Google
Content Targeted Ads
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MarketingSherpa SPECIAL REPORT
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
April 7, 2003
Sign up at http://www.marketingsherpa.com
Survey Results: Google AdWords New 'Content Targeted'
Campaigns -
- Clicks are Low but are Conversions?
Sponsor: 21 Ways to Maximize Your ROI from Google
AdWords
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Your practical handbook to improve your Google results:
- Tips on copywriting ads to get clicks that convert
- Bidding tactics
- Picking low-cost/high-impact terms to bid on
- How to fix a campaign that's getting rotten results
Get yours today:
http://sherpastore.com/store/page.cfm/1962?a=mbv
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
More than 100,000 marketers pay for ads on Google
now, which
may make it the biggest online media seller in
terms of accounts.
Over the past three weeks, many MarketingSherpa
readers have
written in to share their results with Google's
new ad option --
so-called Content Targeted campaigns. We started
to notice a
discrepancy between the rave reviews Google's
PR gave itself, and
the actual data we got from users.
So, last week we sent out a survey, interviewed
experts and
collected data for this Special Report. Hope you
find it useful!
1. Quick backgrounder on Google's
New Ad Option
2. Survey Results: Click rates
3. Conversion rates
4. Sherpa's recommendations
for your campaigns
5. Watch out: Google Uses Opt-out
6. Research notes & useful links
-> 1. Quick backgrounder on
Google's New Ad Option
On February 26th, Google let its AdWords advertisers
know that
they would be automatically getting extra ads
on a new service -
'Content Targeted Advertising' at no cost until
March 12th.
Everyone could try it out, and if they didn't
like it, cancel
that part of their account. If they did like results,
they would
keep on getting these extra ads but at the regular
cost (based on
what they paid for clicks in the search ads system.)
The concept of putting ads next to related content
isn't new.
It's called contextual advertising.
Plenty of other companies, including Lee Enterprises,
CMP's
TechWeb network, YellowBrix, and even Google's
competitor
Overture, offer some form of contextual advertising
against
editorial content.
Historically, in general contextually-placed
ads have gotten
better click results than ads that were placed
in other ways such
as general run-of-site or run-of-network. Few
people can speak
to whether these clicks wound up with better conversions
or not,
because most marketers weren't counting conversions
until fairly
recently.
Also, much anecdotal evidence in MarketingSherpa
Case Studies
reveals that text-based ads are winning over basic
graphical ads
online. Broadly speaking, unless your graphical
ad sings and
dances to attract attention (ie, rich media),
you're probably
better off with text.
Taken together these two points -- contextually
served ads work
and text-ads work -- would indicate that Google's
new Targeted
Content Program would be a success ... as long
as they could be
sure ads really matched the content (articles,
newsgroup
postings, etc.) they were displayed next to.
Susan Wojcicki, Google's Director of Product
Management, told us
for the Targeted Content program their tech team
adjusted specs
to ignore anything that was boilerplate and/or
related to
navigation. So presumably your ad would be displayed
only on
pages with actual content relating to your product
or service.
The other factor that can make a break a contextual
ad campaign's
success is the type of content that ads are placed
against.
Generally newsy, how-to, and highly targeted
articles on niche
sites tend to get far better ad clicks than newsgroups,
bulletin
boards, general interest sites, or stagnant info
pages.
Unfortunately Google didn't take this factor
into consideration
when designing the program. They chose the partner
sites for
contextual ads mainly based on traffic (sites
had to have more
than 20-million pageviews a month, which very
few niche sites do)
and "quality" which seems to mean being
G-rated.
However, partner content sites ran the gamut
from newsgroups to
newspapers.
How well did ads work? Keep reading...
-> 2. Survey Results: Click
rates
Google's Susan Wojcicki admits, "It's true
clicks may be lower."
Most MarketingSherpa readers surveyed agreed
vehemently. "My
regular AdWords yield a 4-6% click though... the
context AdWord
ads yield a .001% click through, said one. "Click
rates for the
content-targeted ads are abysmal," reported
another.
A handful of responders had equal or higher clicks
with content
ads. Elizabeth Karolczak of Oskar Consulting noted,
"I got a lot
more clicks but I have really weird keywords.
I get .5% on
AdWords and 4.4% on the content ads. My monthly
costs went up
pretty significantly."
Unfortunately Karolczak is in such a niche industry
-- content
syndication and licensing -- that the extra clicks
turned out to
be people who were looking for something else
entirely. "I
wasn't getting as good traffic as someone who
has typed my
keywords into Google." So she cancelled the
Targeted Content
part of her Google account.
The number of clicks the average AdWords user
may be getting from
the Targeted Content program is still fairly low
-- Wojcicki says
that although numbers vary by advertiser, generally
"it's going
to be less than 10% of your clicks."
Google's execs are searching out new content
site partners
aggressively, so that number will almost certainly
rise. Still,
Wojcicki remarked, "We are only charging
for the click, and ads
will not be disabled in any way for the lower
click rate."
(Normally, your ad would be cut by Google the
minute it slipped
under .5% click rate.)
So, why should anyone fuss if click rates are
lower? (And plenty
of our surveyed readers are worried about this.)
If all you're
only being charged based on clicks, what's the
problem?
By the way: Survey respondents reported the following
general
click rates across all the Google ads in total:
Under 1% = 25%
1.0-1.5% = 28%
1.6-1.9% = 19.6%
2.0-2.4% = 11%
2.5%+ = 16.4%
Given the breadth of industries and offers represented,
this wide
spread makes sense. Anyway, what really matters
is - are you
getting a good enough conversion to make your
clicks worth paying
for?
-> 3. Conversion rates
Although Google's Wojcicki told us, "initial
data suggests
[conversion rates are] the same," she's about
the only person we
could find who expected Content Targeted ads to
convert at the
same rate as clicks from Search ads.
We suspect that, psychologically, readers and
surfers may be
generally in a different part of the sales cycle
than searchers.
So even if they click, they may be less likely
to take that next
step and convert to buying something or signing
up for something.
Unfortunately, we can't back this with exact
numbers for Targeted
Content ad conversions yet because most people
aren't able to
track them versus regular ads. So, although many
surveyed
readers suspect conversions may be lower, few
knew for sure.
So, we asked two experts who do have tracking
software for their
results so far.
Kevin Lee, CEO DID-IT.COM, who tracked conversions
on behalf of
several clients, said, "The results vary
by client and industry,
as well as other factors we could not identify.
Overall we were
pleasantly surprised by the quality of the contextual
traffic,
but do recommend that marketers measure for themselves,
because
there were instances where the conversion did
drop
significantly."
John Marshall, CEO ClickTracks, who tracked conversions
on behalf
of his own company's B2B ads said, "We can
see big differences in
the behavior of Targeted Content visitors. They
spend much less
time on the site (33 seconds) than regular AdWords
visitors (79
seconds). They can't wait to get out of here."
He adds, "After one month we can say that
on our own site, the
Content Targeted advertising repeatedly leads
to one specific
action ... the user clicking the 'back' button
and leaving our
site."
Why? He thinks, "people aren't in decision-making'
or 'buying'
mode."
Lesson learned: All Google clicks are not necessarily
equal. You
should track results to decide if it's worth investing
in
Targeted Content ads for yourself. The more niche
(and possibly
B2B) your offer is, the less likely it is your
offer will match
the profile of the general 20-million+ pageview
sites these new
AdWords are running on anyway.
Lee offered this suggestion for MarketingSherpa
readers who don't
know how to track Targeted Content Ads separate
from regular
AdWords:
"To separate out your content traffic, you
need to use your log
files or tag the content visitors when they arrive.
For either,
you need to examine the referrer. look at the
referrer for
"pagead.googlesyndication.com", and
see not only the fact that
the ad was a content ad, but also the original
site where the ad
ran. For example, from my wife's site log file
(she is a
psychologist):
http://pagead.googlesyndication.com/search?output=cahtml&num=0&client=ca -burst2_bnr&ca_format=468x60&ca_random=1047344452796&q=http%3A//venusenv
y.keenspace.com/main.html
All the information you need to tag (identify)
a visitor as being
from a content ad is right in that referrer."
By the way: Survey respondents who track conversion
rates, got
these overall rates for all of their various Google
accounts (not
breaking out Content vs. Premium vs. AdWords):
a. Marketers measuring a direct sale as a conversion:
(Note: these respondents as a group were 70% B2C)
Under 1% = 43%
1-1.99% = 17%
2-2.99% = 20%
3-4.99% = 9%
5% and over = 11% (mostly under 15%)
b. Marketers measuring a no-cost registration
(or sign-up) as a
conversion: (Note: these respondents as a group
were 56% B2B)
Under 1% = 14%
1-1.99% = 14%
2-2.99% = 14%
3-4.99% = 17%
5% and over = 41% (mostly under 15%)
-> 4. Sherpa's recommendations
for your campaigns
Keep using Google's Content Ads if....
a. You are seeking brand awareness
-- especially for B2C
(business to consumer) brands
with broad appeal. The current
pricing model means you may
be getting a whole lot of
impressions for a fairly low
CPM (when you do the math and
count your PPC that way) and
at least content targeting does
imply that your ad will show
up on a page somewhat related to
your business.
- and/or -
b. You can count conversions
from these specific ads and your
ROI is good enough for your
needs.
- and/or -
c. You are getting so few clicks
(and several dozen of our
readers surveyed said they had
not gotten any Content clicks
at all yet) that it's not costing
you anything, so what the
heck. For now anyway....
Bail on Google's Content Ads for now if....
a. Your goal is to reinforce
your brand's essence or
positioning. You cannot control
which sites your ads will
turn up on at all beyond the
"relevance" of content which may
or may not be perfect. Brand
positioning campaigns rely to a
great deal on the media they
appear in as reinforcement of
your message. Showing up on
any site that happens to have
info on your topic is not good
enough.
and/or
b. You can't measure conversions
or awareness created by these
ads, and you are spending what
you consider to be a
significant amount on them.
Plus, here are three more MarketingSherpa recommendations
to
improve your Google results of all kinds:
Recommendation #1: Send clicks
to a specialized page whenever
possible.
75% of marketers tracking conversions who sent
clicks to
specialized pages got a 1% or higher conversion
rate. Only 52%
of marketers tracking conversions who sent clicks
to a general
page such as their home page got a 1% of higher
conversion rate.
That's a big difference. Pay attention to it!
Recommendation #2: Check your
Google campaign management
screen frequently - at least a couple of times
a week - and tweak
your campaign accordingly.
Over and over again, as we looked at respondents
with the highest
conversion rates, one thing was blatantly clear.
As a group
33.5% checked campaigns daily, another 28% checked
at least twice
a week.
As a group, marketers with the lowest conversion
rates, checked
their campaigns far less frequently - 43% checked
only two-three
times per month, monthly or even less frequently
than that.
Recommendation #3: Track your
conversion rates.
We were sad to learn that 37.8% of survey respondents
were not
tracking conversions from Google clicks whatsoever.
Another
33.4% were tracking but only from all their Google
clicks
combined irregardless of search term or Google
ad type.
19.3% of marketers said their goal for Google
campaigns is
"awareness" instead of conversions.
They want people to click
over and check out their sites but not to take
any immediate
action such as buying or signing up for a newsletter.
If you are in that pool of marketers, you should
not consider
yourself "off the hook" when it comes
to conversion tracking.
Instead, you should track clickstreams, visit
length, and return
visits, to determine whether those clicks really
looked over your
site and will remember it - or if they hit the
back button and
left ASAP.
At the very least, this data will arm you to
defend your
advertising budget the next time management questions
it.
-> 5. Watch out: Google Uses
Opt-out
Some marketers we talked to were unaware that
Google was using
opt-out for the new advertising, and that they
would be charged
for all clicks received after the two-week trial
ended on March
12th unless they took action.
Google's Wojcicki said, "We sent them a
newsletter, and it's
obvious every time an advertiser goes to the online
reports."
But, the problem is most people don't read every
word of an email
newsletter and as our survey showed, 27% of Google
advertisers
responding checked their campaign results less
than fortnightly.
Marketer Bob Schnyder of ECD Inc who checks his
campaigns twice
daily and spends thousands each month on search
marketing said,
"What they don't realize as big as they are
is they need to tell
you many times more. To be honest I got something
about it, and
I looked internally when I log on to AdWords,
but I didn't see
the little button to stop it."
Michael Herman, Manager of Internet R&D for ChristianityToday.com
said, "I assumed it was opt-in - that was
my first assumption.
They didn't do a good job of letting even us geeks
know."
Andrew Goodman, author of '21 Ways to Maximize
Your ROI from
Google AdWords Select' said, "The opt-out
is not evident on the
main campaign summary page. It's not that easy
to notice."
Our take on this: Google may be a beloved brand
and a great place
to advertise, but charging clients for a new service
without
proactively asking first is not best practices
in doing business.
That said, Goodman and others pointed out that
at least with
Google you have the option to stop the Content
ads. Overture,
which many praise for better campaign reports
than Google, offers
no such option.
-> 6. Research notes & useful
links
We collected much of the data in this Special
Report by running a
survey to a selection of MarketingSherpa newsletter
readers who
tend to be professional marketers working for
mid-size
corporations in the US, with a 60% bias towards
B2B.
Although we sent the survey link to approximately
38,000 people,
we asked that only marketers who had conducted
a paid Google
campaign in 2003 respond. 406 actually took the
survey.
Admitting our mistakes -- two of the questions
in the initial
survey were set up incorrectly so answers were
not always
accurate. Luckily this bug was caught quickly
and corrected.
We did not include data from the "broken"
answers in our results
data because we didn't want to skew results.
Last word: It's early days yet in the Targeted
Content front,
so no results can be considered complete or official.
These are
only indicators. Also, results from various industries
and
offers can vary so widely that no single set of
data will every
work for everyone.
That's why individual campaign measurement is
so important.
We will return with further surveys in the future.
Get yourself
in shape now so you have useful results to share.
Thanks - and best of luck with your campaigns.
Useful links:
Kevin Lee's company http://www.did-it.com
John Marshall's click results page:
http://www.clicktracks.com/syndicate.php
Andrew Goodman's '21 Ways to Maximize Your ROI
from Google
AdWords Select' report
http://sherpastore.com/store/page.cfm/1962?a=mbv
Return
to FREE articles index
|