Comments on: The Quality Impact http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/ The official blog of Yahoo! Search MArketing Sat, 17 May 2008 13:22:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Svizzera http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-323954 Svizzera Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:37:34 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-323954 I hope we will not see minimum bid requirements of $5.00 and more per click as is the case with Google! We are a small business and simply can not afford this. It would be the end of our advertising campaign. I hope we will not see minimum bid requirements of $5.00 and more per click as is the case with Google! We are a small business and simply can not afford this. It would be the end of our advertising campaign.

]]> By: K.P. http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-317409 K.P. Sat, 22 Mar 2008 15:11:55 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-317409 Thanks. Great article. Very informative. Thanks. Great article. Very informative.

]]> By: Vincent http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-313764 Vincent Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:57:23 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-313764 Re: Google. Imagine getting a 35%-65% click through rate (CTR) with ads and a 25% conversion rate at the web site? Pretty good right? Then Google tells me my ads and landing page are not relevant and(slapped me). Increases my bid prices to $5.00 per keyword on 164 keywords. WOW. I dealt with it and re-created the entire campaign. Made 21 ad groups. The results. Lower CTR. The point is human relevance is better than a computer looking at keywords and making a decision. I'm the human. Nothing replaces the human brain. Now my Google campaign is running poorly. But my Yahoo! campaign (a copy of the original Google campaign) is now beating my Google campaign. The point is if a human had looked at my campaign they would have seen it WAS optimized and running great. Looks like Google is putting their own profits ahead of what searchers want. I hope Yahoo! does not make the same mistake. Re: Google. Imagine getting a 35%-65% click through rate (CTR) with ads and a 25% conversion rate at the web site? Pretty good right?
Then Google tells me my ads and landing page are not relevant and(slapped me). Increases my bid prices to $5.00 per keyword on 164 keywords. WOW. I dealt with it and re-created the entire campaign. Made 21 ad groups. The results. Lower CTR. The point is human relevance is better than a computer looking at keywords and making a decision. I’m the human. Nothing replaces the human brain. Now my Google campaign is running poorly. But my Yahoo! campaign (a copy of the original Google campaign) is now beating my Google campaign. The point is if a human had looked at my campaign they would have seen it WAS optimized and running great. Looks like Google is putting their own profits ahead of what searchers want. I hope Yahoo! does not make the same mistake.

]]> By: JB http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-313422 JB Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:58:43 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-313422 if you are in niche markets, quality scores can kill you. i don't want people clicking if they are browsing so i word ads geared towards serious buyers. Why make it tough for the little guys. if you are in niche markets, quality scores can kill you. i don’t want people clicking if they are browsing so i word ads geared towards serious buyers. Why make it tough for the little guys.

]]> By: Jeffrey Tonetti http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-313353 Jeffrey Tonetti Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:31:46 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-313353 We have seen substanial improvements to the Yahoo Search Marketing platform. Our company has been a heavy user of Google Adwords, but with the recent changes in the Yahoo Platform we are begining to feel it is safe to put our "toe in the water" especially with the addition of Quality Score. We have seen substanial improvements to the Yahoo Search Marketing platform. Our company has been a heavy user of Google Adwords, but with the recent changes in the Yahoo Platform we are begining to feel it is safe to put our “toe in the water” especially with the addition of Quality Score.

]]> By: InternetMarketingAdvice.net » Should search agencies charge a percentage of spend? http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-312990 InternetMarketingAdvice.net » Should search agencies charge a percentage of spend? Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:05:50 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-312990 [...] - Search planners have to deal with Google’s quality score and Yahoo’s quality restrictions. [...] […] - Search planners have to deal with Google’s quality score and Yahoo’s quality restrictions. […]

]]> By: Online Coupons http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-312038 Online Coupons Thu, 20 Mar 2008 06:49:57 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-312038 Although Google seems to have most traffic and generate a lot more clicks, we get better economics with Yahoo as there are no $5.00 etc. min bids. Although Google seems to have most traffic and generate a lot more clicks, we get better economics with Yahoo as there are no $5.00 etc. min bids.

]]> By: The Unit http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-311439 The Unit Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:44:56 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-311439 Yahoo really gives you a great bang for your buck. I pay a lot less for Yahoo ads than Google and my relevance of the ads is strong for both Yahoo and Google. It pays to have relevant ads linked to your pages. In many instances you can pay pennies for clicks to your site over ads on the same page that are really irrelevant to the search term. Those people should pay more since they are ususally taking a person to a page that is not really what they are loooking for in the first place. Yahoo really gives you a great bang for your buck. I pay a lot less for Yahoo ads than Google and my relevance of the ads is strong for both Yahoo and Google. It pays to have relevant ads linked to your pages. In many instances you can pay pennies for clicks to your site over ads on the same page that are really irrelevant to the search term. Those people should pay more since they are ususally taking a person to a page that is not really what they are loooking for in the first place.

]]> By: kam http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-311167 kam Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:58:15 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-311167 this takes a lot of time and effort but in the end its all worth it. this takes a lot of time and effort but in the end its all worth it.

]]> By: Ken Green http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-311120 Ken Green Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:43:16 +0000 http://www.ysmblog.com/blog/2008/03/17/the-quality-impact/#comment-311120 Hi, In the middle of the Holiday season, mid November, Google kicked in what min-bids that resulted in over a 37.6% increase in out advertising cost, forced us out of a number of profitable keywords that resulted in Pacific Wine to cut or Google advertising by 90% by late December. Is this what we are to expect from your new program? Google had no appeal process so the software they wrote ran un-checked even after many contacts with them over a 6 week period till we dropped most of our advertising. The software logic as best we can tell looks at the number of hits their search is getting for a specific key word. It then compares that volume to the Google revenue for that keyword. It seams that if there profit is below there budget they access an increase min-bid on that keyword. They then deceive the advertiser, us, by claming that the reason we are access the min-bid for our ad is that it is not relevant or that our landing page, URL is not relevant to the keyword or to the Ad. We spent weeks disputing there ruling on our keywords till they just said Customer Service can do nothing to change the min-bid logic in the Google software. For example, we are a wine shop, we sell Champagne, lots of it, So our key word CHAMPAGNE or BRUT CHAMPAGNE that went to www.pacificwineclub.com/shop/Searchresult.aspx?categoryid=11, was hit with a $5.00 min-bid even though we have 4 pages of Champagne and our Ad was specifically for Champagne. No mater how you look at it we were very relevant to the keyword in question. Looking at other Ad appearing a week later we fond that we listed four times more products, champagne, then any other ads did so we were the most relevant. One completive ad not charged the min-bid was for a champagne color sofa. You see that for generic key words that all advertisers have low conversion rates so to use relevancy to only post the best ad is one thing but to access unfair pricing is wrong. Google hit us with a number of $1.00 min bids for keywords we were, before there min-bid program hit, were in position #1 or #2 at a .30 bid. They also hit us with a number of $5.00 and $10.00 min bids. That is just wrong. We were in the process of moving our Spring 08 to Yahoo, as we are not going to use Google. So now what are we to do,? Ken Green Hi,

In the middle of the Holiday season, mid November, Google kicked in what min-bids that resulted in over a 37.6% increase in out advertising cost, forced us out of a number of profitable keywords that resulted in Pacific Wine to cut or Google advertising by 90% by late December. Is this what we are to expect from your new program?

Google had no appeal process so the software they wrote ran un-checked even after many contacts with them over a 6 week period till we dropped most of our advertising. The software logic as best we can tell looks at the number of hits their search is getting for a specific key word. It then compares that volume to the Google revenue for that keyword. It seams that if there profit is below there budget they access an increase min-bid on that keyword. They then deceive the advertiser, us, by claming that the reason we are access the min-bid for our ad is that it is not relevant or that our landing page, URL is not relevant to the keyword or to the Ad. We spent weeks disputing there ruling on our keywords till they just said Customer Service can do nothing to change the min-bid logic in the Google software.

For example, we are a wine shop, we sell Champagne, lots of it, So our key word CHAMPAGNE or BRUT CHAMPAGNE that went to http://www.pacificwineclub.com/shop/Searchresult.aspx?categoryid=11, was hit with a $5.00 min-bid even though we have 4 pages of Champagne and our Ad was specifically for Champagne. No mater how you look at it we were very relevant to the keyword in question. Looking at other Ad appearing a week later we fond that we listed four times more products, champagne, then any other ads did so we were the most relevant. One completive ad not charged the min-bid was for a champagne color sofa.

You see that for generic key words that all advertisers have low conversion rates so to use relevancy to only post the best ad is one thing but to access unfair pricing is wrong. Google hit us with a number of $1.00 min bids for keywords we were, before there min-bid program hit, were in position #1 or #2 at a .30 bid. They also hit us with a number of $5.00 and $10.00 min bids. That is just wrong.

We were in the process of moving our Spring 08 to Yahoo, as we are not going to use Google. So now what are we to do,?

Ken Green

]]>