Adsense banning only low-end publishers?

And thats why some people are making hundreds - thousands a day, and others are not. Personal opinions aside, google doesnt mind this approach - and it is effective, however tacky and dis-tasteful it may look. Three is kind of overkill though =p

 

I haven't heard of any honest, high preformming adsense accounts getting banned.

I sort of agree on Google's no-preform no-adsense policy, but what if a few months later he starts the next about.com? And since he's already been banned from adsense, he can't get back in. That just seems really unfair.


Josh

 

Why not? How does it harm google? It's still 5 bucks worth of clicks they wouldn't get otherwise, no sane company throws away money... who cares if it's $5,000,000 or $5, you just don't throw away money.

I mean, google gets paid a portion of those clicks, multiply that by hundreds of thousands, and they might as well be burning millions of dollars a year.

Plus, if they are only making $5 per month, it's not like they are putting undue strain on the network, they obviously aren't getting a lot of impressions of clicks.

It just makes no sense, and I'd like to see someone point to one shred of proof that this is google's policy.

 

Does them have any chance to re-apply for the adsense since that they not doing anything against the TOS, its just their site not performing well due to lack of traffic etc. Google should put a minimum requirement on how long the site be on the net and their monthly traffics.

 

Well, not preformming well is against the new TOS in a way, so they did do something wrong in Google's book


Josh

 

Thats why I'd said before that google should be more strict on accepting new publisher. And I would be more than happy if google stop accepting new publisher application.

 

I guess this is what all the hoopla is about. But would they say "invalid clicks" if there were just too few? That's a rather poor characterization. I would assume this is more like, if you aren't showing ads for 2 months, then you are inactive and they boot you.

But I can't imagine why, if you are making $5 per month, they would ban you. I don't know if anyone knows the markup, but google is making a lot more than $5/month if you are. And they probably have hundreds of thousands of lowend users (you see google ads everywhere these days). I just can't fathom that they'd throw away free money.

 

That is a pretty wild assumption on your part. Certainly not evidence enough to start a thread with the title you did.

You imply they are banning low-end publishers for not bringing in enough revenue, without a shred of support.

Irresponsible if you ask me.

I know nobody wants to admit that "a fraudelent click" e-mail from google actually means fraudelent clicks so they come up with any other and every other possibility under the sun...

Regardless, too little information here... and the supposition is completely baseless.

 

They are not banning low-end publishers for not bringing in enough revenue. That's what others in this thread are saying.

I'm saying, every now and then Google will ban some low-end publisher stating the reason is invalid clicks. Whether this is the case or not is never looked into at all. The purpose of the ban is to maintain their reputation of being hard against spammers in the eyes of Adwords advertisers.

Normally these account cancellations end up having their own threads in forums etc. and it makes it "look" like Google is very serious when it comes to the interests of its advertisers. In almost 100% of the cases, it will be the low-end publishers who will recieve the cancellation notices.

 

I don't think google will ban good content websites ... may be just empy junk will be banned ..

 

I think you're probably right- let's hope so

 

Just like 1984, "Although there were no rules to break, we all knew we were breaking the rules..."

 

Doesn't make sense that they would ban him after accepting him. One would think that G would have enough data on the site to predict the type of earnings it would be bringing in. Think about it--it was a low-traffic site to begin with, and it was accepted. Why would they ban it only for being low-traffic?

 

I've often wondered about the 'invalid click' reason for loosing adsense.
I actually do know someone who got one of those emails - he had actually earned way way less that SM's friend. He'd managed to actually get to the dizzy heights of 10 clicks per month on average, so that chances of him actually having been banned for 'invalid clicks' is so low it's unreal.
Many of the low end earners, could well be students who are just starting to find their feet with money making ideas. What happens when 3 years down the road, one of those students comes up with the killer site that brings in 100K uniques per day (or more) - they'll end up going with Googles opposition that's what. By dropping low value publishers, G is going to shot itself in the foot in the long run.

 

NO goolge can't ban low performing sites becuase in TOS they have not mention that low click sites are banner or the reson might be some other
Lakshman

 

Could be that low clicking sites are more easy to commit click fraud... 10 clicks a month and you accidentally click on your own ad once, well that's 10% of your income from click fraud..

 

AdSense changed their policies not long ago, which means that under-performing publishers may face having their account suspended:
http://www.jensense.com/archives/2005/07/adsense_updates.html

 

Might I suggest that you go and read the TOS.

To summarize: YES google CAN ban low performing sites because it is stated in the TOS that they can.

 

From the sentence, I guess google will just terminate the account that not performing but not ban them. So they might always have a chance to apply later.....

Just my 2 cents though....

 

It would make a lot more sense for it basically to be a rejection. After all, it could be a great site but be in its infancy.

I personally think they will look at growth. I started at less than $10 and slowly built up. I do ok now and if they banned me early on, they might have put me off.

I suspect its more the accounts doing $1 month after month after month