Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Google Inc. reported late Thursday third-quarter profit rose 92% on another strong surge in revenue from the ads it places next to Internet search results, sending its shares higher in after-hours trading.
Something interesting which may have some competitive advantage to AdSense webmasters is the emerging market information.
He said revenue growth was particularly strong in the U.K., the Netherlands, Spain, France, Italy and Australia. He also noted that India and Brazil, which he considers emerging markets, were growing at "high rates."
It would seem if there's a new influx of advertising money from those countries then it makes sense to target those regional markets as they expand to take advantage of the emerging revenue click streams.
Anyone seen any visible upward revenue trends from these countries?
500k hits a day x 30 = 15m.... i was so close.. but i guess I'll have to see if my account gets the formal "bye your out" in waiting for a reply from google about those invalid clicks they froze my payments over! (and yes it froze my associated business adsense account which I logged in with the same ip)
We agree: the profit margin is probably larger on the high-volume more-clued-up publishers, which is why G can afford to give some margin back. Also, it's fewer accounts to check for violations, and probably accounts with a public reputation that they don't want to loose.
As regards server-side ad insertion, since G does not yet support mobile XHTML I've gone to another network for my new mobile site, and it is neat just having the ad link straight in the page with no JS fluff. You can imagine how some of the folks round here would be tempted to "adjust" the AS URL or text a little to, ahem, "help" the advertiser get more clicks. %->
Rgds
Damon
Small sites can grow enormously, large sites can only grow some. Google saves a ton of money on advertising Adsense by picking up new Adsense'rs in their infancy. Plus if Google has a site in its fold that explodes overnight, Google does not miss the income transient. Why else would Google pay $100.00 for a signup!
Time and time again we've heard that it's only one or two pages on a site that produce most of the income; small sites have one or two pages too! The probability of writing that super hit page is probably similar regardless of site size, I'd guess the smaller site has a higher probability of a BIG hit page.
When you look at the total picture, over time, small sites are probably a better investment for Google and actually have lower overhead on average. Because there are so many, they will produce a more stable income stream, it's like diversifying in the Stock Market. And, not trading in the market makes sure you don't miss that transient surge day, when all the money for the year is earned on a single stock (site).
From Google Adsense
When a publisher that signed up for Google AdSense through your referral earns their initial $100.00 and is eligible for payout, we'll credit your account with $100.00. *
* A Google AdSense referral is counted when a publisher, who has never previously enrolled in Google AdSense, creates an account and earns at least $100.00 within 180 days of sign-up. The referred publisher must be eligible for payment to qualify as a successful referral.
Time and time again we've heard that it's only one or two pages on a site that produce most of the income
I hadn't heard that, and it certainly hasn't been my experience. If it's true, it just goes to show the value of diversity--not just for Google, but also for publishers.
I completely agree with your sentiment. But in terms of cost, the logic is flawed. [As an aside, nobody really knows who gets what, even if we make the distinction between Premium and Plebs, there are sites in the $US500,000+ pa club who aren't Premium, likewise many Premiums who aren't in the $US500,000+ club, so this is not a good way to split the groups].
But I digress - why is the logic flawed? Because, service levels are often tailored to the importance of a customer. How many people have complained about generic responses? These are often banned sites, or low income. Then how many people with higher income (UPS club etc) thank Google for personalised response? Both got service, but one takes more time than the other.
The second part is that in this kind of business, customers take more resources at the start and this drops off over time - regardless of their income. In adsense, I am sure most people see a significant rise in income at the start. This means that someone starting out at $10 a day could easily be on a $100 or $1000 a day within a few months. Even if the income is static at $10, the resources needed are likely to be less as time goes by. For Google: income up, costs down. You can't just look at where you are now - you most follow the path that lead you there. Jeez. now I'm sounding like a Yoda nerd, and I don't even like Star Wars.
certainly to the extent that some page designs earn a lot more than others... not everyone understands that, of course, and the total number pages the site has can be a factor in sorting it out.
But I digress - why is the logic flawed? Because, service levels are often tailored to the importance of a customer.
You may think my logic is flawed but having been a director of engineering in a few software firms I know for a fact we spent a lot more money on the support of low end customers than we did on the high end customers, and the same is true at my wife's company.
I also base my conclusion on the flood of silly AdSense support problems from the low end based on the types of questions we see in forums like this, so you can imagine what the Google AdSense support queue must look like.
Like you wouldn't want to poke it with a long pole.
I cannot stand CSR work because of the number of people who willfully just won't think or help themselves or use or accept logic. I greatly admire CSR staff who can work through a customer's problem regardless.
When I was an early UK ISP and was subsidising each and every customer from my own pocket, the smallest were the shrillest and the most expensive to service. One guy paying me £10/month kept changing all his equipment and software, and then calling me at odd hours of the night demanding fixes.
Rgds
Damon
