|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Google Content Performance
We have now spent two months testing between using Google content controlled by site exclusion against using placements only, and against using placements with specified keywords.
Unfortunately, I have to be fairly vague here, due to potential competition. Results: Google w/site exclusion only: Bad Google w/placements: worse (using our top 50 performing sites YTD) Google w/Placements and Keywords: worst. Bottom line is that Google content has been steadily going down hill. Regardless of the techniques to control click fraud, poor content matching or demo/geo targeting, the results are dismal. I believe the reasons are twofold and I would like to hear your thoughts on this issue. 1. Content partners have been bailing out of Yahoo and signing up with Google. So now all the junk that was on YPN is now growing on Google. 2. The incremental price increase for targeting inside of Google's content network far exceeds the expected conversions that targeting creates. And perhaps a 3rd. The tight economy may be convincing more and more publishers to stretch their tactics a bit more into the dark gray area. Sometimes I think the time and effort spent targeting, segmenting, breaking down campaigns into small unique campaigns and going after the long tail is all for not. Could it not be more cost effective to simply create a handful of generic campaigns, turn off content and go after only the top 10 KW terms? Last edited by Discovery : 11-17-2008 at 10:02 AM. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Google Content Performance
I'd add another one: the fact that broad matches are getting "broader" with everything creating more intense competition AND less-focused targeting.
My experience with the content network shows the same data as yours. The best content campaigns I have going are strictly keyword based, not site/placement targeting and not a hybrid of the two. I wonder, do you think Google is charging for the extra layer of "targeting" (i.e. you want to target this site directly instead of through keywords, so you'll have a $2.10 CPC instead of $1.80)? |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Google Content Performance
there is more and more need for using good negatives within campaigns... also filtering to add the actual search terms inside of all ppc accounts so you can do advanced negatives
this is a good start http://www.seoptimise.com/blog/2008/...ould-know.html |
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Why Does Google Dominate The Internet? | Dan01 | Other Google Issues | 13 | 10-14-2008 11:23 PM |
| Google to Share Your Data? | Discovery | Google AdWords | 1 | 03-07-2008 03:33 PM |
| Confessions of a White Hat Content Spammer: What I've Learned by Ignoring Google | Marcia | Google Web Search | 16 | 08-04-2006 08:07 AM |
| Google tweaks my rank for selfish reasons | Everyman | Other Google Issues | 7 | 07-11-2006 12:32 AM |
| What is Content? - SES NYC 05 | rustybrick | SEM Related Organizations & Events | 8 | 03-29-2005 04:46 AM |