<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: AdWords QS is BS</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/</link>
	<description>Effective Internet Marketing Strategy and Tactics Through Test</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:16:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Some Usefull Links - Graphics &#38; Eyecandy &#124; TechEnclave</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-143833</link>
		<dc:creator>Some Usefull Links - Graphics &#38; Eyecandy &#124; TechEnclave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 05:01:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-143833</guid>
		<description>[...] Computers &gt; Internet &gt; Web Design and Development &gt; Designers For Yahoo! Searchers AdWords QS is BS &#124; Merjis Internet Marketing Blog  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Computers &gt; Internet &gt; Web Design and Development &gt; Designers For Yahoo! Searchers AdWords QS is BS | Merjis Internet Marketing Blog  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Is AdWords Search History Permutation Fraudulent? &#124; Merjis Internet Marketing Blog</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-40632</link>
		<dc:creator>Is AdWords Search History Permutation Fraudulent? &#124; Merjis Internet Marketing Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2008 12:40:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-40632</guid>
		<description>[...] For small advertisers, the volume of data needed to make techniques like SPSA and Taguchi work, are hard to achieve and pay for, and subject to a lot of statistical noise caused by uncontrolled and/or unmeasured factors such as seasonality, market price fluctuations, confidence, organic search results, press releases, Google&#8217;s changing policies and procedures, the Editorial Review process, trademarking protection, and so on. Mostly I rely on techniques that appear to work in general cases, with tuning when enough historical records are established. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] For small advertisers, the volume of data needed to make techniques like SPSA and Taguchi work, are hard to achieve and pay for, and subject to a lot of statistical noise caused by uncontrolled and/or unmeasured factors such as seasonality, market price fluctuations, confidence, organic search results, press releases, Google&#8217;s changing policies and procedures, the Editorial Review process, trademarking protection, and so on. Mostly I rely on techniques that appear to work in general cases, with tuning when enough historical records are established. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James W</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-16555</link>
		<dc:creator>James W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2007 16:09:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-16555</guid>
		<description>Some websites are allowed to Adwords ads for items that are prohibited by Adwords Policies. Complaints to Google.com may have a temporary affect, but if the website is generating a lot of revenue for Google.com, you can safely bet that the web site WILL NOT be removed or penalized in any way. Help us stop this unfairness! Let&#039;s help Google.com find the Adwords Cheaters. http://www.adwords-cheaters.com

[N.B. as of September 2008, the AdWords Cheaters site no longer appears to be working.]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some websites are allowed to Adwords ads for items that are prohibited by Adwords Policies. Complaints to Google.com may have a temporary affect, but if the website is generating a lot of revenue for Google.com, you can safely bet that the web site WILL NOT be removed or penalized in any way. Help us stop this unfairness! Let&#8217;s help Google.com find the Adwords Cheaters. <a href="http://www.adwords-cheaters.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.adwords-cheaters.com</a></p>
<p>[N.B. as of September 2008, the AdWords Cheaters site no longer appears to be working.]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Higher CTR, Higher MinCPC, Does What? &#124; Merjis Search Marketing Blog</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-13862</link>
		<dc:creator>Higher CTR, Higher MinCPC, Does What? &#124; Merjis Search Marketing Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2007 02:51:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-13862</guid>
		<description>[...] The auction still seems to be built on the generalised second price model. But there&#8217;s already a fudge factor for Minimum Cost Per Click (MinCPC) for the right hand side auction, based on undisclosed criteria, in addition to some documented or inferred criteria. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The auction still seems to be built on the generalised second price model. But there&#8217;s already a fudge factor for Minimum Cost Per Click (MinCPC) for the right hand side auction, based on undisclosed criteria, in addition to some documented or inferred criteria. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Top Position Pricing Motivational Analysis &#124; Merjis Search Marketing Blog</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-13842</link>
		<dc:creator>Google Top Position Pricing Motivational Analysis &#124; Merjis Search Marketing Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 14:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-13842</guid>
		<description>[...] In other words, this is yet another fudge factor for the still rather mysterious Quality Score. It lets Google put a thumb, hidden, on the scales for the auction, and adjust how much revenue is extracted. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] In other words, this is yet another fudge factor for the still rather mysterious Quality Score. It lets Google put a thumb, hidden, on the scales for the auction, and adjust how much revenue is extracted. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AdWords Dynamic Keyword Insertion (DKI) &#124; Merjis Search Marketing Blog</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-10924</link>
		<dc:creator>AdWords Dynamic Keyword Insertion (DKI) &#124; Merjis Search Marketing Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2007 10:49:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-10924</guid>
		<description>[...] Click Through Rate, abbreviated as CTR, is a crucial factor in AdWords advertising. Improve the CTR and you can perversely reduce the cost per click. With a high enough CTR, you can achieve the high prize on AdWords, of position 1 at a $0.01 per click. You can&#8217;t achieve this for every keyword, however, or even most keywords. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Click Through Rate, abbreviated as CTR, is a crucial factor in AdWords advertising. Improve the CTR and you can perversely reduce the cost per click. With a high enough CTR, you can achieve the high prize on AdWords, of position 1 at a $0.01 per click. You can&#8217;t achieve this for every keyword, however, or even most keywords. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Chatfield</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-266</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Chatfield</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 19:09:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-266</guid>
		<description>Hi Lee, so many issues. Where to start? 

You need to have conversion tracking or an analytics package capable of interpreting clicks and showing whether they convert. Right now you are paying for clicks and don&#039;t appear to have the information to be able to judge whether the money is wasted or effectively spent.

Next, you really need to read the article about editorial review. You are in the situation that the keywords that you think are important, can not be used in the advert. If the keywords are present on the landing page, then you only have to overcome the first level of automation. If you can use a high performance advert, then you improve the metric for performance based QS which will reduce the MinCPC.

I suspect that like most new advertisers, you are also sending everything to the home page. Don&#039;t. Send store specific keywords to landing pages that mention that specific store. That improves the QS for the landing page score, helping keep the MinCPC down. 

You should also consider which keywords you use. Your primary offer is a saving. Shouldn&#039;t you be looking for keywords that help you offer a saving? For example, &quot;{store name} discount&quot; may be lower volume than the store, but you can put &quot;discount: in the advert and on the landing page. That&#039;ll reduce the MinCPC, I think (there are some words that seem to have little effect and this is probably one of them). If you have some words of the keyword in the advert, then the advert/keyword matching QS is improved. This usually results in a $2.75 or $0.22 or $0.11 MinCPC (depending on how conceptually close you are to the keyword). 

I suspect that you haven&#039;t used Google&#039;s free AdWords Learning Center. I strongly recommend that you take that course. Then think like a consumer - that isn&#039;t easy, but it is the key. What can you offer that a consumer wants, expressed without using a trademark in the advert? That&#039;s what&#039;ll get a high CTR and reduce the MinCPC.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Lee, so many issues. Where to start? </p>
<p>You need to have conversion tracking or an analytics package capable of interpreting clicks and showing whether they convert. Right now you are paying for clicks and don&#8217;t appear to have the information to be able to judge whether the money is wasted or effectively spent.</p>
<p>Next, you really need to read the article about editorial review. You are in the situation that the keywords that you think are important, can not be used in the advert. If the keywords are present on the landing page, then you only have to overcome the first level of automation. If you can use a high performance advert, then you improve the metric for performance based QS which will reduce the MinCPC.</p>
<p>I suspect that like most new advertisers, you are also sending everything to the home page. Don&#8217;t. Send store specific keywords to landing pages that mention that specific store. That improves the QS for the landing page score, helping keep the MinCPC down. </p>
<p>You should also consider which keywords you use. Your primary offer is a saving. Shouldn&#8217;t you be looking for keywords that help you offer a saving? For example, &#8220;{store name} discount&#8221; may be lower volume than the store, but you can put &#8220;discount: in the advert and on the landing page. That&#8217;ll reduce the MinCPC, I think (there are some words that seem to have little effect and this is probably one of them). If you have some words of the keyword in the advert, then the advert/keyword matching QS is improved. This usually results in a $2.75 or $0.22 or $0.11 MinCPC (depending on how conceptually close you are to the keyword). </p>
<p>I suspect that you haven&#8217;t used Google&#8217;s free AdWords Learning Center. I strongly recommend that you take that course. Then think like a consumer &#8211; that isn&#8217;t easy, but it is the key. What can you offer that a consumer wants, expressed without using a trademark in the advert? That&#8217;s what&#8217;ll get a high CTR and reduce the MinCPC.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Allaben</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-264</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Allaben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 17:30:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-264</guid>
		<description>Well, that&#039;s the difficult part. My site offers the opportunity to shop at over 1000 retail stores and catalogs all from one site and every purchase receives money back based on each store&#039;s % refund. So I set up an ad such as &quot;Shopping made easy&quot; Shop at over 1000 stores and get money back with purchases. Now finding key words for the ad that Google will give a decent quality score I&#039;ve found impossible. I used the name of 20 stores as key words and every one of them wants $5.00-$10.00p.c. My budget is $6.66/day and set .20 p.c. as my max. A new ad I set up last night has 23,235 impr. and 2 clicks yet every key word is inactive. So unless they were active before I got online I don&#039;t know how they got there. No numbers are shown next to any key word. The total number is shown at the bottom opposite &quot;content total&quot;. I&#039;ve had no trademark problems with my key words but try to use a store name anywhere in my ad and it isn&#039;t allowed. I&#039;m not stupid but trying to make this work sure is making me feel stupid!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, that&#8217;s the difficult part. My site offers the opportunity to shop at over 1000 retail stores and catalogs all from one site and every purchase receives money back based on each store&#8217;s % refund. So I set up an ad such as &#8220;Shopping made easy&#8221; Shop at over 1000 stores and get money back with purchases. Now finding key words for the ad that Google will give a decent quality score I&#8217;ve found impossible. I used the name of 20 stores as key words and every one of them wants $5.00-$10.00p.c. My budget is $6.66/day and set .20 p.c. as my max. A new ad I set up last night has 23,235 impr. and 2 clicks yet every key word is inactive. So unless they were active before I got online I don&#8217;t know how they got there. No numbers are shown next to any key word. The total number is shown at the bottom opposite &#8220;content total&#8221;. I&#8217;ve had no trademark problems with my key words but try to use a store name anywhere in my ad and it isn&#8217;t allowed. I&#8217;m not stupid but trying to make this work sure is making me feel stupid!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Chatfield</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-262</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Chatfield</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 15:58:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-262</guid>
		<description>Hi Ron - bids get raised by Google during the editorial review process - the next article. Have a look at that and see if that explains it. If not, drop another note and I&#039;ll try to explain!

Hi Lee - handling trademarks is complex. In the US you can use a trademarked keyword as a search term unless the company complains to you. You may be forced by Google or by the company to avoid the trademark in the advert copy. However, what is your real benefit? Simply providing yet another interface to the store probably isn&#039;t what you offer. Does your site make price comparison easier? Availability checking? What&#039;s the value to the consumer and what would a consumer searching for that value, be typing as a search query?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Ron &#8211; bids get raised by Google during the editorial review process &#8211; the next article. Have a look at that and see if that explains it. If not, drop another note and I&#8217;ll try to explain!</p>
<p>Hi Lee &#8211; handling trademarks is complex. In the US you can use a trademarked keyword as a search term unless the company complains to you. You may be forced by Google or by the company to avoid the trademark in the advert copy. However, what is your real benefit? Simply providing yet another interface to the store probably isn&#8217;t what you offer. Does your site make price comparison easier? Availability checking? What&#8217;s the value to the consumer and what would a consumer searching for that value, be typing as a search query?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Allaben</title>
		<link>http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-261</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Allaben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 15:49:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.merjis.com/2006/11/24/adwords-qs-is-bs/#comment-261</guid>
		<description>Very interesting and somewhat confusing to me as a new customer for Ad Words. I am having a horrible time trying to get any of my keywords to be active.  A Google representative suggested that I focus my ads and use store names yet that is not permitted due to trademark infringement. So they have put me in a catch 22 situation. My site is unique in that it offers shopping at over 600 stores but none of the stores show up unless one goes to them through either a dropdown list or through a general category. I am at a loss. At this point I can only afford .20pc. Maybe I&#039;m just priced out of using this method of advertising. Thoughts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting and somewhat confusing to me as a new customer for Ad Words. I am having a horrible time trying to get any of my keywords to be active.  A Google representative suggested that I focus my ads and use store names yet that is not permitted due to trademark infringement. So they have put me in a catch 22 situation. My site is unique in that it offers shopping at over 600 stores but none of the stores show up unless one goes to them through either a dropdown list or through a general category. I am at a loss. At this point I can only afford .20pc. Maybe I&#8217;m just priced out of using this method of advertising. Thoughts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

