4 ms·

Forgot about the monopoly -- how about outright fraud? As someone who used to operate a domain parking service, I've seen evidence numerous times of google tak

Forgot about the monopoly -- how about outright fraud? As someone who used to operate a domain parking service, I've seen evidence numerous times of google taking away publisher earnings because of alleged clickfraud, but then not refunding advertisers for those same clicks. I know of three advertisers who were appearing in AdSense ads on a publisher page back in 2009 that Google refused to pay out because of "click fraud", and none of these advertisers received refunds or any indication that they were defrauded. Google took the money that was supposed to go to the publisher, kept it, and didn't refund the advertisers. They probably never do. I ended up paying $800 out of my pocket to compensate my users for the lost revenue. I have also worked with hundreds of advertisers in the SEO space, and I have never, ever, seen someone say they had ad money refunded because of click fraud, yet I've seen plenty of publisher earnings held back because of supposed click fraud. Google's fight against click fraud is really just a fight against paying out to publishers, full stop. Google also used to do this crazy shit (don't know if they still do as I'm not in that space anymore) where they would change the TOS at midnight and then retroactively block the past month's earnings on hundreds of accounts that are violating the seconds-old TOS. Pretty sure that is illegal as well. If you think about it, Google has zero incentive to stop real click-fraud, especially if their chosen course of action is to just keep the money and not have to pay publishers or refund advertisers. This space needs regulation, and it's needed it for over a decade. I will happily forward what I have if someone knows how to get in touch with investigators.

extropy 6y ago
I would assume Google just shows more ads on other sites to compensate for the fraudent clicks. Why should they give you money back when they can just fulfill their side of the contract by showing ads to non fraudent users.
- sam0x17 6y ago
  It's funny that never actually occurred to me as a possibility. I would have to get in touch with the advertisers to see if that data is still in their account (which may be possible, I'll see what I can do). It's also not sufficient even if they do that. Many advertisers will run a time-sensitive campaign -- free traffic 3 weeks later in those scenarios is worthless. I actually doubt google does this because if they did it would be most easily implemented as an account credit. They just keep the money and hope no one ever holds them accountable for anything.
  - zaphar 6y ago
    That isn't the way ad auctions work. They don't make it up 3 weeks later. They make it up in real time. The decision on where to show an ad is done in milliseconds. If it doesn't show up on your site it shows up on a different site instead right then.
    - sam0x17 6y ago
      Click-fraud decisions happen weeks later when it's time to send payouts to publishers. It will show $800 pending for deposit and then will say removed and you'll get an email about click fraud. That's what happened in this scenario. $800 / a month worth of earnings on a publisher account got wiped out minutes before the new pay period started.
      - zaphar 6y ago
        Ahh that's a piece I didn't notice in the post. That does change things yes.
      - sagarm 6y ago
        When the click fraud decision is made and when the decision is communicated are different things. When combating fraud, communicating the result of fraud decisions gives fraudsters information they can use to evade fraud protections. The faster the feedback loop for fraudsters, the faster they can find the gaps. Give feedback too quickly, and you'll never keep up in the cat-and-mouse game.
  - siggen 6y ago
    I suspect G doesn’t do strict budget enforcement because that would be “fraud-intolerant.” They likely show in more places and, if no fraud, for the extra they charge $0 to the advertiser. Having said that, I have also heard similar case where someone was banned for fraud when he wasn’t doing anything of the sort, and he had no way to dispute it. This was over a half-a-decade ago.
cblconfederate 6y ago
Google constantly takes 10-12% of adsense earning as "invalid traffic". Now we obviously dont use bots, we have real users, so i can only assume they consider those misclicks. Or something else, they have no transparency. The RPMs have been going down for a decade even as our traffic is stable, and slightly up during covid. They also don't fill our inventory. I wish we had alternative ways to find advertisers. I have yet to see studies confirming that the money that advertisers spend is made good on google marketplace or fb marketplace etc. Sure they may see 50% of it working, but what about the rest of it?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
dudus 6y ago
Google does filter out invalid clicks on the advertiser side as well. https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2549113 https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2549113 Edit: spelling
someonehere 6y ago
How about this? They have zero incentive to stop click fraud because they want to show one set of numbers to potential customers that their ROI will be significant. Meanwhile they bait you, hook you, then you don’t see the results they promised. Exactly as you said.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  So you think Google's ad business is sustained by unhappy customers who get burned and quit?
summerlight 6y ago
> As someone who used to operate a domain parking service, I've seen evidence numerous times of google taking away publisher earnings because of alleged clickfraud, but then not refunding advertisers for those same clicks. Because they're not charged at all in the first place? No charge, so nothing to refund. https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2549113 https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2549113
- disiplus 6y ago
  that's for instantly detected fraud clicks, OP is speaking about it being marked as fraud later.

extropy 6y ago

I would assume Google just shows more ads on other sites to compensate for the fraudent clicks. Why should they give you money back when they can just fulfill their side of the contract by showing ads to non fraudent users.

sam0x17 6y ago
It's funny that never actually occurred to me as a possibility. I would have to get in touch with the advertisers to see if that data is still in their account (which may be possible, I'll see what I can do). It's also not sufficient even if they do that. Many advertisers will run a time-sensitive campaign -- free traffic 3 weeks later in those scenarios is worthless. I actually doubt google does this because if they did it would be most easily implemented as an account credit. They just keep the money and hope no one ever holds them accountable for anything.
- zaphar 6y ago
  That isn't the way ad auctions work. They don't make it up 3 weeks later. They make it up in real time. The decision on where to show an ad is done in milliseconds. If it doesn't show up on your site it shows up on a different site instead right then.
  - sam0x17 6y ago
    Click-fraud decisions happen weeks later when it's time to send payouts to publishers. It will show $800 pending for deposit and then will say removed and you'll get an email about click fraud. That's what happened in this scenario. $800 / a month worth of earnings on a publisher account got wiped out minutes before the new pay period started.
    - zaphar 6y ago
      Ahh that's a piece I didn't notice in the post. That does change things yes.
    - sagarm 6y ago
      When the click fraud decision is made and when the decision is communicated are different things. When combating fraud, communicating the result of fraud decisions gives fraudsters information they can use to evade fraud protections. The faster the feedback loop for fraudsters, the faster they can find the gaps. Give feedback too quickly, and you'll never keep up in the cat-and-mouse game.
- siggen 6y ago
  I suspect G doesn’t do strict budget enforcement because that would be “fraud-intolerant.” They likely show in more places and, if no fraud, for the extra they charge $0 to the advertiser. Having said that, I have also heard similar case where someone was banned for fraud when he wasn’t doing anything of the sort, and he had no way to dispute it. This was over a half-a-decade ago.

cblconfederate 6y ago

Google constantly takes 10-12% of adsense earning as "invalid traffic". Now we obviously dont use bots, we have real users, so i can only assume they consider those misclicks. Or something else, they have no transparency. The RPMs have been going down for a decade even as our traffic is stable, and slightly up during covid. They also don't fill our inventory. I wish we had alternative ways to find advertisers. I have yet to see studies confirming that the money that advertisers spend is made good on google marketplace or fb marketplace etc. Sure they may see 50% of it working, but what about the rest of it?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

dudus 6y ago

Google does filter out invalid clicks on the advertiser side as well. https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2549113 https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2549113 Edit: spelling

someonehere 6y ago

How about this? They have zero incentive to stop click fraud because they want to show one set of numbers to potential customers that their ROI will be significant. Meanwhile they bait you, hook you, then you don’t see the results they promised. Exactly as you said.

srtjstjsj 6y ago
So you think Google's ad business is sustained by unhappy customers who get burned and quit?

summerlight 6y ago

> As someone who used to operate a domain parking service, I've seen evidence numerous times of google taking away publisher earnings because of alleged clickfraud, but then not refunding advertisers for those same clicks. Because they're not charged at all in the first place? No charge, so nothing to refund. https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2549113 https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2549113

disiplus 6y ago
that's for instantly detected fraud clicks, OP is speaking about it being marked as fraud later.