Today I discovered something. My dryer won’t start. Ok so that’s not the discovery. The discovery is what I found while doing a search in google for dryer information. I was searching for my dryer using the basic key phrase “amana dryer” in my favorite browser, Firefox. And on the adwords column I saw listed an ad for “amanda appliances parts”. So I clicked it. Then I was taken to a Landing Page that was just an image and small text telling me to call a 1-800 number for parts information. It wasn’t what I was looking for so I clicked my back button. An low and behold - my discovery!
What’s this? Is google asking if this ad helped me? It would seem so. So you may ask, what does this mean for you Affiliates out there? Well, one note about this ads landing page is that it has no content and its quality is very poor. This poor advertiser probably paid too much for this click and now that I voted that it wasn’t useful, his quality score will probably go down even more. It’s important as an affiliate to make sure your pages hold value and content to the type of ads you are showing. You can’t make money if your quality score is low and you won’t have conversions if your “link wasn’t helpful!” Content on your landing pages and the context that its given in relationship to the ad, plays a vital role with whether or not someone will convert. This was a perfect example of a BAD landing page.
NOTE: Here are the specs of things that may contributed to me finding this. I was in Firefox 1.5, Searching google. The key phrase was NOT a long tail phrase. The adwords sponsors site was very low quality and not SEO friendly [page was built using ImageReady!]. I quickly realized that this was not what I was looking for and hit the back button. I am not sure the quality of the ad triggered the adwords question, because it did do it with another ad that was much higher quality. That leads me to believe it was the speed in which I hit the back button, OR just the fact that I hit the back button!
September 28th, 2006 - 9:21 am
Ok so this is really nothing new, but it still holds true! Affiliates, make quality landing pages!
September 28th, 2006 - 10:16 am
[…] Original post by Affiliate Arbitrators watch out with Google Adwords Was this link useful » Affiliate Information. To read the full article visit: Affiliate Arbitrators watch out with Google Adwords Was this link useful » Affiliate Information […]
November 16th, 2006 - 5:22 am
It’s not just the sponsored links—I’ve been seeing them on the search results too.
Surely if the link was useful though, you wouldn’t go back to the Google search results, and thus you would never click “yesâ€â€¦
November 16th, 2006 - 8:43 am
Thanks for the comment Martin!
Yeh, I think its funny they put the yes, but you never know, you might find someone who clicks back and then hits yes on it?….
I think its triggered when a user is clicking back to the google results page after clicking the ad. Perhaps Google’s thought is that this user didn’t find what they are looking for because they jumped back from that page?
I think its an interesting addition with all the “affiliate” changes they are doing.
November 18th, 2006 - 9:46 am
Its time to disable the back button’s on all landing pages.I believe if every advertiser did this they would get cut off by google and decrease googles revenue in a matter of days and would with speed force google to undo this horribly prejudice method of judging who gets sales and who doesnt..its insane google is not the advocate of the internet world..there just a profit center.I isay they just sit back and collect revenue even from the worse marketing advertisers and affiliates its not googles place to use quality as an excuse to charge higher rates for clicks..Its just BS and will bring on a tsunami of legal action for google..
thanks for reading this banter…
November 18th, 2006 - 8:48 pm
Wow, thanks Jerry for your comments!
Personally, I just don’t see it that way. I think I understands both sides of the picture, though.
On Google’s side, you have them hammering away with advertising, trying to save a design that possibly will fail. They realized that more and more those advertisiments have to deliver quality and relevence. People are clicking on the less and less in the search and more and more on the “Free” organic listings. So possibly, Google is thinking to itself, “Hey, if I can make these ads more ‘relevent’ to the users search, then hopefully people will start clicking on them more!”. And because of the increadable success you can have with “affiliate” ppc ads, you have a flood to the market of people who are trying to make a buck. Unfortunatly, with that, you have folks trying to take big shortcuts and the ads don’t match the search. This makes it hard for us ‘joes’ who work hard in this industry to do it right. And unfortantly, the result is what we have now with google. Least, thats how I see it.
November 19th, 2006 - 9:21 am
John,
You have an elegant way of deffending google and its actions.It is your right to say what you feel,Im all for better marketing and higher relevent ad to keyword ratios and better landing pages.
My big conceren is that as we speak about 35% of expert top marketers are scrammbling to adapt to these very aggressive new quality score rules and just as companys are spending millions to appese google, google introduces these new useful link buttons that have the tendency to further decrease the best quality scores..
So now some 16 year old looking for porn at 3:00am now has the right to click NO on the usefulness of even the highest quality scored landing pages..
John your a search guy and if I pay you to get me clicks and even with the best landing pages I score low your out of business.
John even with your great skills in sem you can no longer make claims as to your past sucess as a se expert as its a new world….Now!The data we all posesed at one time as been reduced to a guessing game..
It appears to me that google is trying to get rid of companies that do not have enough rescourcesto keep up.
Logic would dictate that this would increase conversions and reduce ppc costs,but if you lost half or even a good size percentage of your business, somebodys payin for it”
Of course those who continue to traffic on googles network will be the bearer of higher marketing cost. (with no gaurentee of greater sucsess) as there is no factual data to support such a theory..
There is absolutly zero data that shows that a reduction in advertisers or even affiliate competitors will increase conversions and lower ppc cost..In my business John, I must treat all of my clients the same or I run the risk of faveritisim and though it might not be true it sure seems that only the richest and most optimized will survive on google in the future.
I also feel that in corperate america most large corperations would not dream of engaging there clients in this fashion, as it can stimulate legal actions..and potential business ethics violations.. Thxz!
November 19th, 2006 - 3:21 pm
Outstanding response Jerry!
I must first apologize, because when I read your first post (”the banter one”), I speculated that it was done by the same type of person who I screwing up the industry for others. I am sorry for that and I believe I was wrong. I responded on a more defensive way for Google because of my speculation.
Now I do personally try to put myself in others shoes, and so that’s why I can look at Google and try to “imagine” what is going through their heads for them to do this. That at least, helps me not be so pissed off at them.
But I am not happy about it. And I agree with you on everything except 2 things; first I am not sure I am sold on the part of “Google is trying to get rid of companies that do not have enough resources to keep upâ€, and second I don’t agree on the disabled back button (though its an interesting way to attack it).I personally don’t think Google would go that extreme (least I don’t think that yet), but I think they are just making a stupid decision. My reason for the second is that the idea sounds more like the “don’t buy gas for your car on ‘Tuesday’ so we can stick it to the gas companies.” AND because of how frustrated I get when the back button is disabled.
Now I can honestly say, that I haven’t put a whole lot of thought on this and I may change my view after educating myself on these ideas. So I am definitely not shooting you down. And your methodology for handing your clients (everyone the same) tells me about a quality you have that I must respect. So please don’t take my response as a flame in any way. I do love a good discussion though and I am very open minded (hence the whole way I can look at Google like I do).
But at the end of the day, there is one truth you mention that is frustrating. We are all struggling and playing this stupid guessing game. I hate doing it, and its costing me money, my clients money, and I wish it wasn’t like this! And my clients ARE being forced to spend more and I am being forced to try new things (which isn’t bad in itself). The problem is that we are scrambling to do so in such a manner that I know I have hit a few road blocks and am paying more because of alternative methods!
Hey, keep up the great responses. I’m the type who learns by critique and by opening my head up to new ideas, even if they are not mine. So this kind of stuff is ALWAYS welcome here. As long as people are respectful and not like a bunch of teenagers. Thanks!
November 19th, 2006 - 4:51 pm
John,
I do have a tendency to be a bit of a hot head and often in my media career I have lost a few oppertunities for being out spoken, but im proud that my take no c*ap attitude has also given me the blessing of being a very fearless marketing guy and is the basis for my advertisers marketing successes im convinced.
Im just not a yes man and im Never Happy…
“The Cheese is always moving”
ok, heres some experiance:
I do feel that in high conversion based models..that to much information is dilutive of the google user click for certain products.
For instance on a sleeping product the user will need tons of reading data to make that purchase, but even if the call to action is at the bottom of the 12th Page the conversion rate will be higher than if it where on page 1,2,3,or 4 why? ( users need useful info)thats why in this model the ctc becomes more effictive from pg 4 thru pg 12…in this model 60% of conversions for the client accure on pg 12.this is the perfect quality score candidate..
For a chat,sms,ringtone offers screensavers and all other mindless offers that come with high added value(ie some free cheese for the kiddies) there is no brain surgery as most of the users are bet 13 -22 mostly female and have made the purchase desicion from the first JZ image on the lp..Why? these users completly understand there becomming a member to get these products and do not need to be educated to much, as it will dilute the google user click.
Ready?
Here is another fact 70% of sales from this demographic on any mobile or related product are what us old media experts call an (impulse buy).So my point is, if by showing a simple image and some simple text content to convert ridiculously high why? do we need to increase user usefulness by over explaining what is self explanitory..see only real media experts get what im saying here.I know you get John!
See the thing that gets me John,is that google are not true media people like we are, we have to learn all these nuances from mostly past failed media to be able to advise our clients.
Google they just activate your account & billing.app and its up to you to make it work..or your beat!
If god forbide you have a question you get some robo boy or girl who love to IM you the guidelines docs instead of useing logic to help you..and I spend some serious cheese on google..
I was here before can-spam where everyone had 100% delivery rates on email and everything converted high on cpm buys at that time only a few people used the cpa model..wow.this to me and many others who run very compliant businesses is a slap in the face as was can- spam..Im very displeased to have to start at the bottom with all the Antz and use all of my media lifes knowledge to once again prevail on pg 1. Its like moving from the house you where born in..actually its more like being kicked out….thats why its bs..but i aint no joke and it wont take me long.. so lets rock big John..Peace your site was so neat and tidey before I arrived..lol
November 19th, 2006 - 5:20 pm
Jerry..with good commentary like that, you can just keep going along and messing my “neet and tidy” site! :) It’s all good, and more importantly, its educating others. And thats what my goal here is. Not so much to push my view to others, but to push info to others…
I will respond later to that, but for now..thanks!
November 19th, 2006 - 8:51 pm
Hi all
Here is a prime example of just how crushing this, Was this link useful? button will be.
Pick an affiliate any affiliate heres how first go to any landing page once thair go to view in your browser toolbar scroll to privacy and see the affiliate name in the link id, than hit the back button that google guidlines prohibit us from disabeling btw and if you like the affiliate in the link id give a buddy a yes to help them score better and buy cheaper clicks..Yea right!
its more like click on no as many times as you can so your score gos higher as thairs gos lower..Not cause somebody is doing the same to you..Google needs to can this idea and fast it opens up a whole new world for click fraud.Guess what? during all this insanity Google is still charging high rates and absorbing the cost faster on that You Tube Buy..Think About It!
November 21st, 2006 - 3:21 pm
Hello Matt
That is quite an idea im impressed but i guess your commentary was not in vain as google seems to have abandoned it..Good job…you should get an award from Deloitte & Ducshe for best google counter solution…ha ha ha!
March 28th, 2007 - 9:54 am
[…] don’t know how I seem to keep bumping into Google tests, but I have run into another one. I was searching for “Cross Stitch Patterns” when I […]