I was changing my Ad-Targeting settings yesterday to see if Ad-Targeting was working, however, when I woke up this morning (yea, I know - at 11am), I received this friendly email. My RPC after Ad-Targeting actually dropped by 2 cents yesterday after changing my Ad-Targeting, and better yet, it still never showed relevant ads! Here is the email they sent, what do you all think? Either they are doing very well on pissing people off, or they just do not need testers to tell them their publishing setup is a bunch of crap. I nearly made as much $$$ on Google Adsense yesterday :-( ---------------------------------------- Mar 30 2007 07:53 PT Hello Shawn, Thank you for your participation in the Yahoo! Publisher Network Beta program. Due to the quality of the leads generated from your sites, we have disabled the use of Ad Targeting for your account. You may continue to display contextually-matched ads that Yahoo! serves, however, the matching suggestions provided by the use of Ad Targeting will not be utilized. We regret any inconvenience this may cause you. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Mary Fajardo Content Analyst Yahoo! Publisher Network
the last person to get this email was terminated within a week. you can search the forum - this was a month or so ago.
sounds to me like somewhere you were ad targetting something you shouldn't have been...like finance on a games site...jmo though.
You may be right about that, but you know what, a few months back that would have really been a great loss. Now, not anymore, with the pay per click that I've been getting lately and the number of click that I suppose they consider as invalid, the revenue has gone down so much that it doesn't matter anymore.
Mr. smart guy visitors to a game site may still need finance. Wait until you get an email from them banning your ad targeting or some other reason, then I'd like to see your reply.
I run more than one site. One of them is an arcade site, the other are automotive sites, auto parts, and just local websites I run for clients. I had setup the Ad-Targeting YESTERDAY and they banned it TODAY. I was redoing my Ad-Targeting after looking at all the bad press about how terrible it works, to see if mine did the same thing. Sure enough, it dropped. Then they banned my Ad-Targeting? Hmm!!!!!!
true, the may need finance stuff...but targetting a category that is not about your website is against TOS and will get you banned...I only target the content of my websites, and have never had a problem...
All I'm saying is that they will find another reason to ban you when your time is up. They will find a reason if they want to.
lol of course they will find a reason. the reason being whatever reason caused them to terminate. they dont just terminate to make our lives difficult or put fear into publishers. its all about money. if you make them money and their advertisers are happy, you are safe. if you lose them money with low conversions or advertisers jumping ship, you're out. of course, the whole international bannings were a bit ridiculous, but its their program.
Way back when the payout was rediculously high, it was a cause for great concern that you get banned. It's not the case anymore.
if people were making more with google or some other form, they would be doing that. nobody is using ypn to make less. to test and compare.. yes, of course. i do mind if i get terminated.
exactly...but the bottom line is if you play by their rules, you won't have a problem...break their rules, and they will ban you.
eh, you can play by the rules and do everything right. if your clicks dont convert, you may get the boot. its not your fault. you have no control, you didnt trick anyone. you cant even possibly track conversions to that extent. this is a flaw in their system in my opinion. with these cases, they really should ban url's, ban ad targetting, etc. but to terminate an entire account? only if the entire account is having that problem. but again, their game, their rules.
A few years back I spent about $13,000 on radio advertising for my business. I hardly got any customers to pay for the ads. let alone covering the cost of merchandise and other expenses. I had to swallow the loss. I did not go to the radio station and tell them, hey I need you to refund me my money because the ads. did not convert. They actually would have laughed at me at the mere mention of non conversion and me asking them for a refund. This is just not done in the business world. You run a risk each time you spend money in promoting your business that you might not get your money's worth in advertising.
you are exactly right allisgood. ypn and google are not like that though. i have been credited by both. not 100%. but a portion. and ypn is terminating for non conversion. this is well known fact. it doesnt sound right, this isnt a cpa network, publishers shouldnt be held responsible for whether a click converts, but we are. we didnt write the rules, yet the rules are in place. we live by these invisible rules. the same is true if you pay for marketing, then get the boot by google and THEY DONT PAY AT ALL, you arent going to get your marketing money back. you swallow it. once again, their game, their rules and we all share the risk. i know if i had ads running on the content network and my budgets got eaten up by "junk" traffic and i didnt make sales, i would be yelling at my account rep, who in turn would be giving me a credit and investigating where all these non converting clicks came from. likely, they would get their money back from that publisher and that publisher would get the axe. the advertiser is more important to ypn and google than the publisher. we are just fluffy whipped cream on their cake. they make their real money in search. mess with their advertisers and you will get the boot. yahoo and google will long exist without the publishers. they will both be homeless on the streets without advertisers feeding them. jmo
I'll tell you what's really hilarious is that after banning my ad. targeting function, the ads. they are placing on my sites are even more irrelivant. Isn't that something?