Is Money The Root Of All Evil At Google?
I’ve spent a good portion of the last year evangelizing use of Content Network advertising, because it’s taken such a bad rap from the PPC community in general. Masses of PPC advertisers are convinced that syndicated advertising on the content network segment of ANY search engine ad platform is the Devil. The content network isn’t the Devil. The Devil is in the Details (har har) of how the content network gets “turned on” by default in any new campaign that an Adwords customer creates. If you don’t know any better, you’ll leave them on and hurt your own account optimization efforts.
But lately, I’m wondering if I may be overlooking who or what the Devil really is.
This month, Google quietly released a newsletter suggesting that advertisers become aware of the regional targeting section of their campaign settings because from now on (or until enough people get angry about it), the default setting for regional targeting will be the US and Canada, instead of just the US.
As a Certified Adwords Professional, I have long cultivated the habit of examining each and every one of the basic campaign settings any time I inherit a campaign or I’m asked to troubleshoot one. Toward the end of last week, I started seeing random campaigns in the middle of an otherwise US only account targeting Canada for no reason whatsoever. The reason, it turns out, was that the owner of the account didn’t realize this change had taken place, and every new campaign they’d created in the last couple of days was suddenly targeting an additional country.
Blame Canada?
Are Canadians suddenly clamoring for US Dollars? No, I don’t think so. In fact, in reading the backlash on this change, I’ve run across a few Canadian Adwords advertisers who are hopping mad because the new influx of over-priced US search terms are cluttering up their ad space and driving their CPCs up. I chose a random term – flash websites – and searched in google.ca in one window and google.com in the other and 6 of the advertisers are in both spaces. Maybe I should look up something else, like furniture… the top three spots are all for .ca domains for major brand names, but the three spots in the middle of the sidebar contain US advertisers. One is just a page running Adsense ads and the top spot there is for a localized southern US dealer. Interesting. One is for a site where you can’t even buy furniture – you have to ask for a dealer list. Still inconclusive. It will be interesting to see what happens to the ad space after there’s been more than just a couple of days’ worth of new campaigns created.
Is Google SATAN?
This change won’t be quite as impactful as the sneaky little “automatic keyword matching” was*. It won’t affect campaigns you’ve already got established. But it will bite a ton of PPC newcomers in the butt, just like the content network does. It’s a default setting – why would a newbie change it? Google knows best right? Yeah, just like the cure for poor ad performance is to bid up…
Google’s been a bit embattled (is that a word?) over the last year, what with trying to make a buck and all. And looky who’s dragging up and making waves now… Microsoft adCenter posted one of the highest single quarter percentage increases in PPC history last quarter – why? Let’s see, they gave money back to advertisers, yeah. And they improved ALL their management tools. They also are testing a desktop editor. Hmm… did Microsoft and Google get memos crossed or something?
What did Google do last quarter? Let’s see, they turned on a gadget to let them chose to run your ads for words you didn’t even put in your keyword list. Then they changed the quality score deactivation rule so that all these advertisers who had poor keywords still in their account but inactive because of quality score (“I’ll get to it when I have time”) suddenly found themselves spending $5 a click on these stupid words they hadn’t gotten around to actually pausing yet.
Insidious? Yes. Sneaky? Yes. Money-grubbing? Apparently… but satanic? Nah, but can’t you just hear Cartman in the sales meeting explaining how to fleece us all? Scary.
*the way they insinuated automated keyword matching into innocent accounts WAS the Devil! I apologize to Matt and Trey but the Southpark references were begging to come out.
Sarah Grant Says:
Here’s an interesting update in the world of Google – they’ve just announced that their content network is more cost effective than buying search ads: http://www.ppchero.com/highlights-from-googles-content-network-cpa-whitepaper/
A good article for companies like adMarketplace.com that have been working solely off the Google/Yahoo network for years.
Posted on April 28th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Michelle Says:
I’ve been puzzled about the release of this data… maybe it’s just me, but yes, to run a content network campaign correctly is almost always more cost-effective than running a search network campaign. Combine that with the fact that lead generation campaigns terrorize the content network, that also makes an “acquisition” (which is the A in CPA that they are touting) an easier thing to acquire than a SALE.
Lead generation “conversions” can be something as simple as clicking on to another page or downloading a file. This particular conversion event doesn’t earn the advertiser any income, and therefore is much more common in a campaign targeted to the content network, where the clicks are cheaper. That’s the fiscally responsible way to advertise for lead generation or building brand name recognition. If Google’s 25,000 sample accounts are even half composed of lead generation accounts, there’s no mystery at all to the better CPA numbers. This is how PPC managers and internet marketers acquire leads for their clients…
At the end of the day, every advertiser has to do their own homework – not take someone else’s word for what is more “cost-effective.” There are other things involved than just what you pay per click and how many forms you have filled out. If you don’t use deep tracking and figure out which campaigns, ad groups, ads and keywords actually provide a RETURN and earn you a PROFIT, cost-effectiveness is irrelevant.
Also, you don’t have to put your domain name in your comments – your signature line links back to your web site. We do follow…
Posted on April 29th, 2009 at 10:12 am