4 ms·

No it wasn't but with a CPM you can actually optimize the ads for better results since the click is the only real measure of successful ad placement. Everything

No it wasn't but with a CPM you can actually optimize the ads for better results since the click is the only real measure of successful ad placement. Everything else happens after a click, so getting to the click is the most important target. As for %. They're bringing the customer, providing the tool, the payments and the collection of the money. All the publisher is doing is placing some code on their site. So 32% is actually a lot cheaper than a publisher hiring their own sales staff, buying their own ad servers, collecting and sorting the payment. Just so you know.

throwaway20222 3y ago
I wonder if it would be cheaper if there were more competitors to google in the market than there are currently. There are many things that I could outsource that would be cheaper than doing myself (build/buy a car. Buy a cheeseburger as opposed to producing all the ingredients myself.) I am equally interested in what that 32% fee would look like in a more open market and then say if it is cheap or expensive.
- jsnell 3y ago
  Isn't that exactly what this is addressing? This is splitting up AdSense such that any third-party buy-side operation that wants to use AdSense as the network is on equal footing with Google's own buy-side using AdSense. If anyone else can run that side of the equation better or for cheaper, they can now do so.
- DudeOpotomus 3y ago
  There are and have always been lots and lots of options. It's up to the publisher to decide who they work with. But with the scale that Google holds, it's hard to compete with their money as they own the market and have a black box monopoly - there is no way to know what the actual floor of the bid is for instance, its set by Google, arbitrarily. In other words: They say it costs $5 per click or $25 CPM, they just make that figure up. There is no real market driving that cost. It's 100% made up to maximize Google's profits.
t0mas88 3y ago
A lot of ads aren't about a click and direct transaction. FMCG brands run ads just to increase brand exposure all the time, there is no e-commerce environment to buy a can of beer or a tube of toothpaste after the click.

throwaway20222 3y ago

I wonder if it would be cheaper if there were more competitors to google in the market than there are currently. There are many things that I could outsource that would be cheaper than doing myself (build/buy a car. Buy a cheeseburger as opposed to producing all the ingredients myself.) I am equally interested in what that 32% fee would look like in a more open market and then say if it is cheap or expensive.

jsnell 3y ago
Isn't that exactly what this is addressing? This is splitting up AdSense such that any third-party buy-side operation that wants to use AdSense as the network is on equal footing with Google's own buy-side using AdSense. If anyone else can run that side of the equation better or for cheaper, they can now do so.
DudeOpotomus 3y ago
There are and have always been lots and lots of options. It's up to the publisher to decide who they work with. But with the scale that Google holds, it's hard to compete with their money as they own the market and have a black box monopoly - there is no way to know what the actual floor of the bid is for instance, its set by Google, arbitrarily. In other words: They say it costs $5 per click or $25 CPM, they just make that figure up. There is no real market driving that cost. It's 100% made up to maximize Google's profits.

t0mas88 3y ago

A lot of ads aren't about a click and direct transaction. FMCG brands run ads just to increase brand exposure all the time, there is no e-commerce environment to buy a can of beer or a tube of toothpaste after the click.