Forum Moderators: martinibuster
I took a look at the channel "footer" and supprisingly saw twice as much click value to that of my channel for "header".
The Header is a 726x90 Leaderboard; (smartpriced income)
The Footer is a 468x60 Banner; (above/normal income)
What I decided to do was move the 468x60 banner with it's channel name "footer" ironcily to the Header position, obviously with the false channel naming I will have to remember I moved things about.
The next day I ran through how much the "Footer" in the header is earning me and noticably a big increase.
I can't say if its the channel which has been failed to be smartpriced or if each banner size has their own smartpricing, anyway it made a big difference.
Downfalls of the change:
0.25% CTR to 0.04% CTR (could this be the reason for the increase in value)
Ecpm dropped by half, telling me that my value per 1000 page visits has been reduced, in that likely event I'll probably earn conciderably less today then I would usualy.
So earn less? But increase your click value.
---feedback?
Interesting that they may now have smart pricing down to the channel - thanks!
I was always under the impression that smart pricing was on an account by account basis not a channel by channel basis. Can anyone confirm which way it is.
That's the information available from a post on an Adsense-related blog a few months ago. It's kind of bubbled all around, but so far is the only original mention. I haven't seen or read anything where Google has addressed it. And, since they'd be the only ones able to confirm or deny...
Can anyone confirm which way it is.
I don't believe that anyone really knows the answer to that including AdSense!
Theres really nothing I can do , ctr is so poor at 0.04% now, if it was 0.25% with the click value im now getting id be happy, it's either poor value or poor CTR i can't win.
I can't say if its the channel which has been failed to be smartpriced or if each banner size has their own smartpricing
why on earth should every income change be due to smartpricing?
you cannot derive solid conclusions if you compare different banner sizes on different positions simultaneously. comparisons without all other things leaving untouched lead to nothing. naturally an ad block with less ads yields higher epc and lower ctr. i tell you, this has nothing to do with smartpricing, as most of the issues reported here in this forum. by the way, smartpricing is believed to kick in not until a week after the changes (whereas this alone could be another myth).
For those with low ctr %, please explain where the ads are placed and if your site has much traffic. There must be something wrong with what you are doing?
For those with low ctr %, please explain where the ads are placed and if your site has much traffic. There must be something wrong with what you are doing?
Whats more the leaderboard is paying only 16 cents a click when the banner pays off a nice 40 cents a click.
What can i say tricky situation huh.
but reduction from 0.25% to 0.04% by changing the ad from a leaderboard to a banner in the same position really is sickening.
sickening but absolutely normal. what did you expect for the ctr of an ad block if you reduce the number of ads in it?
the user has less choice between the ads = less probability that an ad interests him = less clicks = ctr down.
on the other hand: only the few best performing ads appear if you reduce the number of ads = clicks are usually worth more = epc up.
sorry, but you just sound like you couldn't comprehend what's going on. tricky? maybe, but it's really no rocket science.
[edited by: moTi at 9:32 pm (utc) on Sep. 26, 2006]
Life sucks now.
Interesting that they may now have smart pricing down to the channel - thanks!
yes... interesting indeed.
could this be the reason why there's now that additional bit of code when you generate a custom channel?
[webmasterworld.com...]
maybe Ann's 'little' experiment wasn't so little after all...
[webmasterworld.com...]
You and I both know that that change is meaningless, as it does nothing more than put the NAME of the channel in the code, to go with the number used to designate the channel--a name which Google already "knows," but hadn't linked so simply to the channel code for us before.....
andrew, it's not nice to pull people's legs like that!
;)
but... but... oh all right... bad boy... baaaad, baaaad boy...
I'll go sit in the corner now...
Google did not know what indexing are for the last years..
obviously google are lame and did not realise that a channel name takes longer to process in a database SQL engine because int is faster than text they changed this to a number, forgetting about us publishers and finaly gave it a commented reference for us to not get so confused.
Also, the small single ad ones (234*60) that I had put inbetween posts on my newssite do not perform well. I will switch to 250*250 ads for my next website version with more ads and to my intuition also a better payout per click.
I can't say if its the channel which has been failed to be smartpriced or if each banner size has their own smartpricing, anyway it made a big difference.
You could just have swapped the channel numbers for the "footer" and "header" and you would have known the answer! :-)
