clicks they are seeing. They do not know what query terms are responsible for the clicks. Tonerman

AussieWebmaster

02-13-2006, 10:04 AM

The expanded match is not click fraud but can be the same wasted spend if not kept an eye on....
Problem is you can argue a refund for click fraud whereas expanded match is more difficult to get a refund for.

tonerman

02-13-2006, 11:20 AM

Agreed - it is not click fraud. Secondly, the ad text may not match the query but people click on the ad anyway. So I doubt if you have any recourse that would be worth the effort to get a refund. You would have to "jawbone" them to death for every dollar.

tonerman

02-15-2006, 12:40 PM

Man - I am sick of Google's Expanded Match's behavior. I have a very important key word and I built a list of about 1500 exact matches for this keyword. I also have a lot of other ad campaigns for the same brand, but for different model numbers and used for different purposes, a few of which are broad match. I had to turn some broad match campaigns back on because I was losing to much traffic without properly constructed phrase word matches in place when I flipped all my terms to phrase match in anger one day.

I noticed one of the new exact match terms had a couple hundred impressions and no clicks. So I did a search myself on the term and there it was in position number 1. I decided that maybe I should try lowering the ad position. So I dropped the max bid several dollars. Did another search and the ad was still in position 1.

Dropped the bid to the floor, did another search on the same term and it was still in position 1. Finally I paused the campaign, did another search and my campaigns still showed a match for the term in position 4 or 5.

Searched all my Google campaigns for the term and had no matches. Then I searched all the campaigns for the brand and broad match. Found some campaigns that were broad, but had different model numbers. Added negative keyword to all those campaigns contained in my exact match term.

Did a search again and finally no ad appeared! SO I turned the all exact match campaign back on, did a search at the lowball number and no ad appeared. Raised the bid to the original bid amount and ad appeared in position 1 again.

When Google says if you have problems with Broad Match with Expanded Match and you can solve them by changing your campaigns to exact match or phrase match - you can only stop this by not having any broad match ad campaigns with the same brand names and similar words and or different model numbers in the keywords! Your exact match terms do not mean diddley! This is just plain BS and I don't have time for it. :mad:

Why in the world Google is p---sing off advertisers is beyond me. They are going to start getting some real backlash on this issue when someone with a lot of bucks being wasted realizes what is going on! It has cost me plenty in terms of effort to control the problem and I probably can't with the number of ad campaigns I have. Who has time or money to spend on this stuff? And even if you do spend the time (I've worked around the clock for days on this!) you can't stop the problem with expanded match anyway!

AussieWebmaster

02-15-2006, 04:53 PM

If you are going to be at SES NYC I can introduce you to a few Google people to talk to about this... though how successful you will be is hard to tell....

tonerman

02-15-2006, 05:56 PM

I can't go. Anything you can do to bring this issue to their attention on behalf of all of us would be greatly appreciated. I got so po'd over it today I got a speeding ticket ($142? Thank you officer) while thinking about it and driving with only half my brain on the road while driving home.

I just can't believe they really want adwords to function this way. It is ridiculas. Thanks for the offer. I would love to see them but I am busy desperately restoring my traffic and click levels.

AdWordsRep

02-15-2006, 07:28 PM

Sorry to hear about the ticket tonerman. That makes for a very tough day. :(

...I noticed one of the new exact match terms had a couple hundred impressions and no clicks. So I did a search myself on the term and there it was in position number 1. I decided that maybe I should try lowering the ad position. So I dropped the max bid several dollars. Did another search and the ad was still in position 1.

Dropped the bid to the floor, did another search on the same term and it was still in position 1. Finally I paused the campaign, did another search and my campaigns still showed a match for the term in position 4 or 5... In reply to your post #73, I wanted to let you know that when you make any change within your account, it will not be reflected on live sites immediately.

There are a vast number of servers that must first update in order to fully incorporate any change you make - and this can take anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours, depending on traffic to the servers at the time, when the servers last updated, and so forth.

To be on the safe side, I'd say that most changes will be incorporated within an hour. So, for example if you change your Max CPC, you would want to wait an hour, if not more, before looking to see your new position. The same applies for pausing and resuming. A paused ad will still continue to run for a variable period of time. A resumed ad will not appear for a variable period of time.

This can be especially confusing (both for you and the servers) when you make many related changes, say to the same Max CPC, within a very short period of time. You'll end up having have a lot of changes to the same thing updating through lots of different servers at the same time.

So, bottom line, it's best to make a change and wait for an hour or more before evaluating it's effect.

AWR

tonerman

02-15-2006, 07:43 PM

Thanks for the tip. I was doing my comparisons on Google and the faq when you make changes to your keywords says that "your changes will appear immediately on Google". I do appreciate the advice, and if it takes one hour fine. However, the instant I got negative keywords in the ad campaigns triggering the ads the ads stopped.

It's the primary topic of this thread that is giving me and many others a lot of grief. I hope somebody back at the fort is taking this issue very seriously. I recognize you don't run the company and don't make decisons like how matching should work. There is really no excuse for what I and many others are experiencing with our Google ad campaigns.

Expanded match has taken the power to make the decisions about how I want to spend my money out of my hands (and not just a few pennies here and there either) and put it into the incompetent hands of a uncontrollable beserk Expanded Match algorithm.

I know that the stock Google answer is "use phrase match with negative keywords or exact match. They need to also say "in ALL your campaigns" because otherwise some loosely related Broad Match campaign (say for the same brand products) is going to take your exact match keywords hostage.

tonerman

02-16-2006, 10:57 AM

I got to thinking about one of my campaigns that got 62 clicks for a search term that was not in my keyword list (860 vs real keyword 870).

Cline figured this problem out ahead of me and did a nice job illustrating it with a chart and data:

"Perhaps this chart will give people an idea of how bad the problem is. Here is a search impressions chart of an adgroup that got expanded broadmatched to death.

http://www.aderit.com/expandedbroadmatch.png

This is only search traffic. There were no significant changes in the targeting over the period shown in the chart, excpet for one thing. That big drop is from when I figured out that the targeting had been corrupted by a new out-of-control expanded broadmatch. I put in a negative for the expansion term and traffic levels returned to normal. Profitability for this targeting crashed corresponding to the explosion in impressions."

If my 870 campaign got 62 clicks for the term 860 in a month, or whatever the timeframe was mentioned earlier in this thread, can anyone imagine how many false impressions it created?.

Multiply that across all your broad match campaigns and it probably comes to a big number in terms of impressions for those campaigns effected. Since CTR effects your CPC, isn't this just another case of expanded match spending your money beyond your control?

Only Google knows what terms are triggering impressions without clicks. When you can't rely on accurate impressions and clicks, when does the whole "trust me with your money" mantra come tumbling down?

Tonerman

cline

02-16-2006, 08:19 PM

I've been thinking about this expanded broadmatch issue, and it seems to me that I should change my mind about it. Since expanded broadmatch is tricky and hard to predict, especially since it destroys the transparency of Adwords reporting, it makes it much more difficult for people who are not experts in Adwords to run profitable campaigns. Consequently, expanded broadmatch increases the demand for Adwords experts, and that's good for my business. Rather than complaining about such problems with Adwords, it seems to me that I should be thankful for them.

Thank you Adwords!

tonerman

02-16-2006, 09:21 PM

jbgilbert

02-17-2006, 10:11 AM

You see the poll... okay, not many people but virtually none favor expanded broadmatch the way it is..

I'm not changing sides......

Adwords really needs to do THIS:
* Separate Broadmatch and Expanded match
* THEN allow the advertiser to elect which ones to use!
* AND inform the advertiser of *exactly* what terms "expanded match" will trigger
* OR keep broadmatch (as it was originally introduced) and GET RID of Expanded match.

tonerman

02-17-2006, 11:29 AM

You see the poll... okay, not many people but virtually none favor expanded broadmatch the way it is..

I'm not changing sides......

I just meant it as a joke thinking it would be nice to be in a position where I could make some money instead of losing a bunch! :cool: In actuality I hate Expanded Match. Tonerman

jbgilbert

02-17-2006, 12:24 PM

Tonerman,

good to hear... no more switching... it's either:
- "less filling" or "taste great"
- male or female
- expanded or not

tonerman

02-17-2006, 03:42 PM

In 2003 I posted a thread that asked if the Google server was making mistakes. Here is a link to that thread in March I think of 2005:
http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=4453

The problem was Expanded Match substituting "3200" for one of my campaigns that had "3100" in it. I didn't have "3200" in my campaigns at the time. The Broad match keyword tool at the time would not display "3200" as a keyword to consider at the time the incident was occurring. Here is what Google said at the time:

"The expanded matches that your ad is running on are determined using data from your account (italics added) The expanded matches returned by the tool are determined using data from all accounts that are using a certain keyword. It is possible, therefore, to notice certain discrepancies between the expanded matches that your ad is running on, and the expanded matches predicted by the tool."

I finally stopped the ad from appearing by making "3200" a negative keyword in the HP 3100 campaign just as we learned earlier in this thread.

The point of this post are the words I got at the time saying that "The expanded matches that your ad is running on are determined using data from your account".

There is the rub! As the data in your account changes the terms that will trigger ads based on Expanded Match will change also. So if you launch a new campaign, then ask to see what keywords Expanded Match is going to use as a trigger for ads for the new campaign, the expanded match keyword list for that campaign is going to change everytime you modify anything in your account.

:eek: Lovely! Tonerman

tonerman

02-23-2006, 11:26 PM

I had to many campaigns and keywords to convert everything to effective phrase and exact match keywords in a short period of time so I reverted those I couldn't do quickly back into broad match. Today's score for Expanded Match? 6 clicks that didn't match anything in my campaigns out of 69 so far today.

Let's see - 6 divided by 69 = 8.7% of my clicks just in one day - at an average cost of $2.73 per click that's a cool free $16.38 out of my pocket for clicks I didn't want for search terms not in any of my campaigns or my keywords.

Shutting off Expanded Match would probably derail quarterly profits for a quarter don't you think? They probably aren't to anxious to end Expanded Match I bet.

Then there was the hour I spent pulling log files and drilling down to see what clicks came in on what queries so I could add negative keywords to several campaigns after I checked to make sure I wasn't shooting myself with the negative campaign keyword.

If we don't make enough noise for Google to hear us and fix this then shame on all of us! Tonerman

jbgilbert

02-24-2006, 08:53 AM

Making enough noise to get Google's attention on this is going to be difficult -- more like impossible.

Tonerman you have some good stats. Enough of those stats about costing you money for clicks you do not solicit kinda seems like it leans to the click fraud area....? Why don't you ask Google for a fat refund every month!!!!

Do a decent long post (kinda like the last one), make it an article, title it with the words in it Google's own form of click fraud, we can get it published.

BUT REMEMBER, it is only our intent to get Google to give us the option: expanded or not..............

AussieWebmaster

02-24-2006, 11:06 AM

I will be pushing for the return of the list of expanded keywords in the keyword suggestion tool so we can at least negative out the obvious bad ones... should be a worthy cause at SES NYC.

tonerman

02-24-2006, 12:06 PM

Give 'em hell Aussie! :mad: Tonerman

tonerman

02-26-2006, 09:26 PM

Expanded Match would crack me up if it wasn't costing me money! How about this one? I had a campaign for the Sharp AL-1000 toner cartridge and the ad displayed for the query "1000 round ak drum clip". :rolleyes:

Must have been a query by a dumb terrorist! Idiot clicked on an ad with the headline "AL-1000 Toner Cartridge" All I know is it cost me an average of $2.50 a click.

Besides for being in the arms business Adwords also thinks I sell digital cameras. It displayed my ad for the "XD Toner Cartridge" for the query "olympus p-440 photo cartridge". That campaign averages $3.00 a click.

I do have the terms "photo conductor" and "cartridge" in my keywords but never by themselves and I do not have "p-440", "440", or "Olympus" anywhere in my campaigns. Now it's making up brands, model numbers, and products!

Here's aother made up non-existant product from expanded match: "minolta 2200 laserjet toner". Minolta printers aren't called Laserjet and I have not heard of a "2200" but maybe it exists. HP makes "laserjets" and Minolta doesn't. They make "Pagepro" laser ptinters. It also made up another product this weekend, the "qms 2400 toner". I checked and I do not have the term "2400" anywhere in any campaign except as a negative keyword (-2400) in one campaign.

Altogether there were 5 model number screw ups (showing ads that didn't match the query for 5 model numbers or products that do not exist) with a average cost per click of $2.70. So Google hit me for only $19 in lousy clicks this weekend.

Stopping Expanded Match from displaying ads with negative keywords is impossible because there is no rhyme or reason as to how it arrives at what queries will trigger your ads.

Maybe I'll start selling thousand round clips for AK-47's and digital cameras!

Google - results are all that matter right? Wrong - relevance and competence matters when it comes to your spending people's money entrusted to you on their behalf!

tonerman

02-28-2006, 02:04 AM

Yesterday I made "olympus" a negative key word in a campaign when Expanded Match started showing my toner cartridge ads for Olympus parts. Today it picked another campaign to show ads for a different Olympus part. I didn't have the part number anywhere in my campaigns, and I didn't have Olympus except as a negative keyword.. So tonight I made Olympus a negative keyword along with the latest non-existant part number in all my campaigns. Sure hope that Olympus part wasn't a popular keyword!

This would be fun except the joke is all at my expense in lost time, wasted clicks and impressions I can't stop until I get a click I didn't want!

Maybe I should listen to Google Expanded Match and start selling stuff for Olympus cameras! After all, I even OWN an Olympus camera! :rolleyes: Of course, that's about all I have to do with Olympus except in the insane mind of Google Expanded Match.

tonerman

03-01-2006, 02:05 AM

While no one on this forum that voted likes expanded match I heard thru the grapevine that Google was "aware of this thread's info" and that they were only going to "improve expanded matches accuracy". I do not know anything about the position of the Google person who made this remark.

In terms of accuracy they are starting at almost "ground zero". Two of my wasted clicks today are good examples of how far they have to go to "improve the accuracy".

Here are today's beauties from Google Expanded Match:

Query "micr toner hp8150". I have a campaign for the HP 8150 MICR toner cartridge with the keywords "HP 8150 micr toner". Seems like a good time for expanded match to kick in right? It did - it displayed my ad for the "HP 4 micr toner cartridge", ignored my "HP 8150 micr toner cartridge" key words in every variation in an ad group named "HP 8150 MICR". The user took one look at the wrong item and split. Kachung! $3.85 for Google - 1 page view for me.

Query: "Sharp_FO-4400_Fax_Machine/display_~full_specs". I have a campaign for the FO-4400 toner cartridge but all of the keywords have toner, cartridge or some variation in all the keywords. Expanded Match decided this person needed one of my toner cartridges, although he wasn't looking for one, and then BRILLIANTLY showed my ad for the Sharp FO-50ND toner cartridge! I have a campaign for the FO-4400 toner cartridge. Wouldn't it be nice if at least it offered him the right product even if he wasn't looking for it?

Altogther today's wasted clicks totaled about $15 included the above stupidity and ads for model numbers we don't advertise and one ad click in spite of a creating a negative keyword days ago trying to stop clicks for that term! Like the Adwords Rep said, it takes a while for the network to update so I keep paying in the meantime for clicks on terms I didn't ask for in the first place.

Why don't we start a thread that is a contest to find the dumbest Expanded Match Click of the Month? I'll throw up a prize even. At least we would get something in the form of entertainment for our wasted clicks. :D

cline

03-08-2006, 07:20 PM

Dang some of these expanded broad matches are hard to stamp out. The term in the expanded broadmatch problem in the chart I presented several posts above was where "blue widgets" was expanded broadmatching on "imperfect-synonym-for-blue widgets". Today I found ads targeted for "brand x blue widgets" -- every keyword contains "brand x" -- showing up on "blue widgets".

This is disturbing. It's well-known that more-specific searches (e.g., containing brand names and model numbers) convert better than more-general searches because for more-specific searches the user is closer to their decision point. Consequently, bids are higher for more-specific terms than more-general terms. What this means is that Adwords is taking the liberty of taking advertisers' high-bid/high-value keywords and running them on keywords that are not worth nearly so much.

And yes, I sent full details of the finding to my Adwords rep.

tonerman

03-08-2006, 08:08 PM

Hi Cline! "And yes, I sent full details of the finding to my Adwords rep."

I don't bother bugging Google . Google doesn't care about the your problems, or how they waste your or anybody else's money. They can't be unaware of the issue. I assume the post by Travisk on my more recent thread on this topic was a Google employee who said I was beginning to understand the meaning of "Broad", "Negative" and "Responsibility." I'm having problems with Broad Match because I'm just not being "responsible". What a crock.

Google's tech support's response to my questioning cllicks for queries that didn't match any keywords in my campaigns was ""I understand that due to the specificity of your keywords, expanded matching may not yield the most relevant results. Therefore, I suggest changing all of your keywords to either phrase or exact match."

Specificity of keywords? Isn't that the point of campaign keywords? What? Pick any words you like Google - just get me some clicks please?

I read an extremely good book once called something like "The 20 Immutable Laws of Marketing". One of the immutable laws was "Success leads to arrogance, and arrogance leads to failure." Sure reminds me of Google's Broad Match with Expanded Match.

The Adwords rep to the forum commented that "Expanded Match" has been around since 2003, like what's the big deal? As a matter of fact, I checked my logs in August 2004 and didn't see any problems. The problem is that Broad Match has changed and Google doesn't want to stop this nonsense. Arrogance, Evil, Incompetence?

You tell me. Their attitude is obviously "take it or leave it" if due to the specificity of your keywords, expanded matching may not yield the most relevant results. Therefore, I suggest changing all of your keywords to either phrase or exact match."

I am certain that this BS is going to come home to roost at Google eventually, and it isn't going to be easy for Google to defend its poor performance when a sharp reporter bings this problem out into the open in a major business news story, or by a sharp lawyer who appears in the courts one day with a class action lawsuit on behalf of Google Adwords advertisers.

cline

03-08-2006, 10:23 PM

Tonerman, I think you're being overly negative.

I do find that Google makes a reasonable attempt to address issues. They're not as quick as they used to be, but they're much bigger than they used to be and size reduces speed.

Don't let the useless advice from Google's customer service reps get to you either. They don't know this stuff like we know it. If they did, given the demand right now for marketers with PPC management skills, they could get better jobs than doing customer service. But PPC management requires much higher skills than PPC customer service. As a case in point on this, I recently hired someone who used to work for one of the PPC providers, doing keyword targeting and ad copywriting. I'm having to retrain them, as what they do is fine for the PPC provider, but it's not good for clients.

If you really believe that this problem makes Google open to a class action suit and you're really that angry and you've got the data, then you should contact your lawyer and ask about leading the class action suit. Personally I don't think the problem goes over that line, but several companies have sued Google on weaker grounds than this.

tonerman

03-08-2006, 11:06 PM

Tonerman, I think you're being overly negative.
No question about it. I am very negative. I have seen no change in Expanded Match since I first learned of the problem. The same behavior continues utterly unchanged and I am certain they are aware of it.
I do find that Google makes a reasonable attempt to address issues. They're not as quick as they used to be, but they're much bigger than they used to be and size reduces speed.
Let me know if anything positive happens as a result of speaking with your adwords representative if possible.
If you really believe that this problem makes Google open to a class action suit and you're really that angry and you've got the data, then you should contact your lawyer and ask about leading the class action suit.
I've got a business to run and payrolls to meet. I am not going to take my eyes off my primary responsibilities to go play Perry Mason. I'm angry, but I'm not crazy. As for the data - I do have it and I'm mulling the time reguired to really figure out the damage in $.
Personally I don't think the problem goes over that line, but several companies have sued Google on weaker grounds than this.
I frequently found 5%-10% of my daily ad spend down the drain to this flaw. I think across all advertisers in lower CTR's and higher avg. CPC's it isn't chump change. What if it was 1/2% to 1% of daily ad spend across all advertisers? Whatever the number is, I bet it is bigger than a bread basket.

It's time for me to let this issue go however it unfolds. Frankly I feeled betrayed by Google because I've been an advertiser with them from Day 1 back in the per thou impression days. I never worried about my campaigns. I hadn't seen a bad click in years and it never occurred to me that Google would screw up Adwords.

I was as strong a supporter of Google anyone could be. I believed in them and I believed in Adwords. I still believe you can make money with Adwords with the right tools and strategies, but Adwords is stacking the deck a little to heavily in their favor right this minute with the BS we've been discussing. As for goodwill, after spending 100's of thousands with them they have none with me right this minute. Why? Because they've complicated my job unnecessarily and cost me great deal of lost time and money

I better get to work building my business and quit scrrewing around with trying to stop a problem that's out of my hands anyway. I've got plenty of my own problems to deal with anyway. Have a nice night Cline.

OnlineGuy

02-20-2007, 10:24 AM

We are experiencing the same problem as everyone else in this thread. For years, one of the terms we have bid for was a highly specific but infrequently searched for term. Since these terms were so specific to our business but infrequently searched for, our max bid was around $2 per click. Our impressions averaged around 100 per day. Beginning in early January, this term increased from 100 impressions per day to 1,200 impressions per day. Never before has this infrequently searched for keyword received over 150 impressions in a day. This impression surge continued until early February when we pulled this term offline.

Google has changed something on how it implements the broad match/expanded match criteria, which has effected this term. Oddly enough, only one keyword has been affected.

We have attempted to contact Google on several occasions in an attempt to rectify the situation. Google will not reveal number of searches for this keyword (only the number of impressions) or a list of the expanded terms for which this keyword is displayed. Our company has been an AdWords advertiser since it was introduced years ago. We have spent tens of thousands of dollars in advertising with Google and used the 'broad match' option for our campaigns until now.

Google has only offered us 'canned' responses with hypothetical explanations on what may have caused the surge in impressions. Of course, Google profits from the change they made while bleeding our company of advertising dollars.

flyingrose

02-24-2007, 08:55 PM

I would like to weigh in on this very important issue. I have access to many dozens of Google Adwords accounts. Some are being severely impacted by this issue. I no sooner control one run-away expanded match problem and then a totally unrelated expansion spikes in that account or I find one in another account. The main reason Google hasn't seemed to care thus far is that they aren't fully understanding the implications.

Even other PPC experts like Andrew don't "get" what the fuss is about. This issue is more critical to smaller businesses that cannot absorb huge losses and expect their PPC expenses to be totally covered by the sales profits they drive. I am very close to recommending that all advertisers delete all broad matched keywords in every account knowing full well that means cutting traffic and sales in half BECAUSE I have seen sudden increases of 4000+% in ad costs on a single keyword. No small business can absorb such increases.

There is an easy fix for this but only Google can implement it. This is why they should:

1. Standard broad match drives about half of all a particular advertiser's traffic and sales. (I know that because I've run broad/phrase/exact simultaneously and measured actual traffic and sales.) Deleting all broad matched keywords to control this issue means cutting the average advertiser's traffic and potentially their sales in half.

2. Expanded broad match results in untargeted ads that cost more than they drive in sales. There are not enough hours in the day for us to constantly monitor and fix the new expansions Google's system is sending us.

3. Ads for specific product names and model numbers have the best ROI BECAUSE they're for that specific product. Expanded broad match is killing the golden goose.

4. Using phrase and exact match and not broad match requires using hundreds or even thousands of keyword phrases and will still not show an advertiser's ads for many relevant searches. Many products have brand name, product name, and three or more formats commonly used for the product number. There is no way to accurately predict what order those words will be used in a phrase. (I can provide Google with a specific account full of thousands of keyword phrases for specific products to show them there is no consistent way to decide which of those thousands of keyword phrases are most important.) THIS is why we need the original broad match function separated from the expanded match function.

5. Advertisers MUST be able to control where they want their ads to display or they cannot maintain profitability. What is profitable for one advertiser may bleed red ink for another. Even though Google's programming is very sophisticated applying results one business has to another's advertising is a losing proposition. Here is an excellent real example:

Expanded match displayed an ad for Grohe faucets on a search for DuraVit sinks. The phrase "DuraVit sinks" is in a paused campaign. While you can argue that both Grohe and DuraVit are plumbing brand names and someone buying a sink might want to buy a faucet too that is not the decision I want Google to make on my advertiser's behalf. There are too many variables their system does not have that required considering. (Because Grohe faucets are often used on DuraVit sinks so it is possible that they are using conversion data to select ads. )

Another point that has not been mentioned is the enormous jump in spending you may see if you pause ad groups. In the above example we paused the DuraVit sink campaign because of a poor ROI. The result was that instead of those very targeted ads with average CPCs under $1 Google's expanded match system started showing totally unrelated ads with CPCs over twice as much. Pausing an Ad Group or Campaign to save money could end up costing two or more times as much and since the ads and landing pages aren't targeted conversions will likely be almost zero.

P.S. Using broad, phrase, and exact match versions WILL NOT do anything to change this situation. Don't bother trying that. Only blocking every possible expanded use of your ads (impossible) or deleting ALL broad matched keywords in an account will control it as currently implemented.

P.P.S. Even if you haven't seen this affect you yet that doesn't mean it won't. As previously mentioned it isn't that easy to notice AND "expanded match" is constantly expanding. I just saw it hit another advertiser on a very stable keyword. Here are the exact details:

I've just encountered this issue again in a different account for a different industry. This time I can see that the change in Google's system occurred on Sunday, February 4th. Historically this keyword phrase consisting of a brand name and the general product description has received less than 30 impressions per day and had a consistent CTR of over 1.5%.

This is easily seen by comparing any individual day prior to 2/4/7 with any day since that date or by comparing statistics for January 1-31 and February 1-21. I have included the statistics for this specific example below.

Clicks went from less than ½ click per day to over 10 per day – an increase of 2400%. Impressions have increased from less than 27 per day to over 1146 per day – an increase of over 4000%. CTR dropped from 1.5% to 0.88%. It is obvious that this keyword phrase has been broad matched to one or more expensive, more general phrases because the CPC jumped from $1.14 in January to $1.74 since February 4 even though the average position has dropped from 4.9 to 6.7

The 13 clicks and $14.79 spent in January generated one sale while 212 clicks in the past 21 days generated no sales and cost $362.68. Spending went from $14.79 (less than $0.48 per day in January) to $362.68 ($17.27 per day). Spending increased by over 3,590%!!!

Can you imagine the impact if multiple keywords got matched all at once and each of them saw spending increase by over 3,590%? Or if this hits advertisers who almost never look at their accounts? Since broad matching is the default the less someone knows about managing their account the more likely they'll get hit.

Clearly Google really must take a look at this issue. We must all make an effort to help them understand what the situation is, what the impact is, and what the result will be. Right now the only solution I see is to delete all broad matched keywords from every account regardless of the impact on sales because the risk is simply too great for smaller companies to bear.