do images pay more?

[Solicitors Mortgages]

i have my 4x text ad banner set to both text and images....
very occasionally i get the odd banner image ..instead of the 4 text links,
i would assume (but cannot confirm) that the advertiser would pay google MORE to have all 4 spaces...with an image...so can i assume that my
earn per click would be 4 times higher...if someone actually clicks on an image add?

i cannot determine this myself, as i have no idea what has been clicked ..and what hasn't, has anyone got a 'guestimation' they could share?

thanx
Solicitors Mortgages

[thebassman]

Yeah, the images would be worth more, as they'd have to beat out 4 text ads on the same topic to get shown.

When I switched from text-only to text and image, my eCPM went up by almost 30%.

[mopacfan]

Originally Posted by thebassman

When I switched from text-only to text and image, my eCPM went up by almost 30%.

But did you're overall clickthru go down?

[Homer]

Yes images are worth more. But I think the average surfer today is really sick of banners. I think you will find the ctr of text banners is far greater for this reason. Personally I have found the original text banners to be most effective with adsense.

[thebassman]

My overall click-through did not go down at all... in fact, though it's only been about a month since I let the image ads on my site, it's been slightly up (like 0.5%)... It will obviously vary from site to site, but I think my visitors appreciate the contextual image ads... gives the regular users a little variaty.

[mopacfan]

Originally Posted by Homer

...I think the average surfer today is really sick of banners....

This is my feeling and that's why I was asking. I just have a hard time believing anyone clicks on banners anymore.

[thebassman]

As long as the banners stay fresh, I think they will pull a better CTR than the text ones if they're running where normally text banners are shown... especially on sites where those of us try to integrate the text ads into the site layout (same colors, etc). Makes the image banners stand out more.

[mopacfan]

I'm glad they're doing well for you. I'm just surprised by the fact that you're experiencing good results. I think that's outside the norm. But who cares if you're making money

[dcanfield]

Originally Posted by mopacfan

I just have a hard time believing anyone clicks on banners anymore.

I use to agree with this but it depends on your traffic. A banner for A motorcycle company was showing on my site and the clickthru rate blew my mind away.

After I added the option on my adsense to display banners my cpc average increased by 18 cents after a week.

[www.AmCy.org]

The banners do pay more, in my experience. I allow banners or text ads on the vast majority of my sites, but on my blogs I use only the text ads. I've found that since disabling the banner ads on my blogs, people are clicking more.

AmCy

[MattL]

I have always assumed that the images pay more as well.

I think by having both it "mixes it up" a bit more and there is less ad blindness.

Also, some of the banners are really effective and have button type graphics that say things like "click here". I'm sure that helps.

[www.AmCy.org]

Originally Posted by MattL

Also, some of the banners are really effective and have button type graphics that say things like "click here"...

The "click here" button is an absolutely essential part of any good banner layout. It's banner basics really. Banners 101. Any banner without a "click here" button is just asking to be ignored. Needless to say I use "click here" with all my banners.

AmCy

[pchere]

They do have some good banners. But I feel banner blindness is increasing.

[MattL]

Originally Posted by www.AmCy.org

The "click here" button is an absolutely essential part of any good banner layout. It's banner basics really. Banners 101. Any banner without a "click here" button is just asking to be ignored. Needless to say I use "click here" with all my banners.

AmCy

It's surprising how many you see with no call to action at all.

[www.AmCy.org]

Originally Posted by MattL

It's surprising how many you see with no call to action at all.

Banners are often created by graphics professionals who are looking to make everything as pretty as possible. They are in "pretty" mode when designing, when they should be in "pretty/effective" mode. Or should it be called "form/function" mode?

As for me, most of my banners are as ugly as sin, but they all have the "click here." Heh.

AmCy

[tradefor]

Does anyone have an opinion on the effectiveness of image Google ads versus ads from affiliates e.g., CJ site theme-related ads?

The reason I ask is that I've stayed away from image ads because
a) I've become so banner-blind that I assume everyone else has;
b) the affiliate ads, Amazon ads, CTR etc. have been extremely disappointing for me.

[honey]

I allow both, and as all say, it definitely has to pay more for the 4 spots to G. No guesses about CTR from me.

[BigEasy]

Looks like it's time to experiment a bit. I allowed text/banners in one of my ad spots on one site for a while and didn't see any results - but my overal ad effectiveness on that site has improved a great deal since then so maybe now some banners might work well.

We'll see.

[dcanfield]

I have always had bad epreiences with banners but the google banners actually seem to pull very good. Of course if I was paying 40 cents to have someone click on my banner I would definitely want tightly targeted traffic and that seems to be exactly what google has accomplished for the most part.

[MattL]

Originally Posted by tradefor

Does anyone have an opinion on the effectiveness of image Google ads versus ads from affiliates e.g., CJ site theme-related ads?

The reason I ask is that I've stayed away from image ads because
a) I've become so banner-blind that I assume everyone else has;
b) the affiliate ads, Amazon ads, CTR etc. have been extremely disappointing for me.

That's comparing apples to oranges...CPA and CPC. You may get similar CTR but CTR doesn't matter with aff ads, only conversion matters. Assuming CTR is equal that is.