Yes, and they account for those clicks in your traffic reports. But how does being paid by the click make you a "salesman," unless you're encouraging your users to click on the ads?

If I sell something, then I'm a salesman.

If I'm selling clicks, I want to know what was clicked.

What part of that don't you understand?

Nope. I'm just capable of looking beyond "It's all about what I want" to see the bigger picture.

You're not making sense.

ASA said:

You can report sites that you suspect are distributing others' copyrighted material through the Report a Policy Violation form

Did just that several days ago and it's still there in the SERPS.

Oh well!

If I'm selling clicks.

Again, you're not selling clicks. Google is selling clicks, for which you're being paid an unspecified share by Google according to the contract that you agreed to when you joined AdSense.

I want to know what was clicked.

Sure, and I want a guaranteed AdSense income of $100,000 per month. That doesn't mean I'm entitled to it, or that I have a legitimate complaint if Google doesn't choose to let me rewrite the AdSense-publisher contract.

<slightly OT>Historically it isn't very often I agree with EFV :)
But on this one IMO he is absolutely right about who is selling what .

Try to see it this way ..simili

You are the owner of two malls...in which you have some vacant shop units ( web pages on two sites , two distinct site subjects).you want to rent these shop units out ..but you dont want to have to organise it all and find commercial tenants ,chase non payers , evict bad guys etc etc
One mall is is the restaurant area of town ..
The other is where the chic boutiques are ..

Google ( the middle man space broker ) .says "I can get you some temporary tenants in each shop unit ..they'll each fit right in with the respective malls themes ..only thing is I dont know how much they'll each pay per day or month or year ..and some will be short stay ..like one day ..and some will keep coming back ..and some may stay a month or a year" .."But I, google will give you a cut of whatever rents I get ..but some people will only want to pay me if they make sales from your shop units ..so the money may vary quite a bit ..but I'll give whatever your percentage is to you monthly..trust me on the percentage ".." anytime we disagree we are free to walk ..Ok ? ..

You sign up ..

( I actually know a chain of fresh produce shops here in France who are in fact shops within another shop ..and whose daily rent is based on how much they sell daily ..and that depends on how many customers the main shop attracts in ..and there is a middle man / agency looks after the paperwork ..eveybody makes money )

Now back to your shop units in these "malls" ..
You arent selling the space / clicks to the tenants ..Google is ..they are the "broker" ..they give you a percentage of their take ..they dont tell you their gross ..nor their net and they dont let you see their books ..( and on the other hand you dont let them see how much you spent on pizzas whilst you were coding your pages )..

If their customers make money ..they do ..and you do ..

Anytime you are ( all 3 of the parties which are involved ) free to walk away ..

Those who are the least satisfied with brokerage deals like these are those whose sole income is from the brokerage deal ..ie websites with no direct advertisers ( or few ) and relying on adsense for the mortgage / beer money / clothes etc .

Those who are the most contented are those who have diverse income streams from their sites or elsewhere and who dont depend on Google ..

Now I'm very very suspicious of Google and the furthest thing from a G fanboi you could ever meet ..But the above is basically the deal ..

You don't sell clicks ..they do ..you agree that they will pay you an unknown percentage of the clicks they sell out of your space ..

they could make the deals details more transparent ..but don't hold your breath ..meantime your efforts are best spent on diversifying your revenue streams

<back to normal service>

i disagree.
because it's our page content that actually makes them do the clicking.

if you write a page reviewing a particular camera, for example, and google puts up an ad for that camera, then it's our page content and layout that makes them click it, every bit as much as google's link text and snippet.

if the advertiser was only paying for the impressions, and not the clicks, then i would agree that it's google doing all the selling. but when they are paying for the click, and not the impression, then it's US that's doing the selling. placing the ad on the page is just half the story. it's up to us to tailor the page content to make the person click.

to say that we don't have any involvement in securing any subsequent sale for the advertiser is silly -- because google wouldn't be able to sign up any new advertisers at all if all they could offer them was impressions and unqualified leads.

advertisers sign up to adwords because they want qualified leads, which is 50% down to us.

[edited by: londrum at 12:50 pm (utc) on May 30, 2009]

to say that we don't have any involvement in securing the clicks for the advertiser is silly

I didn't say that :)

you are providing the venue for the potential click..
not selling the click ..google is
the distinction is a fine one ..but it exists ..

the better the venue ..the better the click ..and the more clicks ..etc ..

again ..I'm not defending them ..

I'm just saying what the deal is ..and who is playing which role .

[edited by: Leosghost at 12:52 pm (utc) on May 30, 2009]

well that's the important thing, anyway, i reckon. google is selling clicks, not impressions.

if they were just selling impressions then they could rightly lay claim to being the salesman. but getting clicks is partly reliant on us, on our layout, and our page content. so they can't claim to be the sole salesman.

not that they are, of course. because they don't say anything. that is the problem.

Again, you're not selling clicks. Google is selling clicks, for which you're being paid an unspecified share by Google according to the contract that you agreed to when you joined AdSense.

Why are you telling me the obvious about contracts? I am requesting Google improve transparency, I'm not saying they did anything illegal.

When you sell anything online through affiliates, you get to know what was sold. In the case of AdSense we're selling clicks, not ad space. I don't get paid for renting space to Google, if the space is not CLICKED I don't get paid.

Sure, and I want a guaranteed AdSense income of $100,000 per month. That doesn't mean I'm entitled to it, or that I have a legitimate complaint if Google doesn't choose to let me rewrite the AdSense-publisher contract.

Who's talking about contracts here?

[edited by: incrediBILL at 2:15 pm (utc) on May 31, 2009]
[edit reason] removed OT comments [/edit]

When you sell anything online through affiliates, you get to know what was sold. In the case of AdSense we're selling clicks, not ad space. I don't get paid for renting space to Google, if the space is not CLICKED I don't get paid.

But you do rent space to them ..( the thing is they only pay you rent ( a percentage of what they get ) when there is a successful in theirs and the advertisers eyes ) click ..like my real life shop within a shop example ..

Biased in their favour as regards the exchange of info ..sure it is ..

but the alternative is to reduce your dependance on them ..because they arent going to become crystal clear about anything anytime soon ..they even use third parties ( like jensense ) to trickle out info ..IMO so that if it goes wrong they can say that it never actually came from them ..especially about the "blend" issues etc ..

I dont think they are "great" ( so I dont beleve they can "stay great" )..but you can use them ..as they use you ..just dont trust them and theirs ..nor rely upon them for consistency , clarity or your online existence ..mortgage ..etc ..

They are never going to be transparent ..especially not when their official reps ( PR posters ) here or elsewhere say they are ..

[edited by: martinibuster at 8:31 am (utc) on May 31, 2009]
[edit reason] Removed OT remarks. [/edit]

Actually I enjoy S_John's posts very much. They show a very very strong pro G bias , almost as if he works there.. so it is really good to have a defacto G voice in the forum.

Let's see....I'm one of the guys who always warns against keeping all of one's eggs in one basket, who has said more than once that AdSense is merely a source of incremental income on my site (after display ads and affiliate links), and I sound like someone who works for Google? That's pretty funny.

Fact is, I'm not "pro-Google" or "anti-Google." I'm pro-common sense, and I think quite a few AdSense publishers would be happier (and more prosperous) if they spent as much time thinking about publishing as they do poring over their AdSense stats.

Here two off-the-cuff suggestions for how to improve the program by helping AdSense publishers focus on publishing instead of on AdSense:

1) Eliminate real-time stats. Publish daily traffic and earnings reports at the end of the day, not before.

2) Eliminate channel reporting, which just encourages tail-wagging-the-dog Web publishing ("My page about mesothelioma earns more than my page about Mother Teresa, so I'll turn my Lives of the Catholic Saints site into a site about abestos attorneys").

Also, in keeping with publishers' demands for "full transparency," make publishers' quality scores, average conversion rates, etc. available to any prospective advertiser who wants that information before an ad is run. Advertisers are Google's paying customers, and they shouldn't be required to buy a pig in a poke or depend solely after-the-fact conversion tracking when allocating their budgets.

As I said before.. It is all about the advertisers.. The publishers can go to H***. This is what precisely seems to be G's thinking.. No offense.. But I can see the point of view being propunded. I just feel it is a little od hat and publishers, maybe, should also have some say?

How about letting publisher know..

Their site Quality ranking..
The conversion rates..
Smart pricing rate?

These should help us IMPROVE..

Advertisers are Google's paying customers, and they shouldn't be required to buy a pig in a poke or depend solely after-the-fact conversion tracking when allocating their budgets

Oh so true, something lost on publishers here and I'm not an active AdWords buyer.

That's just plain commonsense.

Suffice it to say. that it is clear that you guys have NO idea about how many tools and options are available to the adWords customer these days. Things have really changed on the adWords side. Get an account and see for yourself.

Common sense is one thing. Putting it into practice and getting the balance right, between two sides of the same coin is something totally different.

Cheers.

1) Eliminate real-time stats. Publish daily traffic and earnings reports at the end of the day, not before.

Yeah. And why have even daily stats? Why have _any_ stats at all? Google pays just once a month anyways. Why all that detailed data about clicks, eCPM, and what not? Just one line per month, saying:

May 2009 - $1,234.66

2) Eliminate channel reporting, which just encourages tail-wagging-the-dog Web publishing ("My page about mesothelioma earns more than my page about Mother Teresa, so I'll turn my Lives of the Catholic Saints site into a site about abestos attorneys").

Spot-on. Get rid of _ANY_ tools that might help publishers improve their pages, or help them even remotely to understand the system. Removing all the data junk will also free a couple of servers, so Google might increase monthly payout by 0.000001% for each publisher. That's were the new efficiency is!

Just one line per month, saying: May 2009 - $1,234.66

And now that I think about this, even THIS is far too much information, too early.

The publisher will certainly be happy to trust Google that some money will arrive sometime, as Google sees fit. When looking at the cheque/bank account the publisher will know what value Google has assigned to his work. Why tell him before? All this information just distracts the publisher from his day-to-day work of creating content for Google to monetize.

Spot-on. Get rid of _ANY_ tools that might help publishers improve their pages, or help them even remotely to understand the system.

Are you telling me that you "improve your pages" by studying AdSense stats?

Does the publisher of NYTimes.com study channel data before choosing between a story about a flood in Bangladesh or one about mesothelioma attorneys?

Fact is, the current system encourages AdSense publishers to think like MFAs, not like publishers. Read this forum for any length of time, and it becomes clear that--for many AdSense publishers--the tail is now wagging the dog.

Fact is, the current system encourages AdSense publishers to think like MFAs, not like publishers. Read this forum for any length of time, and it becomes clear that--for many AdSense publishers--the tail is now wagging the dog.

Please, let's not confuse sound business practices with being MFA.

If you write content that only gets discounted low paying advertisements then you're working too hard for too little, there must be some reward in the end otherwise it's just a futile exercise and not a real business.

I both monetize with Google and sell ads direct and I can tell you I work harder on areas of my site that allow me to get more premium paying advertisers than areas of my site that has little commercial value.

It's just common sense, it's thinking like a business owner trying to maximize profits and cater to the customers that spend the most or spend most frequently.

If nobody bothered to build what customers actually wanted most we'd all be out of business.

[edited by: incrediBILL at 2:44 pm (utc) on May 31, 2009]

Fact is, the current system encourages AdSense publishers to think like MFAs, not like publishers.

Wait a minute.

At a certain point in time, a publisher who sells ads (regardless of whether just to Google or to a variety of advertisers) HAS to think like a MFA. Even the Elbonian Times will have to think like this. Because being a (commercial) publisher means "publishing content that attracts advertisers". Advertisers, on the other hand, will only come when they find the content attractive enough to advertise.

So, a publisher needs to know whether his content is a good platform for his advertisers, whether they like his content, whether one piece of content is more profitable than another. And who his advertisers are, and what topics they advertise.

THAT'S WHY WE NEED MORE INFORMATION, NOT LESS. It's up to Google to police the system and remove any real MFAs from it. Clearly, they don't like this idea as it is real work.

The idea to reduce the (tiny) amount of information is too weird to be meant serious.

Read this forum for any length of time, and it becomes clear that

I joined in May 2007. I am aware of what's going on here. Thanks.

May 2009 - $1,234.66

This is brilliant!

But why stop there? I'd even go a step further - instead of giving you money, Google will do all the shopping for you (based on your search preferences, of course) and you'll receive one neat package containing whatever items and foodstuffs Google decided you deserve to consume this month. No returns and certainly no questions allowed.

Err folks. Aren't we kinda losing the plot here?

...now what was the original thread? It must be in here somewhere.

Aaarrrghhh

I was thinkink [sic] that meself [sic]