AdWords black box darkens

by greg on December 9, 2005

According to Google’s official Inside AdWords blog, Google is now taking into account the landing page behind the ads when evaluating your bids on keywords. Google provides some general guidelines to follow but states that they’re neither hard-and-fast rules nor exhaustive – so when designing your landing pages, guess away.

Google’s pitching this as a way to ensure better user experience, of course – when ads and landing pages aren’t related, that’s a waste of the user’s time. However, I suspect that’s only half the story. The way Google evaluates landing pages sounds like a direct attack on arbitrage attempts, where traffic is bought through minimum-bids on keywords and directed to a page prominently featuring other advertising programs (often contextual ads for a related but more expensive keyword.) Done right, this allows traffic can be bought low and sold high with very little risk – it’s arbitrage in the purest sense. While arbitrage might not be the greatest user experience, it’s useful because it reduces and eventually eliminates inefficiencies in the marketplace caused by irrational bidding. In particular, arbitrage drives out price discrimination, where the same good is sold for two different prices by the same provider. When there’s price discrimination, one buyer’s by definition getting a bad deal.

By evaluating landing pages of would-be arbitrageurs negatively and raising the minimum bids, Google maintains irrational bidding and allows price discrimination to continue, helping its bottom line at the expense of its less-savvy advertisers’. It also makes its system a little bit harder to understand. I wonder – will we ever reach a point where the complexity and opacity of AdWords frustrates the majority of advertisers to the point where they say ‘to hell with it, I’m moving to a system where the third-highest bid always results in the third-highest ad’?

UPDATE: At least one of the good folks at Threadwatch says, independently of anything I’ve written here, “Google’s adwords requirements are getting out of control and opaque; to the point where they’re going to start to piss people off.”

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

John K December 9, 2005 at 5:34 am

Early this year, I thought that Google would scare off the mom&pop types with all the new complexity, and lose “diversity” with the result being a ton of Amazon, Ebay, NexTag generic advertiser ads like:

Buy {Keyword:}
Compare prices on {Keyword}
Free Shipping.
http://www.bla.com

However, that hasn’t seemed to happen. Google does react to things (like when they targeted reduction of affliate ads). If anything, they’ve moved to where the real money is, luring bigger and bigger players with all the complex features.

So now the big offline advertisers are starting to spend dough on Google. That’s not gonna get smaller. As long as they can hire an SEM who can get them 2X ROI on their ad spend, they’re gonna be very happy to keep pushing dough to search.

So Google can afford to piss off a lot of people – because the ROI is still there, the macro economics are good, and the competition still sucks.

And re: arbitrage – it’s all temporary. Arb opps may go away quicker when a bunch of math people control the black box that the arbitrage was based around.

Greg December 9, 2005 at 7:16 pm

Funny how they are not removing spammy/arbitrage sites, just charging them more. So do they really care about the user experience, or is this a way to maximize revenues from sites that are gaming he system?

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: