This blew me away ($$$$$$)?

[NewComputer]

I hope I have your attention, because I have no idea how to interperet the following. I was checking out my adsense search returns this morning. I saw the following. Now, I have the url for the image, if I can post it, but basically the effective CPM was $11,000 and the payout was no where near, but still pretty large.

Does that make sense? Does that mean the G received 10K for that one search? I was stunned, and if me posting this is in anyways a bad idea or against their TOS, please let me know by emailing me directly so I can remove it. I don't think it is, but sometimes you never know. If I can post the image let me know, so you can see it for yourself. Maybe others have had the same thing???

[digitalpoint]

No, CPM could be that high if you have very few impressions, and lots of (high paying) clicks. I see CPM rates above $500 in certain channels, and above $1,000 occasionally. A CPM of $10,000 just means that you averaged $10 per impression. So 3 impressions, one click for $30 would be a $10k CPM.

[NewComputer]

No, CPM could be that high if you have very few impressions, and lots of (high paying) clicks. I see CPM rates above $500 in certain channels, and above $1,000 occasionally. A CPM of $10,000 just means that you averaged $10 per impression. So 3 impressions, one click for $30 would be a $10k CPM.

It was 2 page impressions, 1 click and $10,995. I made near the averages you talked about. I need to find out what that search was for ;)

[schlottke]

HAHA, I will tell you the search if you PM me...Im the one that did it, after enjoying your blog post.

[qll]

It was 2 page impressions, 1 click and $10,995. I made near the averages you talked about. I need to find out what that search was for ;)

that means you got a $20 keyword page. what is the keyword? everything i do is very average. i believe the adwords price dropped a lot in recent month, however the low bid at $0.05 are heated. so more people are bidding $0.1 and less people are bidding at $10.

[NewComputer]

I believe it would be against Google's TOS for me to let you know what the $20 keyword is.

[Weirfire]

It's already against the TOS telling us about the CPM and how much you got for your click :p

[NewComputer]

Then I guess I have learned my lesson.

[qll]

It's already against the TOS telling us about the CPM and how much you got for your click :p

unless you are not related to adsense.
google ban only adsense or adword users to disclose them. it is a loophole in their TOS. it has no control of 3rd parties.

[hulkster]

If you add an IMG tag to your Adsense Search code, you have a decent shot of determing what they search for - take a look at my test page (http://www.komar.org/test/) if you are interested in an example.

[qll]

If you add an IMG tag to your Adsense Search code, you have a decent shot of determing what they search for - take a look at my test page (http://www.komar.org/test/) if you are interested in an example.

smart move.
i don't think adsearch is that profitable, otherwise i will run it. TOS said you can not change the code of search codes, but it does not say anything about you can not change the value of the code from outside of the code, such as automatically call the script or insert search strings into it. i don't many will click the ads, as google's template is not designed for higher CTR.

i designed for high CTR, however i lost a lot of visitors, as the new design is looking weired. CTR is also coming down, after realize the new layout.

i am still developing my next generate high CTR pages, i think its CTR will be at 20% to 25% and stays there without dropping, as i will intercert something dynamic that my visitors will not stop using my site.

[hulkster]

FYI FWIW: my test page is (as the name implies) just a test page where I play around with stuff - I doubt this is against the TOS, but it was more just an idea of how to track what people were punching in and I'm one of those inquisitive guys that likes to see how things work - Shawn actually get the credit for the idea - no surprise! ;-)

[dhruv]

That test page of your is a nice idea!

[caroline]

Really nice idea, indeed.

[NewComputer]

If you add an IMG tag to your Adsense Search code, you have a decent shot of determing what they search for - take a look at my test page (http://www.komar.org/test/) if you are interested in an example.

What does this do for you? I noticed you added the </img> tag, but how does that help you?

[hulkster]

I just updated my test page (http://www.komar.org/test/) with an example of what the web logs look iike when you do this ... and just for grins, here are some recent searches done on this page - does anyone recognize any of these?!?

66.169.240.211 q=golf+ball+display Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; Q312461)
69.198.185.217 q=fucking+shit Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0)
198.164.252.42 q=test Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1;.NET CLR 1.1.4322)
80.141.255.100 q=bank Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705)
68.118.219.228 q=dog Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
24.165.43.57 q=test Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0)
67.9.98.15 q=custom+buttons Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705)
69.225.158.74 q=test Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; TeomaBar 2.01; IBP; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
80.145.103.196 q=cool Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-AT; rv:1.7.1 ) Gecko/20040707 MultiZilla/1.6.3.1b
194.201.42.199 q=cycle+africa Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5. 0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
210.214.82.32 q=mesotheloma Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; digit_may2002)
24.219.177.96 q=test Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
67.86.222.191 q=apples Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
207.107.231.2 q=google Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0)
193.113.57.167 q=loans Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
83.31.85.161 q=sex Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)
83.31.85.161 q=ringtones Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)
150.140.129.22 q=soap Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)
206.81.49.194 q=thingamajig Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705;.NET CLR 1.1.4322)
213.240.31.254 q=test Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; MyIE2)
213.240.31.254 q=seo Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; MyIE2)
10.1.1.1 q=alek Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040803 Firefox/0.9.3


EDIT ADD: I expanded the output a bit to show the IP address and browser type - the search phrase is right after the "q=" ... more of you guys should take a look at Firefox - it ROCKS!

[SEbasic]

I may have done the "test"

J/K

[NewComputer]

Alek, does the img string give you the query result? How does that display with a log analyzer?

[hergo]

It would give you the page url that accesed the image.

Q. Is this just inserting an image via the adsense search control panel?

[hulkster]

I just updated my test page (http://www.komar.org/test/) with some information/examples that should answer all of the above questions.

[Help Desk]

Anybody interested in having a PHP script that does this?

[nadlay]

ThinkBling,

What would your PHP script do for us?

[schlottke]

Umm, Im pretty sure it would do what Alek was just talking about ;)

[Help Desk]

The script that I'm talking about would be used in place of the image file. The script would return the appropriate image to the web browser but also would log the referrer string and IP address.

[hergo]

Could be useful if you were really that interested to know.

What would your script do exactly? You should make it log the search terms and date in a database or something so you could view the exact stats at a glance. You could then look at the days where you earned more and get a rough idea.

I suppose it would be almost perfect to test and determine what are high paying keywords and what aren't. Especially if the search was not used by anyone other than yourself.

[nadlay]

Umm, Im pretty sure it would do what Alek was just talking about ;)

:D

The script that I'm talking about would be used in place of the image file. The script would return the appropriate image to the web browser but also would log the referrer string and IP address.

So, from the referrer string we could break out the search phrase?

I'd love to be able to see what they are searching for.

BUT, would it be fully compatible with the TOS?

[NewComputer]

:D



So, from the referrer string we could break out the search phrase?

I'd love to be able to see what they are searching for.

BUT, would it be fully compatible with the TOS?

As long as you don't edit the code ;)

[Help Desk]

I have a working prototype at...

http://www.googl2.com

You can view the log at...

http://www.googl2.com/images/test.txt

Currently, the only content that is saved is the Date, Time, Referrer string and IP address.

The problem though is that if the user caches the image, this log file doesn't get updated.

[hulkster]

The problem though is that if the user caches the image, this log file doesn't get updated.
Yep - I saw the same thing too - don't think there is a good way around this unless you can do something tricky with the img that causes the browser to think it has to reload it every time.

[Rob]

The CPM report on google seems a bit non-sensical. I am not sure why the add it there.

[Help Desk]

Yep - I saw the same thing too - don't think there is a good way around this unless you can do something tricky with the img that causes the browser to think it has to reload it every time.
It probably isn't allowed, but if you were using PHP you could change the image reference from the calling app to be...

<img src="img.php?x=<?php echo random_number_function(); ?>">

This way the browser thinks it's a different image each time.

[NewComputer]

Yep - I saw the same thing too - don't think there is a good way around this unless you can do something tricky with the img that causes the browser to think it has to reload it every time.

What about using 'no cache'?

<META HTTP-EQUIV="Pragma" CONTENT="no-cache">

Would this work?

[Help Desk]

Seeing as how it is an image, one can't return any Meta information.