SEO Class in Chicago, IL
Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
New Google Pay-per-impression Program
Posted 25 April 2005 - 07:53 PM
I've just received Google's email regarding their new pay-per-impression AdSense feature. While I'm excited about this new feature, I'm equally concerned about generating false impressions by surfing my own sites, which I do regularly to ensure that my sites work properly. It's hard enough to edit my pages without inadvertently clicking on my own ads.
How does Google address this problem? I've written Google but have not gotten a response from them yet. Does anyone know? Personally, I think this new feature is quite flawed since that there are many ways to fraudulently inflate impressions (thru pop-ups, for example). This may lead to false terminations of some advertisers' accounts.
Posted 25 April 2005 - 09:00 PM
Anyway, I don't know, but seems like Google must have some sort of system that invalidates impressions from a single URL after so many or something. Otherwise - with all the recent concern about click fraud - seems they wouldn't be able to convince advertisers to try it.
Posted 25 April 2005 - 09:10 PM
Posted 26 April 2005 - 08:23 AM
I'm more bothered about what it'll do for revenue. It could be loads better, but I'm not unhappy with the click-through rates.
If I find the rates drop, I'll drop Google - I can get cpm rates anywhere.
Posted 26 April 2005 - 09:29 AM
1. Much in the same way that Google detects some click-fraud, they will also have methods to detect impressions inadvertently generated by webmasters. Despite lots of comments to the contrary, I don't believe that Google is launching the CPM program to combat click-fraud (internally they believe that the problem is under control) - it is being done to acquire different types of advertisers.
2. Advertisers that bid on a CPM basis, will only have their ads shown if that CPM > CPC & CTR (the current method). Unless advertisers convert en masse to CPM (unlikely IMHO), most publishers probably won't notice a difference.
3. Publishers will never know whether their advertisers are paying on a CPC or CPM basis.
Posted 26 April 2005 - 09:58 AM
Posted 26 April 2005 - 01:35 PM
Posted 26 April 2005 - 05:19 PM
Posted 27 April 2005 - 12:07 PM
Posted 27 April 2005 - 12:23 PM
Posted 27 April 2005 - 02:18 PM
I thought that cockney rhyming slang was fairly lateral thinking but this rivals the British 'Three R's' - reading, writing and arithmetic!
Posted 27 April 2005 - 03:20 PM
For whatever reason, some businesses use M for thousand and MM for million in business documents. Then again, some use K for thousand. (I have worked for both kinds.)
I have no clue why it is like that or the history behind this...I only know because I've had to use those notations in past careers on P&Ls, proposals, budgets, etc.
Posted 29 April 2005 - 04:04 PM
1) Advertisers will know which sites they are targeting with CPM ads. This is likely to involve a lot more targeting of high-volume sites than low-volume sites.
2) Publishers apparently will not know which ads are based on CPM and which are based on PPC bids, so they won't know whether to click for click fraud or reload for impression fraud.
3) Ad networks have always had to deal with "what's an impression." Google doesn't have to blaze a new trail here.
4) Yes, we're working on a process similar to our keyword research offering, to research appropriate sites for CPM advertising.
Posted 30 April 2005 - 09:19 AM
Interesting, so any clue if this really is a way to help alleviate click fraud on Google's part?
When I heard this announcement from Google, I immediately thought this was an alternative for the folks in idustries getting nailed with the click fraud (gambling, pharmeceuticals, etc).
If its is how you've explained... that's a plus for them is it not?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users