Google not counting all CTR. Do you have those thoughts sometimes?

Google not counting all CTR. Do you have those thoughts sometimes?
I got those yesterday.
I was averaging 20% on one of my sites, yesterday it was 7.8%. On another site I got 105 impressions and not even a single click. That is really really strange. They may call it smart pricing, but don't you guys think that they are deleting valid clicks ..... sometimes a lot of them? I think I am entitled to all valid clicks (or at lest 99% of them) and that google should provide us the publishers with log files for all clicks, impressions and a list of the invalid clicks ...... For example the phone companies provide us with statements for the long distance calls and the respective phone numbers. ....... It is business after all.
ST12

 

Yeh ive definately thought about this too, I remember cases where I definately should have gotten some clicks but didnt.
The trouble is, with everything...it is all a secret. After all we live in a world where online dating agencies fake women to keep men online and pay the membership fees...

 

I would agree that there is a small accountability issue here. I guess as publishers we just have to put all of our trust in G and assume everything is being handled in a professional manner. I think G has too much going for it to be involved in a scam such as this. If this were happening and someone were to find out and be able to prove it, it could mean big problems for G.

I do agree that it would be nice if we had a bit more information from G but due to how everthing is so secretive that day will not come anytime soon.

 

Those numbers seem well within the norm. When working with a low amount of impressions, you are going to see large statistical swings. There is adsense software you can purchase that will track more detailed information, but I think it is very unlikely google is going to be involved in something shady. They are a public company under intense scrutiny and the founders risk losing billions of dollars - but using a tracking software should confirm this. I don't see any benefit to providing log files, as if someone was doing something illegal, they could just not log clicks they weren't going to report, or keep two sets of logs. Adsense reporting is basically a report of a log - and unless you were clicking your own ads, you wouldn't know if something wasn't being reported unless you had some sort of third party verification.

 

I agree. Just buy some software and take a look and see. It is possible though, because I've seen days where I seems I get a lot of impressions with very few clicks.

All in all, I don't think it is much to worry about.

 

Google's books are all audited. They would have to be charging publishers for 1,000 clicks and only paying out on 750, etc. which would be a pretty easy thing to catch (and yes, I know there has been accounting fraud). Google has the legal ability to control what they pay out. They don't guarantee to pay out any set percentage. If they were paying out 50% and wanted to make some more money, they could legally just pay 40%, 30%, etc. and not get involved in a felony that would mean prison time. In order to pull something like this off, many people would have to be involved, and you certainly wouldn't want to have a bunch of employees knowing of fraud - not in today's environment. At least that's my opinion.

 

I brought this up because, this is probably the third time it happend since August. I might be wrong though, I cannot prove with logs any stats. Today for example I got from one of my major websites impr. -35 clicks - 1 CTR 2.9% and this is very, very rare to have only 1 click out of 35 impr. I average above 15% CTR on that site, but 2.9% is still something. Not like yesterday 105 impressions and 0 clicks. I am not saying G. have done something illigal, ...... the very low CTR put some doubts in my head, I wish them much of success.
ST12

Something to ponder about...
Do you guys remember the Microsoft troubles with their business practices, I mean that one "if you do business with that company (MS competitor) we won't do business with you. ...... Reminds me a bit of G. TOS "if you place other company's contextual ads on your web page we may terminate (don't know the exact wording) your account. In other words we can only display G. contextual ads on "Our" pages or else.
That was my second thought.
st12

 

Google's TOS does not prevent you from placing other contextual ads on your site, they don't allow them on the same page. Yahoo has the same policy. You are free to run anything you want on any pages, but if you choose to run adsense or YPN, you cannot run other contextual based advertising on that page. You can run affiliate ads or any other type of advertising on that page (subject to some content issues such as gambling, adult, etc).

 

What if I have a store and sell candy for the "GGL" company, can they say "you can sell only our candy, you may sell soda, cookies ....., but not candy" and be on the safe side of the law?

Competition is good for consumers, having ads from diffierent advertisers on the same page means better products, service, and happy clients IMO.
GGL, YO, MS etc. surely don't like competition if all I see and hear is true.

 

It's done all the time. Coke has an exclusive deal with McDonalds, not Pepsi. Pepsi owns TacoBell and you won't get a Coke served there. If you agree to be a franchise, you can't sell pizza at a McDonald's. Linkshare or CJ both require their clients only use them for an affiliate program.

Microsoft's problems were a lot more complex and were primarily related to a monopoly because they control the majority of the operating systems installed and forced vendors to take other bundled software like Windows Media which created an unfair advantage to RealPlayer, etc.. There are restraint of trade laws, but I don't think adsense falls within those guidelines. There are all types of arrangements that give benefits to certain vendors. Go into a Barnes and Noble bookstore. The books you see with prime placement on the end isle, those are paid for by "selling advertising space" and guarantee placement over any other book. A Macy's catalog is the same way - paid for by vendors. Many high end vendors have requirements on who can sell their products - many hair products can only be sold by salons and not mass discounters. Many high end products can only be carried by full priced retailers to “preserve their image” - the end result is that the consumer pays more. They can’t mandate the price, but have others terms that insure the same result.

Would I like to be able to run YPN an adsense on the same page? Sure. Do I think Yahoo or Google is breaking any laws? No. If they required an exclusivity on all forms of advertising, then perhaps - but nether have that requirement. Contextual advertising isn't a vital to the display of a web page. I'm sure either Yahoo or Google would argue it would confuse the user and hurt their image - or some other legal argument. I don’t think you could argue the consumer is being hurt by the type of advertising that is displayed on a particular page - many consumers would probably prefer no advertising at all - and unlike Microsoft, there are more than a hundred different types of advertising that are available to the website owner. Adsense is popular because it happens to be one of the best paying - if it wasn't, publishers would jump ship. Exclusivity requirements are designed to benefit Google and Yahoo. If there were forced to do something that cut into their profits, they aren't going to eat that loss, they are just going to pass it along to the Publisher by means of a lower percentage payout. MSN and Yahoo - and other competition is going to benefit the Publisher. If either of those decided to let you run other forms of contextual advertising, then google might be forced to change if they started losing business. That's why competition is good. Neither MSN or Yahoo are the "little guy" and both have the financial resources to go after google in a battle for Publishers. I've run about 75% YPN, but that could change tomorrow. If you started a contextual business and could produce better results for the publisher, you wouldn't have any problem finding website owners to run your ads - even if you required that no other forms of advertising could be shown.

Unlike being forced to buy a particular operating system, there is no cost involved in dropping google and going with someone else.

 

Thank you for your coment mjewel, you made some good points. I still believe though the consumer gets hurt if competition is limited.
If somebody does not like to see ads on a web site, the exit is easy for them "x" on the right top corner. As for G, Y etc. we are engaged in business relations them.