Google announced some upcoming AdWords changes that affect the way that they handle the Quality Score calculations. These changes have been made to improve the accuracy of the Quality Score calculations and to improve the usability of the AdWords accounts. They were announced on 21 August 2008, and will initially be rolled out to a few PPC customers for feedback, with the rollout to the full AdWords client base occurring over the next two months.

There are four enhancements announced:

Quality Score Timeliness

Google will now be calculating the Quality Score for your ad each time it matches a search query. In the past, the Quality Score was only recalculated periodically, which could cause some lag in the improvement to Quality Score once the problems were corrected. By calculating the Quality Score “on-the-fly” your ads will be more likely to display when relevant (and less likely to display when not).

“Minimum Bid” to be Retired (but not really)

The Minimum Bid calculation was added to Google AdWords about three years ago (July 2005), and has been the bane of many PPC advertisers. We believe that the Minimum Bid calculation was a work-saving measure that allowed Google to limit the number of phrases to be considered for a particular search query and provide better speed-of-service to the searcher. As a result, though, many phases would be turned off, and an inattentive PPC manager could be caught unawares. Users of the Google API and the offline AdWords Editor will still see the Minimum Bid field until these tools are updated, so while they no longer show in the Google GUI, they are still being calculated (based on the new Quality Score calculations).

As a part of the real-time Quality Score improvements, in the GUI, the Minimum Bid metric is being replaced with….

“First Page Bid” Calculation

Google will now provide an estimate of the bid needed for your ad to be displayed on the first page of the search results. There are a couple of factors in play here: The ad’s Quality Score, the Exact Match version of the keyword (even if you are using broad or phrase matching), and what your competitors are up to.

Keyword Search Deactivation Removed

The final change that Google is implementing is the removal of the “inactive for search” flagging. In the past, when the Quality Score and max bid factors were too low, Google would mark a keyword phrase as inactive, and ads would never be displayed for those phrases. When these changes roll out to your PPC campaigns, keywords will no longer be marked as “inactive for search.” Note that this means that keywords marked as inactive today will become active again (unless already paused or deleted). Google indicates that the same reasons that caused the keywords to be marked as inactive in the past will likely keep the phrases from generating much traffic.

What does this mean to you?

In the very short term, nothing. Google will be rolling these features out to existing PPC accounts over the next two months, so you might not see these changes in your campaigns immediately. In the mean time, we recommend reviewing your accounts for “inactive for search” keyword phrases, and consider whether these phrases should remain in your accounts or be paused/deleted.

The “First Page Bid” metric is a welcome addition, and will make managing campaigns and evaluating popular keywords much easier.

The real time Quality Score calculation should make your PPC account more responsive to changes in ad copy, which in turn should make the accounts perform better quicker.

Finally, note that these changes affect keywords, ads, and bids in the Search Network – the Content Network is unaffected.

If you have advertised on Yahoo’s Panama for any length of time or managed multiple accounts there, you may have seen (in many account cases) a deterioration in conversion performance in search.

We are talking search here — not the content network.

I just finished investigating this issue on several accounts today and found a very interesting fact:

Of all the clicks coming from these accounts on Yahoo Panama, only 33.7% were actually from Yahoo — the rest (66.3%) were from Yahoo’s Search Network!

So Yahoo’s search network delivers more traffic than Yahoo search? Yep, in many cases this appears to be an absolute fact.

“So who cares”, you say?

You should! Yahoo’s search network (and Google’s for that matter) is not chunked full of brand name properties to put it politely — to be a bit rude many are “scummy”. So, conversion performance from Yahoo is 66.3% search network which just DOES NOT convert as well as search.

WELL… YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST and WE WARNED YOU!

See our original article at:
googles-automatic-match-more-greedy-than-expanded-broad-match

 
If you need the quick summary and don’t have time to read our original article, here you go:

• If your Adwords keywords (Exact, Phrase and Broad match types — including expanded broad match) don’t make your ads show… Automatic Match Will!

Call me somewhat of a cynic, but I have a very tough time relating this to “producing better relevance”. I have personally seen what broad match (with expanded broad match) can do when it gets out of control and have found ways to prevent the excessive spend from occurring. Thank goodness…

But there is GOOD news — you can OPT out!

For the moment the Beta description is still available (Automatic Match Beta),

 
BUT
 
Try using the AdWords help function (while logged in) searching for “Automatic Match” and you get this:
Your search — “automatic match” — did not match any answers in the AdWords Help Center.

 

Why is it hidden? Go Figure!

By Scott Morrison, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES reports a top Google executive (Tim Armstrong, Google’s North American president for advertising and commerce.) of saying:

“Speaking at the Bear Stearns Media Conference in Palm Beach, Fla., Armstrong said Google’s advertising platform will evolve over time so that it won’t distinguish between search and display ads.”

Anyone care to comment on what the heck that means?

WELL… YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST and WE WARNED YOU!
Quote from an Official Google email dated 23May2008:

“The feature will be enabled by default, although it
won’t begin to affect your accounts until June 3, 2008.”

UPDATE! 23May2008 — Automatic Match to be the DEFAULT! see the full update at: Automatic Match to be Default

So far this “Automatic Match” option is only a beta and accessible by invitation only. BUT, If this monster goes live and removes our ability to “opt out” (like in Expanded Broad Match), something very, very ugly may happen:

•   No matter how large your budgets, they WILL be spent — every penny (and dollar)!

I was going to let you read the Beta help file, but it disappeared… IT’S BACK, but you will have to be logged into an AdWords account to get to it: Automatic Match

Summarizing:

Just build your campaigns and they will come. Heck, you no longer even have to offer any keywords — Google will look at your ad and your site and make sure your ads show for any search query that even “smells” relevant.

Did Google’s revenue drop in January scare them that badly?

There has been a lot of discussion on Google’s recent changes to the way that they handle expanded broad match (at WebMasterWorld , High Rankings Forum and other places).

We have come across a different issue that relates to the investigation of expanded broad match, and has wider-reaching repercussions for your PPC campaigns, as well as understanding oddities in interpreting Analytics. We have been seeing this issue for the last month or so (since Aug-Sep 2007), and according to the Google engineers with which I have discussed this: “the search results […] are the result intended behavior. When determining which ads to show on a Google search result page, the AdWords system evaluates the user’s previous search query as well as the current search query.”

The Google Match Problem

Google is combining the search queries from two successive searches when serving up the PPC ads. If a Google visitor makes a search, then uses the search box on the first search’s results page, the original query AND the second query are BOTH used to determine the ad to display. My colleague Jim Gilbert refers to this as the “Google 1-2 Punch”, and it can end up costing you money and leaving you confused if you don’t take steps to combat this new algorithm change.

Why is this a problem? Ads may be displayed for inappropriate searches, resulting in unnecessary expense for the advertiser.

Examples:
Using Google, search for:
Golf clubs
Then on that results page, search for:
Women’s perfume

Here is what I see:

In another example, I searched for:
mp3

And got these results:

These results look substantially different if I search for:
accessories
And then search for:
mp3

What Is Happening with Google AdWords

If the Google visitor uses the search box from one search to make a second search, when the second request is sent to the Google site, the HTTP_REFERER field is filled in with the URL of the first search request. In this second example, this means that the HTTP_REFERER line in the header would look like this:


GET /search?hl=en&q=mp3&btnG=Search HTTP/1.1
Referer: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=accessories


(There are other lines in the HTTP Request, but these two are the relevant ones.)

I believe that the Google site is seeing the q= parameter from the HTTP_REFERER in addition to the q= parameter from the actual GET request, and is using BOTH terms to determine the relevant PPC ads to display. Note that this issue is NOT reflected in the organic search results.

Try it for Yourself and See

It is easy to reproduce this issue for yourself: Search in one of your current PPC campaigns for a phrase match KW that is at least 3-4 words long (let’s say “Okra ice cream sundae”). (It also works for two word phrases, but this is my example). We want to select a phrase that does not include a shorter phrase that might trigger your PPC campaign. Therefore, insure that the phrase consisting of only the last half of the KW (e.g. “cream sundae”) does not trigger one of your ads. Starting with a newly opened browser, search for the first half of your KW phrase (”okra ice”). Then, using the search box on the results of that query, search for the 2nd half of your KW phrase (”cream sundae”). Your ad should appear (assuming the campaign is active, has remaining budget, etc.,etc.).

This is a factor for broad, phrase, and exact match KW phrases in your AdWords campaigns.

Why do I think it is the HTTP_REFERER field?

The problem is only seen if the visitor uses the form on the results of the first search to perform the second search. If you pass the same two URLs requesting the two searches, but either type the queries manually, cut and paste them, or use a bookmarked query, the organic search results are the same, but the PPC search results reflect ONLY the second query’s terms. In all three of these cases, the HTTP_REFERER is not filled in by the browser when sending the search request.

Insidious Part

Search engine marketers (SEMs) researching the effects of Expanded Broad Match tend to make a lot of back-to-back queries to see which of their PPC ads are being displayed. Since this effect only comes in to play when you make a 2nd search within the search box on the results page of an earlier search, SEMs are likely to have been tripped up by the Google 1-2 punch.

Both expanded broad match and the 1-2 punch have the effect of having an ad displayed for words that are not in the current search query, so many SEMs researching expanded broad match may actually have been seeing the effects of the 1-2 punch instead (or in addition).

What Can You Do About It?

Unfortunately, not a lot. There is nothing in the Google AdWords user interface that allows you to opt out of this new feature (nor the expanded broad match feature, which is dearly desired by many, but is unlikely to happen (See related artcile on Expanded Broad match)

There is a partial defense: the traditional defense against expanded broad match is to use negatives in the campaign to explicitly request that your ad NOT be displayed when one of those related terms is searched for. Thus, if I were selling stainless steel knives, I might include “pots” and “pans” in my negative list to keep my ad from matching to searches for stainless steel pots.

With the Google 1-2 punch, it appears that using a negative exact match phrase in the adgroup may prevent the ad from being displayed – even if that negated phrase is NOT the phrase being searched for in the second case!

For example, I set up a test PPC campaign with a single phrase match KW “okra ice cream sundae”. Searching for “okra ice” followed by “cream sundae” caused my ad to display (as expected). Here is the good news: Adding “–[sundae]” to my negatives list (which should prevent my ad from displaying if someone searched just for sundae also keeps my ad from displaying for the Google 1-2 punch. Curiously, using “-[ice]” keeps the Google 1-2 punch from happening, even if “ice” is not a part of the second search.

This is a work-around, and it will add needless complexity to your PPC campaigns. It will also increase the processing for the Google servers as customers’ negative lists expand extensively to counteract this issue. I firmly believe that the best solution is for Google to give AdWords customers the option of opting out of both expanded broad match and the Google 1-2 punch, and have the Google AdWords system work as advertised.

We will continue to research this issue, and provide updates as we learn more.

Summary of the Issue:

Around August 20, 2007 many clients’ Google AdWords accounts saw their cost/conversion skyrocket — in one particular case we saw it was over 100% increase. It was caused by a corrupted “Expanded Broad Match” algorithm.

What Caused it?

“Expanded broad match” was expanded by Google way too much. AdWords began showing ads for “expanded broad match” terms that were just not relevant to the broad keyword generating them.

What to do:

1) Stop using “Broad Match”! If you do use it Google kicks in “Expanded Broad Match” and you can not opt out of the expanded part.

2) Insist to your Google contacts that you be allowed to opt out of expanded broad match!
(We have tried for a couple years, but have made no progress.)

UPDATE: 10/16 — see 10/16 note below

The Rant, Some Interesting Thoughts and the Detail — if you like the fun stuff

The Real Title of this Post should be “Expanded Broad Match - Google’s EPS (Earnings Per Share) Equalizer”

Rarely will you find me crawling all over Google’s AdWords PPC offering. Compared to the alternatives (competition in other words), they have done a technically good job, understand usability, continue to grow their footprint and are somewhat responsive to user (and agency) needs.

However, “crawling” is now in order. Since Google announced their “expanded broad match” it has been a sore spot with all those who understand how it works and what it does. For over 2 years we have begged Google to allow AdWords clients to “opt out” of the “expanded broad match” — broad match as it was originally YES, expanded broad match as it is today NO, NO, NO!

Around mid to late August and into September several very valuable AdWords clients cost/conversion numbers went VERY FAR SOUTH (like in bad & the ugly) — in one case over doubling! Careful investigation revealed that the increase in conversion costs were directly related to a VERY FEW broad match terms.

Even further investigation identified “some” of the new “expanded broad match” terms that had kicked in and destroying the conversion costs. Expanded terms that DO NOT RELATE to the broad term in anything resembling an acceptable manner.

Demands to the usual Google contacts requesting an option to “opt out” to “expanded broad match” were (again) unsuccessful. We provided the documentation and our reps agreed that these documented instances were “kind of far out there”. They even offered to help find more negative keywords to prevent it from happening. In one case we let them try to add effective keywords is and existing list of over 1,200 ones — trust me there was little they could do. See, there is no tool for identifying what Google expands broad keywords to. There used to be, but it conveniently disappeared.

We have great Google Reps, but they can only consult with their superiors on making these types of changes — the reps do not have the power to make something like this happen. Nor do they have “thousands of users” complaining — since their are probably not thousands of users who understand or can detect what is really happening.

Why does Google refuse to allow opt out for “expanded broad match”? The original explanation I received for implementation of “expanded broad match” was to enhance the AdWords user’s experience and provide them a better variety of related ads. Started out innocent enough, but as Google went public and had to answer to the ridiculous quarterly financial demands put on public companies by “Wallstreet” they probably realized that killing “expanded broad match” would have a severely negative impact on AdWords revenue. Furthermore, with continued “Wallstreet” pressure following Google’s first time “missed quarter” Google probably sees this:

My Opinion Only and I will remove it if Google will allow us to opt out of “expanded broad match”.

Not only can they NOT AFFORD to allow opting out of “expanded broad match” — by just loosening the knob they can instantly and dramatically pump revenue up in seconds.

Now it’s time to monitor the “expanded broad match knob”. We have put things in place to detect this “knob turning”. Like last time, wouldn’t it look funny if the knob was loosened only during the mid to late quarter periods?

This is only the beginning — those smart enough to monitor and detect wasted click spend due to unsupportable expansion of terms will at some point do more than just beg or throw fits.

P.S. Relax… I am not a cynic or pessimist — The facts of the analysis support these conclusions (except maybe my final opinions).

UPDATE: 10/16:
Appears the Expanded Broad Match Knob was screwed back in in a good bit. I screamed and hollered and Google backed off — doubtful. What is more likely is that they had pumped revenue all they could for the quarter ending Sep (3Q) and backed off during early 4Q (and Hoping they don’t have to do that ever again?).

Rumor has it that new Yahoo executives are running around the trough asking other Yahooers about the direction of the company and what needs to be done. Ain’t that a laugh!

From my experience with the Yahooers I’m allowed to interact with they are part of the problem — not part of the solution.

Many recommendations have been forwared to Yahoo (from little ole me) regarding their PPC systems and to date NOT ONE has ever been implemented. But then, what do I know since I’ve only used PPC systems for years to manage many, many client accounts? A couple of these recommendations were almost guaranteed to put lots of $$$$ in Yahoo’s pockets.

So Yahoo… this is an open challenge to see if your new executives are serious about making improvements and money! Talk to the “right” people — yes, I’m one of them and not that hard to find.

You might even want to keep in mind that at least one high level executive on “Wall Street” values my opinon. That’s kind of funny… Wall Street wants my opinons on Yahoo, but Yahoo doesn’t.

Heck, we are already blocking some of those babies as this is being written.

Google just released a new feature for AdWords advertisers. Advertisers can now specify if they do not want their ads to show up for specific IP addresses.

Visit the Search Engine Roundtable post or Google IP Blocking Help for more…

Please tell us there will be more specific information on this odd announcement! Calls to the support center don’t appear to help, since the agents don’t seen to know much about it.

The email from Microsoft:
We’re writing to notify you that your Microsoft adCenter Terms and Conditions are updated. The changes take effect on April 30, 2007.

Some of the key adjustments to your Terms and Conditions include:
— “Microsoft may use matching criteria other than keyword searches to display your
advertisements.”
(Huh?)

— “Microsoft may display your advertisements on its network of advertising channels operated
by the Microsoft network of participating websites and other distribution outlets.”
(Huh?)

And you have to love their closing:
“If you do not consent to these revised Terms and Conditions, you may cancel your adCenter program relationship with Microsoft at any time… blah, blah…, blah…”