|
#2
10-25-2004
|
|||
|
|||
|
I am of the same thought. Also seeing it in too many more places lately. I am concerned that spreading it too thin will do the same thing to AdSense that it did to banner advertising with the eyes no longer seeing it. Google is becoming less and less restrictive on the kinds of sites that it goes on and I have seen some real junkers lately.
|
|
#3
10-25-2004
|
||||
|
||||
|
It is a business and they will throw it out there as long as it is generating revenue. Unlike the banner advertising of old that people in most cases did not measure (and could not with any accuracy)... this model is actually based on a real visitor (well that's debatable too)...
People are more willing to do AdSense than banners as they only pay for the traffic getting to them... they then have to improve conversion to make the purchase worthwhile.
|
|
#4
10-25-2004
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm sorry, I guess I didn't explain myself. I meant that Google is running banner ads advertising to webmasters to run adsense on their sites. And, it seems those banner ads are everywhere.
Oh hey look. If you look at the bottom of the page, you will see what I am talking about.
|
|
#5
10-25-2004
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've also been noticing a lot, but in a way advertising can be looked at as providing a valuable service. We'd never know about certain sales on things we need without the ads in newspapers and the "junk mail" we get (like restaurant coupons), and a lot of website publishers who could benefit and send qualified traffic to advertisers still don't know about the AdSense program.
All in all it's a good thing all around, for Google, advertisers and publishers. The only gripe I can think of is that Google could do a little better job on quality control of where the ads appear, in some cases for the branding of advertisers appearing on garbage pages. But then again, they're not the advertisers' "mother" whose job it is to protect them.
|
|
#6
10-25-2004
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#7
10-25-2004
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In the short run, it cuts the publisher because consumer curiosity will start to die from seeing it all the time. Consumers do not click if they are no longer curious. Contextual or not, consumers will stop clicking when they see the same thing over and over again. Second, most publishers value their AdSense and don't want to screw it up. I've talked with several who indicate that there would be of enough temptation to click fraud on their ads, except for the fact that they don't want to risk losing their AdSense. Now if Google spreads themselves thin, allowing any site to use up inventory, and publishers profits drop, there will be more people that consider it worth the risk. Google has to keep this of value or "not worth the risk of losing" for publishers or their fraud rates will go up and AdWords clients will either opt out of the network or lower their bids to compensate. A fine line exists between maximized distribution and greed. Greed kills anything it's connected with and AdSense is no different. If G turns this program into so much mush, it's the perfect opportunity for Yahoo to jump on the bandwagon and announce that they have something different, offer higher returns, and yank G's ol' carpet out from underneath them.
|
|
#8
10-26-2004
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yahoo should wave the white flag now and sell off Overture to Google....
I can hear the people groaning over that comment... but realistically Overture has very poor support and customer service (though my current rep is good) and with PFI PPC at Inktomi they are getting worse. If Yahoo does not drop PPC they should outsource it to someone else as opposed to Overture... give a SearchFeed type company the reigns and I think things would improve.
|
|
#9
10-26-2004
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting. I"ve had just the opposite.
The support I get from Google is non-existant. The reps at Overture bend over backwards to help me. I've found that the ROI for Overture ads is much better than the ROI at google. Heck, I'd love to drop doing any PPC with Google -- working with them is frustrating, time consuming and expensive.
|
|
#10
10-26-2004
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Neither has great support. Yahoo is better if you stop advertising for awhile. You rise to the top of the support list. Google is mixed. You get a reply 24 hours later and it is usually a canned response that doesn't quite fit. But when you reply to them and get very specific, they eventually do get specific in a very general sort of way.  You cannot pin them down and they offer up very little information that you don't specifically ask for. Only problem is that you often don't know what to ask for.You: I have problem 1, 2, and 3 Google: There are many causes for this: Problem 1 - things change, Problem 2 - who knows, and Problem 3 - the world is a strange place You: Fine, but this is still a problem. Did you change A, B, or C or anything else to cause this effect? I just want to know how to correct or compensate for this. Google: As stated earlier, there are many causes for this. No, we did not change A, B, or C You: Fine, how about the "anything else" part of the question? Google: There are many things that change in the world, all of which work together in cosmic ways that are not necessarily known. Yet through our combined limited-perfect understanding of the universe, we can almost possibly state with an indefinite amount of semi-certainty, that one of these unknowns has potentially changed something of unknown origin in a way that was or was not predictable within a situation that might or might not be similar to sites like yours. But this is only a guess!
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
