|
View previous topic
::
View next topic
|
| What is your most successful Adsense ad size? |
| 468 x 60 Banner |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| 120 x 600 Skyscraper |
|
66% |
[ 4 ] |
| 728 x 90 Leaderboard |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| 300 x 250 Inline rectangle |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| I don't know - never tested different adsense sizes |
|
33% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 6 |
|
| Author |
Message |
elbavaro
Joined:
13 Jul 2003
Posts:
28
|
Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2003 7:46 am
Post subject: What is your most successful Adsense ad size?
|
 |
|
After most of us being many months into the adsense program I would like to ask again some of the most basic questions concerning adsense.
Browsing through this forum I found many times questions about size, position and color of the adsense ads. Most of these topics ended in "never tested any different size" or "heard that this works better than that.." or "depends on the type of website adsense is on.." or or or.
This poll is about :
"What is your most successful Adsense ad size?"
This does not mean what type of ad size you are using, but the ad size which you so far tested worked best.
Therefore I thought it could be a new starting point to find out - what each of us is using in terms of size - color - and position of the adsense ads.
I think discussing these issues is not againgst Google adsense terms - but if Allan think's it is, he might freeze this topic.
Please participate in this poll.
_________________
EL Bavaro |
|
| Back to top |
  |
 |
Debs
Joined:
16 Aug 2003
Posts:
4296
Location:
NY
|
Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2003 2:59 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
I would think, at least at this time, this will be hard to test. Unless you change all ads on the site, test, change again, test.
Once Google gets the by domain or by page tracking live, then I can really offer my feelings on this.
Debs
_________________
Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charlie
Joined:
22 Aug 2003
Posts:
3305
Location:
UK
|
Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2003 4:32 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
I agree with Debs...
As someone who runs many small sites (which I am gradually trying to get accepted for Adsense), the absence of individual page (not site) tracking is more than annoying.
Cheers,
Charlie.
_________________
"Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
Guest
|
Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2003 2:19 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
| We'll never see individual page tracking. Just too much opportunity to abuse the system or otherwise create fraud in a high dollar PPC environment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Debs
Joined:
16 Aug 2003
Posts:
4296
Location:
NY
|
Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2003 2:44 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
Individual Page tracking, never see it? Please fill me in on why you think so ... it's my wish to see it!! 
Thanks,
Debs
_________________
Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charlie
Joined:
22 Aug 2003
Posts:
3305
Location:
UK
|
Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2003 1:04 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Just too much opportunity to abuse the system or otherwise create fraud in a high dollar PPC environment. |
Are you meaning fraudulent clicks? If so, why the difference for pages rather than sites, re tracking?
I am still quite new to Adsense, but I would have taken much more interest sooner if I hadn't had to group everything together.
Cheers,
Charlie.
_________________
"Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepoolroom
Joined:
11 Dec 2003
Posts:
89
Location:
Australia
|
Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2003 10:40 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
Charlie, I think 'Guest' meant that if Google provided page-by-page stats, it would make it easier for people to 'game' the system - targetting very specific high-pay search terms, tweaking and retweaking their pages to get the ads they want on pages that rank highly in the search engines.
Google wants people to just concentrate on providing good content, and they'll figure out which ads to serve you.
I guess the assumption underlying this is that people who try really hard to go after very high-pay search terms are not likely to be offering high-quality content about those topics. They're just chasing dollars.
_________________
http://www.OneStopUnder.com - serious reading for serious photographers. |
|
| Back to top |
 |
|
Charlie
Joined:
22 Aug 2003
Posts:
3305
Location:
UK
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2003 11:24 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
| thepoolroom wrote: | | Charlie, I think 'Guest' meant that if Google provided page-by-page stats, it would make it easier for people to 'game' the system - targetting very specific high-pay search terms, tweaking and retweaking their pages to get the ads they want on pages that rank highly in the search engines. |
Maybe it's a matter of degree, but show me someone who says they put Adsense on their site for any other reason than to make money, and I'll question their honesty.
"Tweaking" pages to get good returns (with relevant content) is surely the way to approach Adsense. Tracking is one of the most important aspects of marketing generally, and online this is made easy. People expect this nowadays.
| Quote: | | I guess the assumption underlying this is that people who try really hard to go after very high-pay search terms are not likely to be offering high-quality content about those topics. They're just chasing dollars. |
If that's the assumption, I think it's a dangerous generalisation. It's a bit like saying magazines that charge more for adverts are a worse read (because they are trying to attract advertising revenue).
It might be true, but it certainly isn't the norm.
Just my opinion,
Charlie.
_________________
"Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepoolroom
Joined:
11 Dec 2003
Posts:
89
Location:
Australia
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2003 11:49 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
Just to make it clear - I wasn't saying I agreed, I was just saying I think that's why Google wants to limit the stats.
The magazine analogy is interesting. I've stopped buying certain photography magazines because they pander too much to the advertisers. They never tell you when a product stinks, and they never give a bad review, for fear of offending their regular advertisers and damaging their income stream. It makes for bland reading.
_________________
http://www.OneStopUnder.com - serious reading for serious photographers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charlie
Joined:
22 Aug 2003
Posts:
3305
Location:
UK
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:56 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
Hello again.
| thepoolroom wrote: | | Just to make it clear - I wasn't saying I agreed, I was just saying I think that's why Google wants to limit the stats. |
Don't feel the need to justify your opinions for my sake.
Besides, I think disagreement on forums is a pretty good idea generally. Either way, you get used to it after a while. 
Anyway, maybe guest will come back and explain what "he" actually meant in the first place.
| Quote: | | The magazine analogy is interesting. I've stopped buying certain photography magazines because they pander too much to the advertisers. They never tell you when a product stinks, and they never give a bad review, for fear of offending their regular advertisers and damaging their income stream. It makes for bland reading. |
I wonder what their advertisers would prefer... less biased reviews or a drastic reduction in exposure (due to reduced circulation)?
Perhaps a few other people will stop buying and then the publishers will have their answer.
All the best,
Charlie.
_________________
"Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
Guest
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2003 4:14 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
poolroom, in his/her post timed at Sat Dec 13, 2003 10:40 pm, summed it up perfectly. From reading other message boards, primarily WebmasterWorld, I'm sensing increased problems with dishonest webmasters.
Think about it, if individual page tracking and reporting became available, not only would this type of keyword fraud become more prevalent on existing sites, people would just set up lots of one page sites doing the same thing since once you are in the program, you can add your AdSense code to any other site you are legally authorized to act on behalf of.
As with everything, the rule breakers spoil it for everyone. Google's primary responsibility is to protect their advertisers. While Google's way of reporting our AdSense earnings certainly isn't optimal, I'd rather have it this way than to see advertisers pull out of content sites. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
Guest
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2003 4:19 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Maybe it's a matter of degree, but show me someone who says they put Adsense on their site for any other reason than to make money, and I'll question their honesty. |
There are honest ways to make money from the AdSense program and there are dishonest ways to make money from the AdSense program. It's Google's responsibility to weed out the dishonest among AdSense publishers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepoolroom
Joined:
11 Dec 2003
Posts:
89
Location:
Australia
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2003 10:31 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
Haha, no problem here with disagreement! I just haven't made up my mind on this one - I can see both sides.
It would look bad to many Adsense advertisers if lots of people set up mini-sites just to get people to click on their ads. They'd think it wasn't very targetted traffic, and not worth paying lots of money for (I'd like to see evidence before I agreed with that, though). I reckon they'd much rather see their ads on large, popular sites directly related to the topic of the ads.
BTW, the magazines are blaming their falling sales on the growth of the internet, not on their editorial policy. They think people are getting all the same information for free instead of paying for magazines.
Personally I think people prefer the internet because you can find unbiased information there, and often with a technical standard far higher than the magazines offer. So most of them still don't get the message and change their style.
_________________
http://www.OneStopUnder.com - serious reading for serious photographers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
