Ok, i don't get it. I know google says they tested it, but it still
does not make sense. I used all of my imagination to create a person
in my mind and make him browse for additional ads and then click on
them - well, my imagination broke on that. Who on earth would use
those arrows to find ads?
LOL! I call it Google's Blonde Moment. That feature is the most
useless I've ever seen.
Moew: if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?)
> Ok, i don't get it. I know google says they tested it, but it still
> does not make sense. I used all of my imagination to create a person
> in my mind and make him browse for additional ads and then click on
> them - well, my imagination broke on that. Who on earth would use
> those arrows to find ads?
Quote: "if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?) "
AdSense shows the highest paying ads first, not the highest performing
ads. An ad that pays the most per click won't pay a cent if no one
clicks on it. You'll earn more money by having a variety of ads, even
if some of them pay much less than others. Better to have 10% of
something than 100% of nothing.
> LOL! I call it Google's Blonde Moment. That feature is the most
> useless I've ever seen.
> Moew: if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?)
> Quote: "if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?) "
> AdSense shows the highest paying ads first, not the highest performing
> ads. An ad that pays the most per click won't pay a cent if no one
> clicks on it. You'll earn more money by having a variety of ads, even
> if some of them pay much less than others. Better to have 10% of
> something than 100% of nothing.
> On Oct 2, 10:25 am, yummyfood wrote:
> > LOL! I call it Google's Blonde Moment. That feature is the most
> > useless I've ever seen.
> > Moew: if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?)- Hide quoted text -
> Does anybody really notice the arrows?
> Wonder what feedback Google has on them.
> Acorn
> On Oct 2, 5:48 pm, Spatter Brush wrote:
> > Quote: "if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?) "
> > AdSense shows the highest paying ads first, not the highest performing
> > ads. An ad that pays the most per click won't pay a cent if no one
> > clicks on it. You'll earn more money by having a variety of ads, even
> > if some of them pay much less than others. Better to have 10% of
> > something than 100% of nothing.
> > On Oct 2, 10:25 am, yummyfood wrote:
> > > LOL! I call it Google's Blonde Moment. That feature is the most
> > > useless I've ever seen.
> > > Moew: if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?)- Hide quoted text -
Hey, it's the beginning of October. CTR is down another 20% (or more),
eCPM is down 40% (or more), just since September 15. Do those arrows
really matter? 10% of a tiny little bit isn't much... kinda hard to
distinguish from 100% of nothing. Back to Business 101: No profit, No
business. Wiseacre: there's the "results." My $0.0000...0002 worth
(about what one click is these days).
> Oh those arrows? I thought they were to vote.
> No wonder I could never find the results.
> On Oct 2, 4:37 pm, Acorn wrote:
> > Does anybody really notice the arrows?
> > Wonder what feedback Google has on them.
> > Acorn
> > On Oct 2, 5:48 pm, Spatter Brush wrote:
> > > Quote: "if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?) "
> > > AdSense shows the highest paying ads first, not the highest performing
> > > ads. An ad that pays the most per click won't pay a cent if no one
> > > clicks on it. You'll earn more money by having a variety of ads, even
> > > if some of them pay much less than others. Better to have 10% of
> > > something than 100% of nothing.
> > > On Oct 2, 10:25 am, yummyfood wrote:
> > > > LOL! I call it Google's Blonde Moment. That feature is the most
> > > > useless I've ever seen.
> > > > Moew: if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?)- Hide quoted text -
Is it just me or do we go ad blind? I look at other sites and I don't
see or skip over ads with no thought at at all.
On the other hand, my wife is the perfect "ad sucker" (I hope she's
not reading this) anytime she finishes a search she clicks the top
left content or the content on the right that stands out the most.
It's funny to watch.
> Hey, it's the beginning of October. CTR is down another 20% (or more),
> eCPM is down 40% (or more), just since September 15. Do those arrows
> really matter? 10% of a tiny little bit isn't much... kinda hard to
> distinguish from 100% of nothing. Back to Business 101: No profit, No
> business. Wiseacre: there's the "results." My $0.0000...0002 worth
> (about what one click is these days).
> On Oct 2, 4:39 pm, wiseacre wrote:
> > Oh those arrows? I thought they were to vote.
> > No wonder I could never find the results.
> > On Oct 2, 4:37 pm, Acorn wrote:
> > > Does anybody really notice the arrows?
> > > Wonder what feedback Google has on them.
> > > Acorn
> > > On Oct 2, 5:48 pm, Spatter Brush wrote:
> > > > Quote: "if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?) "
> > > > AdSense shows the highest paying ads first, not the highest performing
> > > > ads. An ad that pays the most per click won't pay a cent if no one
> > > > clicks on it. You'll earn more money by having a variety of ads, even
> > > > if some of them pay much less than others. Better to have 10% of
> > > > something than 100% of nothing.
> > > > On Oct 2, 10:25 am, yummyfood wrote:
> > > > > LOL! I call it Google's Blonde Moment. That feature is the most
> > > > > useless I've ever seen.
> > > > > Moew: if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?)- Hide quoted text -
Actually, NilsC, I'm very heavily channeled (and targeted) so that I
know where my business is coming from. Some channels will see clicks
paying a buck or two, some pay a penny or two. Some I seem to make
more money per 1000 impressions (ads for movies and TV shows just
plain don't pay). Put it all together and you have a "general" eCPM.
In the summer of '07, that general eCPM translated to an average
$0.025 per page view. These days it varies from $0.005 to maybe $0.01
(all numbers slightly rounded). It's a sign of the overall economy.
On the other hand, my best traffic (and best paying) pages have been
sold to my own advertisers for a significantly better and more stable
income stream. And when I compare the CTR from my own ads with the CTR
from AdSense I have to say "Yes, it looks like folks are going AdSense
ad blind." Some of my link units do better than ad units on the same
pages. My own ads do not resemble AdSense in any way, and the "bad"
ones get only 10% CTR's. In ski season, 25% to 60% CTR's are normal on
those pages - and AdSense would ban me for that kind of performance.
What I'm trying to say right now is it's not all doom and gloom in
this economy. Sometimes you just have to take another path. Of all the
public ad-servers, AdSense is the best. But there is definitely room
for improvement. Not everyone can or wants to take my route. And even
pouring all your energy into my route will not make anyone rich
overnight - the vulture capitalists themselves figure it takes good
funding to start out with and 3-5 years of steadily increasing
effort...
> Is it just me or do we go ad blind? I look at other sites and I don't
> see or skip over ads with no thought at at all.
> On the other hand, my wife is the perfect "ad sucker" (I hope she's
> not reading this) anytime she finishes a search she clicks the top
> left content or the content on the right that stands out the most.
> It's funny to watch.
> On Oct 2, 7:33 pm, zihara wrote:
> > Hey, it's the beginning of October. CTR is down another 20% (or more),
> > eCPM is down 40% (or more), just since September 15. Do those arrows
> > really matter? 10% of a tiny little bit isn't much... kinda hard to
> > distinguish from 100% of nothing. Back to Business 101: No profit, No
> > business. Wiseacre: there's the "results." My $0.0000...0002 worth
> > (about what one click is these days).
> > On Oct 2, 4:39 pm, wiseacre wrote:
> > > Oh those arrows? I thought they were to vote.
> > > No wonder I could never find the results.
> > > On Oct 2, 4:37 pm, Acorn wrote:
> > > > Does anybody really notice the arrows?
> > > > Wonder what feedback Google has on them.
> > > > Acorn
> > > > On Oct 2, 5:48 pm, Spatter Brush wrote:
> > > > > Quote: "if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?) "
> > > > > AdSense shows the highest paying ads first, not the highest performing
> > > > > ads. An ad that pays the most per click won't pay a cent if no one
> > > > > clicks on it. You'll earn more money by having a variety of ads, even
> > > > > if some of them pay much less than others. Better to have 10% of
> > > > > something than 100% of nothing.
> > > > > On Oct 2, 10:25 am, yummyfood wrote:
> > > > > > LOL! I call it Google's Blonde Moment. That feature is the most
> > > > > > useless I've ever seen.
> > > > > > Moew: if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > > > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?)- Hide quoted text -
zihara, I agree with you on the heavy channeling and targeted content.
I still look at my sites visitors as visitors, not business. I track a
lot of stats that may be considered useless but to me it's interesting
data. 70% of traffic comes from search engines and I have limited my
ads to show only to guests. I have no data for 07 since I pulled ads
from my sites after 06 where my eCPM was $2.33 for the year and the
click through rate was 0.93%. (AdSense and web sites is an hobby to me
- not a source of any major income)
It sounds like you are doing this as a business so we come from two
different directions when it comes to AdSense and income generated.
That does not mean I'm not looking for that niche to make this a full
time job. As for the AdSense blind part, I'm even more blind when it
comes to other advertisers networks.
I agree with your statement that it's not all doom and gloom, I am in
a niche where there are fewer companies advertising but it seems like
their competition to stay high in searches creates a higher bid per ad
shown (I think that is correct explanation) so my earnings are higher
with a lot less clicks now that the 06 earnings, and the the ads are
on target.
> Actually, NilsC, I'm very heavily channeled (and targeted) so that I
> know where my business is coming from. Some channels will see clicks
> paying a buck or two, some pay a penny or two. Some I seem to make
> more money per 1000 impressions (ads for movies and TV shows just
> plain don't pay). Put it all together and you have a "general" eCPM.
> In the summer of '07, that general eCPM translated to an average
> $0.025 per page view. These days it varies from $0.005 to maybe $0.01
> (all numbers slightly rounded). It's a sign of the overall economy.
> On the other hand, my best traffic (and best paying) pages have been
> sold to my own advertisers for a significantly better and more stable
> income stream. And when I compare the CTR from my own ads with the CTR
> from AdSense I have to say "Yes, it looks like folks are going AdSense
> ad blind." Some of my link units do better than ad units on the same
> pages. My own ads do not resemble AdSense in any way, and the "bad"
> ones get only 10% CTR's. In ski season, 25% to 60% CTR's are normal on
> those pages - and AdSense would ban me for that kind of performance.
> What I'm trying to say right now is it's not all doom and gloom in
> this economy. Sometimes you just have to take another path. Of all the
> public ad-servers, AdSense is the best. But there is definitely room
> for improvement. Not everyone can or wants to take my route. And even
> pouring all your energy into my route will not make anyone rich
> overnight - the vulture capitalists themselves figure it takes good
> funding to start out with and 3-5 years of steadily increasing
> effort...
> On Oct 2, 7:17 pm, NilsC wrote:
> > I guess I got all the god ads then zihara :-)
> > Is it just me or do we go ad blind? I look at other sites and I don't
> > see or skip over ads with no thought at at all.
> > On the other hand, my wife is the perfect "ad sucker" (I hope she's
> > not reading this) anytime she finishes a search she clicks the top
> > left content or the content on the right that stands out the most.
> > It's funny to watch.
> > On Oct 2, 7:33 pm, zihara wrote:
> > > Hey, it's the beginning of October. CTR is down another 20% (or more),
> > > eCPM is down 40% (or more), just since September 15. Do those arrows
> > > really matter? 10% of a tiny little bit isn't much... kinda hard to
> > > distinguish from 100% of nothing. Back to Business 101: No profit, No
> > > business. Wiseacre: there's the "results." My $0.0000...0002 worth
> > > (about what one click is these days).
> > > On Oct 2, 4:39 pm, wiseacre wrote:
> > > > Oh those arrows? I thought they were to vote.
> > > > No wonder I could never find the results.
> > > > On Oct 2, 4:37 pm, Acorn wrote:
> > > > > Does anybody really notice the arrows?
> > > > > Wonder what feedback Google has on them.
> > > > > Acorn
> > > > > On Oct 2, 5:48 pm, Spatter Brush wrote:
> > > > > > Quote: "if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > > > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?) "
> > > > > > AdSense shows the highest paying ads first, not the highest performing
> > > > > > ads. An ad that pays the most per click won't pay a cent if no one
> > > > > > clicks on it. You'll earn more money by having a variety of ads, even
> > > > > > if some of them pay much less than others. Better to have 10% of
> > > > > > something than 100% of nothing.
> > > > > > On Oct 2, 10:25 am, yummyfood wrote:
> > > > > > > LOL! I call it Google's Blonde Moment. That feature is the most
> > > > > > > useless I've ever seen.
> > > > > > > Moew: if Adsense shows the most performing ads first, why I'd like
> > > > > > > someone to browse for more ads (which are supposed to pay less?)- Hide quoted text -
I, too, started out as a hobby. I had a day job that paid really well.
Then the dot-com crash and 9/11 wiped out my day job. I went from
$100K per year to $20K, and still had the big bills. There were no
jobs in my area in my field so I started building websites for other
folks. Then they started asking me about running advertising for them
on my hobby site. It was a no-brainer. I didn't start out to sell ads,
people came to me wanting to buy ads. It got me back on my financial
feet and I haven't looked back since.
When I first got into AdSense I did what any lazy man like myself
would do: I sat back in my back bedroom (glass of Shirazz in hand) and
plotted out a strategy of R & D to see what it could do for me. Then I
began to implement that strategy. I learned a lot in a short period of
time, especially from analyzing stats that were "useless." I also made
the requisite time-and-effort investment into learning SEO and
generating that unique, compelling content, easily navigated,
attractively presented that shows very well in the SERPs... and that
attracts cash-paying advertisers to my door.
These days, the AdSense results keep me apprised of what's going on in
general across the Internet advertising landscape (and my many graphs
of useless stats run back almost 3 years now). The feedback I get from
here and from my own advertisers has me raising my rates incrementally
with almost every new sale: advertisers want to see measurable
results. Somehow, even in this economic climate, I'm able to deliver
good results in a cost-effective manner. Lucky for me, there's a lack
of effective competition there. And it's not about mass traffic, it's
about quality traffic.
My particular niche shows tremendous competition and is overflowing
with "publishers." So AdWords is diluted, the "quality" publisher pool
is diluted, eCPM is diluted. If I didn't have the opportunity I have
made for myself, I'd be out trying to scrape by on two or three day
jobs (and I live well out in the middle of nowhere - and am too old to
be working on gas or oil drilling rigs).
No profit, no business. Good Profit, Good Business. Know what "enough"
is. 90% of enough is a lot better than 100% of nothing (because I
didn't know what enough was).
And yet one more time, my yesterday's hobby has turned into today's
money-maker. I still see my site visitors as "visitors." My
advertisers are my customers (they're the ones who pay my bills, not
my visitors). If my advertisers don't add something of relevant value
to my site, I don't let them in. If they run "crap" sites, I get
involved in helping them upgrade. My "service" involves putting
relevant, attractive ads in front of an interested, self-targeting,
cash-carrying traffic stream (the poverty-stricken are not interested
in my subject matter - except perhaps to copy it and try to run their
own AdSense on it). A significant amount of my "profit" is re-invested
in building my site bigger and more comprehensive. I cater to my
visitors, which is also catering to my advertisers. My site is about
things that I love to do, so this "business" doesn't get much
better... and when I feel like moaning and groaning about something
(especially the crap-mongerers - and these "Former AdSense Publisher"
forums are a direct interface with many of them), I come here and let
loose: I'm not against AdSense, I'm FOR a better, higher quality
Internet. I get the feeling you are, too. There are a lot of other
folks in these forums who are, too, but we're all walking slightly
different paths to get to that same place (and, of course, some of us
are certain we know the best and only way ;-). This is Google's
playground: they set the rules. We don't have much (if any) say in the
matter. And Google has shot themselves (and us by extension) in the
foot more than once... at the same time, they, too, are FOR a better,
higher quality Internet. It's what their "business" is supposed to be
about, isn't it? But I sure am glad I dumped my Google stock back when
it was still above $750. (I made out almost as good on that as I did
on a "little known" manufacturer of body bags I bought into back in
'01 - although I knew they made Kevlar but not body bags... Wall
Street is such a trip, especially these days - and my market timing is
based on the intense analysis of essentially useless stats and other
disconnected data). Anyway, Good Luck!
> zihara, I agree with you on the heavy channeling and targeted content.
> I still look at my sites visitors as visitors, not business. I track a
> lot of stats that may be considered useless but to me it's interesting
> data. 70% of traffic comes from search engines and I have limited my
> ads to show only to guests. I have no data for 07 since I pulled ads
> from my sites after 06 where my eCPM was $2.33 for the year and the
> click through rate was 0.93%. (AdSense and web sites is an hobby to me
> - not a source of any major income)
> It sounds like you are doing this as a business so we come from two
> different directions when it comes to AdSense and income generated.
> That does not mean I'm not looking for that niche to make this a full
> time job. As for the AdSense blind part, I'm even more blind when it
> comes to other advertisers networks.
> I agree with your statement that it's not all doom and gloom, I am in
> a niche where there are fewer companies advertising but it seems like
> their competition to stay high in searches creates a higher bid per ad
> shown (I think that is correct explanation) so my earnings are higher
> with a lot less clicks now that the 06 earnings, and the the ads are
> on target.
> On Oct 3, 10:01 am, zihara wrote:
> > Actually, NilsC, I'm very heavily channeled (and targeted) so that I
> > know where my business is coming from. Some channels will see clicks
> > paying a buck or two, some pay a penny or two. Some I seem to make
> > more money per 1000 impressions (ads for movies and TV shows just
> > plain don't pay). Put it all together and you have a "general" eCPM.
> > In the summer of '07, that general eCPM translated to an average
> > $0.025 per page view. These days it varies from $0.005 to maybe $0.01
> > (all numbers slightly rounded). It's a sign of the overall economy.
> > On the other hand, my best traffic (and best paying) pages have been
> > sold to my own advertisers for a significantly better and more stable
> > income stream. And when I compare the CTR from my own ads with the CTR
> > from AdSense I have to say "Yes, it looks like folks are going AdSense
> > ad blind." Some of my link units do better than ad units on the same
> > pages. My own ads do not resemble AdSense in any way, and the "bad"
> > ones get only 10% CTR's. In ski season, 25% to 60% CTR's are normal on
> > those pages - and AdSense would ban me for that kind of performance.
> > What I'm trying to say right now is it's not all doom and gloom in
> > this economy. Sometimes you just have to take another path. Of all the
> > public ad-servers, AdSense is the best. But there is definitely room
> > for improvement. Not everyone can or wants to take my route. And even
> > pouring all your energy into my route will not make anyone rich
> > overnight - the vulture capitalists themselves figure it takes good
> > funding to start out with and 3-5 years of steadily increasing
> > effort...
> > On Oct 2, 7:17 pm, NilsC wrote:
> > > I guess I got all the god ads then zihara :-)
> > > Is it just me or do we go ad blind? I look at other sites and I don't
> > > see or skip over ads with no thought at at all.
> > > On the other hand, my wife is the perfect "ad sucker" (I hope she's
> > > not reading this) anytime she finishes a search she clicks the top
> > > left content or the content on the right that stands out the most.
> > > It's funny to watch.
> > > On Oct 2, 7:33 pm, zihara wrote:
> > > > Hey, it's the beginning of October. CTR is down another 20% (or more),
> > > > eCPM is down 40% (or more), just since September 15. Do those arrows
> > > > really matter? 10% of a tiny little bit isn't much... kinda hard to
> > > > distinguish from 100% of nothing. Bac
