Google is the real greedy player, the rest are wannabes.

:)

It isn't a blacklist, it's a price-adjustment mechanism.

And it's designed to tie the price for a click to the actual value of that click for the advertiser. You can argue about whether Smart Pricing works as advertised (though Google is likely to have better data than you do), but without smart pricing or something like it, one of two things would occur:

1) Advertisers would avoid the content network, and bids would drop accordingly, or...

2) Google would need to give advertisers greater control over where their ads appear, which would benefit high-profile niche sites with decent traffic but would take income away from rank-and-file publishers of low-traffic, low-visibility sites.

Ayone know , what is the 'Smarp Pricing' cycle..

It seems to correct click values up or down every few days .. a week maybe..

Maybe, just maybe it would be more benefitial to concentrate on improving ads placement and section targeting in order to increase ad conversion rates instead of trying to fool the smartpricing system.

My subjective judgement is that hat this approach can work in favour of a publisher too.

I've said this before in other threads and I'll say it again... smart pricing can be both good _and_ bad for you, but it's ultimately a reflection on the quality of the visitors you're sending to the advertiser.

What most people forget is that smart pricing means that your earnings per click can go UP if you exceed the median conversion rate for that advertiser.

When an advertiser sets a maximum bid for an adword it does not mean that they will be charged that maximum bid ( I know because I use AdWords too ).

If your site is a known to produce clients that convert poorly ///relative to the median for that advertiser/// then you will be paid less. On the other hand, if your site produces clients that convert higher than the median, you will be paid MORE ( because the advertiser will have to bid higher to get a place on -your- pages ).

So, if you're finding that you're being smart-priced down, then perhaps sit down and consider if the people you're sending to the advertisers are being sent there for the right reasons.

By working from the median conversion rate it means that situations like late-conversions (ie, client comes back at a later date) and poor landing pages (ie, advertiser sucks at converting) are nullified.

What most people forget is that smart pricing means that your earnings per click can go UP if you exceed the median conversion rate for that advertiser.

I'm not sure this is the case. As I understand it, Random Pricing(tm) is a discount - therefore if an advertiser bids 10c per click, that is the maximum you will get (less Google's share). It's never going to increase above that.

The other thing that is worth re-stating is that smart pricing is basically a mechanism to increase Google's profit. OK - they say that it's an inducement to advertisers, but as an advertiser myself I've never seen the mythical discount. I think you need to spend a lot of bucks with them in order to be able to shout with conviction before they will actually give you a discount. Small advertisers - forget it! I'm sure that someone gets a discount on my clicks, but it's not me. Now who does that leave? Hmmm.....

The other thing I'd say is that when I've experienced a sharp increase in traffic and clicks (such as the time I got listed at top position in search), epc falls immediately. I rather suspect Google use smart pricing to cream off extra profit.

David_uk,

Does Google state anywhere that SmartPricing is strictly a discount-only process (a genuine question, not a retort)?

Tx.

Read the information provided by Google. They only talk of a reduction in advertiser costs. There's no hint that it can work the other way. (In effect they'd be smart pricing themselves, which I consider highly unlikely)

Well, from the advertisers perspective there can only be a reduction below their bidded price. Google cannot normally afaik increase the bid price beyond what the advertiser has bidded.

I should hope google announce smartpricing a failure in the next few weeks... it's a disaster and everyone knows it's a waste of time for us publishers.

I should hope google announce smartpricing a failure in the next few weeks... it's a disaster and everyone knows it's a waste of time for us publishers.

In a perfect world all MFA's and the like would be smartpriced out of business.

I guess in a perfect world there would be no MFA's to begin with. <sigh>

[edited by: Scurramunga at 11:10 am (utc) on July 19, 2006]

I should hope google announce smartpricing a failure in the next few weeks...

It's been in place for two years, and AdSense revenues have grown enormously during that time. Some failure. :-)

it's a disaster and everyone knows it's a waste of time for us publishers.

Smart pricing was designed to protect Google's customers: the advertisers who pay money to Google. And ultimately it benefits publishers, too, by expanding the pool of advertisers for the AdSense "content network."

Some publishers are hurt badly by smart pricing, and some aren't. That's understandable, because not all types of content and not all audiences perform equally well for advertisers. The alternative to smart pricing would be to let advertisers have more control over where their ads run. For one approach to this possibility, see the thread "SMART SELECT: Smart ad placement as an alternative to smart pricing" at:

[webmasterworld.com...]

Some publishers are hurt badly by smart pricing, and some aren't. That's understandable, because not all types of content and not all audiences perform equally well for advertisers.

Very true, which is why I don't understand the constant debate over SmartPricing. In fact, many advertisers do not employ conversion tracking and the entire idea seems to stall when this isn't monitored.

The alternative to smart pricing would be to let advertisers have more control over where their ads run.

And this will eventually squeeze out the MFA's, scrapers, and any other sites that lack quality.

greedyplayer, quite a few publishers have been able to keep their EPC stable or even improve it, so I don't think you should overgeneralize from your own experience.

I've been in AdSense for over 2 and half years, going back to before Smart Pricing was introduced, in April/May of 2004. When it was, I did see my site's EPC decline, by maybe 20-30% over a span of several months. Since then I have found ways to gradually bring it back up, and is now higher than it was before Smart Pricing was introduced.

I hope Google improves Smart Pricing. I don't expect they will dump it....

many advertisers do not employ conversion tracking and the entire idea seems to stall when this isn't monitored.

When smart pricing was introduced, Google indicated that the type of content was a factor in determining the anticipatd likelihood of conversion. Two examples were given: a camera-review page (more likely to convert) and a page of photo tips (less likely to convert).

Google obviously possesses huge amounts of data, and it may know--to use just one hypothetical example--that clicks from a forum on a social-networking site are less likely to convert on average than clicks from a product review on a niche editorial site. If that's the case, an ad for the keyword "camera" on the talking-teenyboppers.com forum will be discounted more than an ad for the same keyword on a photography magazine's Web site. And even if the assumptions aren't perfect (who knows--maybe a bunch of rich teenagers are talking about a photographic shopping spree), overall averages are what count.

The alternative to smart pricing would be to let advertisers have more control over where their ads run.

And this will eventually squeeze out the MFA's, scrapers, and any other sites that lack quality.

Smart pricing can do the same thing, but I like my "Smart Select" proposal better, since it would let advertisers have greater control without having to micromanage site lists (and without hurting publishers of mom-and-pop sites that don't get enough traffic to justify an advertiser's time and attention).

When smart pricing was introduced, Google indicated that the type of content was a factor in determining the anticipatd likelihood of conversion. Two examples were given: a camera-review page (more likely to convert) and a page of photo tips (less likely to convert).

Yes. I've read that camera scenario in the Adwords News Achive many times. In fact, the piece you're referring to EFV, says: "We take into account many factors such as what keywords or concepts triggered the ad, as well as the type of site on which the ad was served."

I think many will argue that even though Google retains a lot of data, and have diverse algos that determine the concept and keywords on a site -- this process doesn't work very well without more stable evidence of a conversion on the other side.

Google is basically saying: "We have an idea (by estimating) whether a user will become a sale if they click an ad on your site."

But what if you have webmasters who haven't optimized their pages correctly? What happens if strategic SEO techniques aren't followed?

It appears that Google's theory will penalize such sites -- even though they may be aesthetically pleasing and content-rich. Since we don't know exactly how the algo works, it's difficult to determine if it picks up other relevant content when a publishers' site isn't optimized as well as it could be.

Again, many of these issues could be solved if advertisers were allowed to use an idea like your "Smart Select" plan.

But would Google step out of the way and allow advertisers that much leeway?

But would Google step out of the way and allow advertisers that much leeway?

Since AdSense was launched in 2003, Google has given advertisers three forms of control that weren't available in the beginning:

- A domain filter

- Site-targeted CPM ads

- Separate bidding for the search and content networks

So it isn't completely unreasonable to think that, as the network evolves, advertisers will have more control (and more options) than they do now.

It appears that Google's theory will penalize such sites

Since we don't know the details of how smart pricing works in general or how it affects our sites individually, I don't see how you can come to that conclusion.

Anyway, needless to say such a system can't be perfect. But clearly Google felt they needed to do something to restore confidence in the content network. And if smart pricing did not exist, content network advertisers would tend to bid less or not at all.

There's no question some sites have been affected more than others, but whether publishers would be better off overall if smart pricing had never existed is impossible to know.

So it isn't completely unreasonable to think that, as the network evolves, advertisers will have more control (and more options) than they do now.

Exactly. So let's hope there is a substantial amount of control given to quality advertisers in the near future.

Since we don't know the details of how smart pricing works in general or how it affects our sites individually, I don't see how you can come to that conclusion.

I probably should have worded that differently. I didn't mean to imply that Google would levy some numerical penalty against publishers. Instead, a publishers' site may be denoted as a low-conversion site, which eventually affects EPC.

But Google clearly states in the Google News Archive message that EFV and I referred to:

"We are constantly analyzing data across our network, and if our data shows that a click is less likely to turn into business results (e.g. online sale, registration, phone call, newsletter sign-up), we may reduce the price you pay for that click. You may notice a reduction in the cost of clicks from content sites."

In other words, if you're a publisher and Google's algo... (which I know isn't perfect)... doesn't categorize your site as a "good converter", then you will likely make less money (lower EPC) than a publisher whose site is liked by Google's algo.

If an advertiser is using conversion tracking and tells Google: "Yes... EFV's site sent me 10 visitors looking for travel information about Hudiksvall, Sweden -- and all 10 purchased travel books from me."

That's bonafide tracking of ROI.

But if the same advertiser is not using conversion tracking, but can say: "Yes... EFV's site sent me 5 visitors looking for information about Nice, France -- and all 5 purchased travel books from me."

Still good ROI, but Google will not know this if it doesn't think the publisher's website is a "good converter". Google would come to this conclusion based on its algo which supposedly analyzes results and estimates whether or not a site converts well.

But I agree, jomaxx.... something is better than nothing, and I hope the future sees some type of improvement.

We've never had a problem with smart pricing. We get good, quality traffic that converts. Keep the site relevant and full of good, original content and smart pricing stays at bay.

And Google can pay publishers whatever it wants. Before AdSense, there were few decent ways to make a content site pay. So, instead of being angry at not being paid enough, whatever that is, maybe being grateful that content sites at least have a way to monetize is a better route. If you don't like the game, then don't play.

>> hope Google improves Smart Pricing. I don't expect they will dump it.... <<

I hate G, but I do love smart pricing... Yeah, yeah, yeah, throw egg on me all you want. I sleep good at night NOT because I'm earning OK money, but because I have stable and controlable growth in my adsense framework. I don't ever worry about it crashing on me overnight ever since things seem to be semi stabilized. Believe it or not, I see traffic fluxes at times on my site and smart pricing attempting to make up the difference in revenue to me because it seems to trust me as a source. Lastly, smart pricing is trying to address companies relying on it as a major source of revenue. Meaning, if you are serious about your business and play by what they define as ethical, then they will stand by you and not slice your throat in the drop of a hat, which we all have experienced getting to learn smart pricing.

Smart pricing is a coming along nicely as technology, just not for the MFAs...

Despite ups and downs, my site's monthly ecpm averages are now about at least 5 times higher than when I first started.

I definately get my ups and downs with AdSense - but SmartPricing isn't something I'm worried about. I've only ever seen my income going /up/ on a monthly overview.