Broad Match is for the Lazy

Discussion in 'Google AdWords' started by GuyFromChicago, Aug 4, 2006.

0
  1. #1
    I've been having a discussion with an associate of mine about the use of broad match in AdWords. I'm of the opinion that broad match, in a lot of cases, is a lazy half assed way to get a campaign going. There are some cases/objectives where broad match makes sense but 99 times out of 100 broad match is used by people who really don't have a clue how AdWords works. Getting rid of all the broad match campaigns is one of the first things I do when I take over an account.

    Thoughts?
     
    GuyFromChicago, Aug 4, 2006 IP
  2. kevingibbons

    kevingibbons Guest

    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    I agree that it's normally more effective to just use the exact or phrase match options but in some cases it can be useful to use the broad match to increase traffic.
     
    kevingibbons, Aug 4, 2006 IP
  3. Micromag

    Micromag Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    67
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    #3
    I prefer to use Broad Match, adding also all possible Negative keywords to the campaign I can imagine to preventing hurting CTR%.

    This brings more traffic without need bidding high prices.

    Normally my campaigns has around 300 ~ 600 negative keywords
     
    Micromag, Aug 4, 2006 IP
  4. donnareed

    donnareed Peon

    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    9
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #4
    Another reason to not use broad match is that Google has recently started running Exact Match keywords as a priority over broad match and phrase match.
     
    donnareed, Aug 6, 2006 IP
  5. Micromag

    Micromag Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    67
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    #5
    This is not so true, Priority is related with Keywords Quality Score and Keywords Bid Price for a long time and they have not changed this recently to nothing related with the matching option.
     
    Micromag, Aug 6, 2006 IP
  6. GuyFromChicago

    GuyFromChicago Permanent Peon

    Messages:
    6,728
    Likes Received:
    529
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    Interesting take on it.

    Don't you think you could accomplish the same - and be a little more targetted - by using exact match? I've never seen anything that leads me to belive exact matching is more expensive.
     
    GuyFromChicago, Aug 7, 2006 IP
  7. Art

    Art Peon

    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    17
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    If your originating keyword source is broad enough (and I bet we're all doing similar) to cover most combinations of searches for your specific market, then exact match is ideal since you won't get "chance" impressions diluting your CTR.

    However, if anyone has any thoughts otherwise, please let me know! I'm quite keen on hearing you takes :)
     
    Art, Aug 9, 2006 IP
  8. joewills

    joewills Peon

    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #8
    When a user enters a keyword into Google, is the quality score based at keyword level, ad group level or capaign level?

    e.g.

    Campaign - First Name

    Ad group - Joe


    Keyword 1 - Joe Bloggs CTR 90%
    Keyword 2 - Joe Gloggs CTR 5%
    Keyword 3 - Joe Smoggs CTR 1%

    e.g. does it matter having bad performing keywords in an adgroup?

    would Joe Bloggs keyword perform just as well if remains in the same ad group than if it was on its own adgroup and own capaign, where it was the only keyword
     
    joewills, Aug 16, 2006 IP