3 ms·

Wow, that is not very cool. I advertise on content networks online, and I'd love to pay for your click if you're interested in the ad, but not so much to "tip

by jbenz 18y ago

Wow, that is not very cool. I advertise on content networks online, and I'd love to pay for your click if you're interested in the ad, but not so much to "tip the blogger". Also, If a site gets a lot of click-throughs but no sales, I stop advertising there. So you might be helping in the short run and hurting in the long run.

tom_rath 18y ago
Yes, folks like breck are why we stopped advertising on the content network. It provided us with nothing but a way to indirectly fund bloggers or buy someone sushi at the Google cafeteria. Behaviour like that is going to kill 'ad supported' sites.
- breck 18y ago
  I was mostly kidding. I very rarely click on AdSense ads anyway, and only do so if I've got at least some interest in the company. But if I stumble upon a site or article that I don't like (linkbait or parked domain pages for example), I will never click on an ad. I don't want to reward crappy websites. However, because the corollary to that is true (if I like a site I am more likely to click on an ad) that does not make my behavior inappropriate, imho. Regardless, a certain percentage of frivolous clicks won't kill ad supported sites. If conversion rates from content ads decrease advertisers should bid less and prices will correct themselves. In other words, if advertisers see their ROI on each click drop by 10%, they should bid 10% less per click. If you see a decrease in ROI and don't decrease your bid amount, that's no one's fault but your own. If you see a decrease in ROI and decrease your bid amount but lose placement to competing bidders, than for some reason you are seeing less ROI than them and it has got nothing to do with frivolous clicks. Unless of course one of your competitors is specifically targeting your ads, but I believe Google is pretty good about catching those things. In general though, content ads are much, much less effective than search ads because when someone clicks a search ad they are in a different frame of mind(looking actively to find/buy something) than when they click on a content ad(mildly interested), so: A) I think you are making the right move not advertising on the content network. B) What's going to kill 'ad supported' sites is the much higher conversion rates from search ads and the fact that most ad supported sites are no more essential to humanity than most ad supported TV shows.
  - DougBTX 18y ago
    When was the last time you bought something due to seeing a banner/in-situ ad? I don't think I ever have, does that mean every ad I've ever seen on the internet was someone wasting their money? I must have seen hundreds even thousands of ads! Poor guys.
    - breck 18y ago
      Exposure and brand building are valuable, just less valuable than actually capturing someone's business at the moment.

by jbenz 18y ago

tom_rath 18y ago

Yes, folks like breck are why we stopped advertising on the content network. It provided us with nothing but a way to indirectly fund bloggers or buy someone sushi at the Google cafeteria. Behaviour like that is going to kill 'ad supported' sites.

breck 18y ago
I was mostly kidding. I very rarely click on AdSense ads anyway, and only do so if I've got at least some interest in the company. But if I stumble upon a site or article that I don't like (linkbait or parked domain pages for example), I will never click on an ad. I don't want to reward crappy websites. However, because the corollary to that is true (if I like a site I am more likely to click on an ad) that does not make my behavior inappropriate, imho. Regardless, a certain percentage of frivolous clicks won't kill ad supported sites. If conversion rates from content ads decrease advertisers should bid less and prices will correct themselves. In other words, if advertisers see their ROI on each click drop by 10%, they should bid 10% less per click. If you see a decrease in ROI and don't decrease your bid amount, that's no one's fault but your own. If you see a decrease in ROI and decrease your bid amount but lose placement to competing bidders, than for some reason you are seeing less ROI than them and it has got nothing to do with frivolous clicks. Unless of course one of your competitors is specifically targeting your ads, but I believe Google is pretty good about catching those things. In general though, content ads are much, much less effective than search ads because when someone clicks a search ad they are in a different frame of mind(looking actively to find/buy something) than when they click on a content ad(mildly interested), so: A) I think you are making the right move not advertising on the content network. B) What's going to kill 'ad supported' sites is the much higher conversion rates from search ads and the fact that most ad supported sites are no more essential to humanity than most ad supported TV shows.
- DougBTX 18y ago
  When was the last time you bought something due to seeing a banner/in-situ ad? I don't think I ever have, does that mean every ad I've ever seen on the internet was someone wasting their money? I must have seen hundreds even thousands of ads! Poor guys.
  - breck 18y ago
    Exposure and brand building are valuable, just less valuable than actually capturing someone's business at the moment.