Some days back i removed infolinks from my blog due to low pay from ntwk ads and now Google seems to paying too low too....wt* is happening, moreover they don't disclose their percentage share...
I thought infolinks were always a low earner. The countries you receive traffic from also matters right? About google not disclosing their % share, I have no idea. Isnt it their own wish whether to disclose it or not? Just my thoughts......
Blocking ads can negatively affect earnings. Advertisers for your niche could be scaling back their bids. You could have been smart priced (your clicks are converting for the advertiser as well as other sites) My payouts (per click) are the highest they have been in 6 years. Payouts are dependent on the advertisers. Google doesn't have to disclose payout percentages (and you don't have to use them) but as a public company, their financials are available. Last numbers I looked at showed a 77% payout to publishers. This includes network partners so it might be a little less, but it does state that all regular publishers receive the same percentage.
Just got smartpriced last week. I was earning at least $1.50 day,then it went down to .40 cents or less for absolutely no reason. My problem is solved, though, I dropped Adsense
WHAT? Do you believe that? Could you please direct me to where it says that? I Googled "all regular publishers receive the same percentage", and this thread is the ONLY result. I believe that publishers are paid by how well they perform. Here is my analysis of that - http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/internet/top-paying-words.htm#how-publishers-get-paid Some publishers offer a high conversion rate for advertisers. Don't you think that these publishers get paid more? Shouldn't that read "Payouts are dependent on the advertisers, AND on the quality of the publishers."? . .
I experience a 25% decrease in the eCPM as well in average over 1 month and all my sites, for Feb and Mar in comparison with previous months. very bad.
It's in the google financials. Note that I said "percentage" which doesn't mean publishers who have better conversions are not paid more per click. That's what smart pricing was designed for - advertisers are charged less per click which results in a lower net payout to the publisher - but same percentage. The link you gave is either faulty in its assumptions or google has committed fraud in its filings and if you can prove it, you could get a huge reward via the SEC. Somehow I doubt google would lie (and their auditors) and risk billions of dollars - especially when they are under no obligation to pay any percentage to publishers, or treat regular publishers equal - unless they voluntarily state it in SEC filings.
I think I see what you are saying. A publisher only gets paid what the click is worth, and then the advertiser is charged an amount that results in the amount being paid to the publisher of 77% (or whatever). I agree that Google can't be sued, since they never say what they pay to the publisher, or what they intend to pay to the publisher. Publishers get whatever Google decides to pay them, and that is it. No argument, no discussion. I guess that I am confused with the meaning of "smart-pricing". As I understand it, the original smart-pricing was designed to prevent the advertiser from ever paying any more than 1 penny more than the second highest bidder. And that was all it meant. Then, somewhere along the line, the concept of smart-pricing got redefined to include the amount paid to the publisher. I don't know where that came from. It seems to me that another term should be used, such as "publisher-pricing". Because it has a far different meaning than just what the advertiser pays, which was the original meaning. Just because the advertiser pays less than 2 cents more than the second highest bidder, doesn't have anything to do with the percentage the publisher gets paid. It seems like somehow, because the advertiser pays less, that this got translated into "the publisher gets paid FAR less", JUST BECAUSE the advertiser paid somewhat less. I think we are talking about 2 different things here. I can see how, overall, publishers get paid 77% on average. But I really don't see EACH publisher getting paid 77%. I have read where some actually get paid 100%, on some deals where Google REALLY wanted the business - a loss-leader, if you will. Conversely, I don't think that Google even pays 20% to websites that offer a conversion rate of essentially zero. Sure, the advertiser can be charged less for the click, but I don't see Google paying anything near the 77% to the undervalued publisher. I wouldn't, and I don't think they do. For example, to achieve the 77% for a publisher that doesn't convert AT ALL, Google would have to charge the advertiser . . . ZERO. Which I don't see happening. I still need to see "all regular publishers receive the same percentage". Because I still don't believe it. If you can show me where Google says that, I will change my mind, of course. . .
3. Google doesn't make money from 'smart pricing' In fact, we make less money, since the cost to advertisers is reduced in order to provide a strong ROI. Ultimately, this leads to higher payouts for publishers by drawing a larger pool of advertisers and rewarding publishers who create high quality sites. Did you actually read the 10K and couldn't find it? I'll go through it if you actually read it but couldn't find it.
Sorry, I suffer from "edit-itis" - I can't stop. (I added extra stuff to your quote of me above - I'll stop now). Right. I didn't say they did. I am searching the 2008 annual report now. http://investor.google.com/documents/2008_google_annual_report.html The phrase being searched for is - "all regular publishers receive the same percentage" (or anything close) The document contains 18 occurrences of the word "same", not one of which is "same percentage". The document contains 34 occurrences of "percentage", not one of which refers to percentage to publishers. The document contains 3 occurrences of "regular", not one of which refers to publishers. Am I looking at the wrong document? Perhaps you read this somewhere else? . .
But how does traffic doesn't convert my 80% traffic is from search engines. Is it my problem if advertisers are using catchy lines to get clicks, even if they are not worth it.... this smart pricing thing is very confusing. How does Google consider if the click was legitimate or not, bigger websites use adsense to pull traffic only (atleast in India) and they have no leads attached. After all it is CPC network not a relative CPA network..
All adsense transaction are basically sourced from adwords campaign. Let's just hope that more adwords client will increase their campaign's budget.
I haven't read their recent financials, but this is what was previously published. "Both the standard agreements and the negotiated agreements contain provisions requiring us to share with the Google Network member a portion of the advertiser fees generated by users clicking on ads on the Google Network member’s web site. The standard agreements have uniform revenue share terms. The non-standard agreements vary as to revenue share terms and are heavily negotiated." 2008 10K "Agreements with our larger members are individually negotiated." I would need to go through all their filings and see if they have made stated changes the uniform revenue share terms, otherwise, it would still be in effect. Payout percentages from TAC (includes network partners) q107..1,350,000,000....1,130,000,000.....83.7% q406..1,200,000,000......976,000,000.....81.3% q306..1,040,000,000......825,000,000.....79.3% q206....997,000,000......785,000,000.....78.7% q106....928,000,000......723,000,000.....77.9% q405....799,000,000......629,000,000.....78.7% q305....675,000,000......530,000,000.....78.5% q205....630,000,000......494,000,000.....78.4% q105....584,000,000......462,000,000.....79.1% q404....490,000,000......378,000,000.....77.1% q304....384,000,000......303,000,000.....78.9% q204....346,000,000......277,000,000.....80.1% q104....334,000,000......271,000,000.....81.1% q303....175,000,000......144,000,000.....82.3%
I am at like .01 to .02 per click, it makes me so mad b/c i get like 1000's of clicks too, I think it maybe a good idea for some to switch to widgetbucks
Economic crisis causing the advertiser reduce the cost invested and google also reduce the sharing to protect their company. So, publisher are getting lower CPC now