Has anyone been disappointed by their average CPC on sites where they have optimized for keywords that should pay extremely well, but end up paying just plain old well? I have a site where I see this. I get a good amount of traffic and clicks, from all over the U.S. (so the regional variances should be washed out into the average), but my average CPC is not nearly what I estimated it would be prior to building and launching the site. Has anyone had a similar experience and if so, have you figured out why and what to do to get your average CPC to the place where it should be? Before you say I estimated incorrectly (which I'm sure some of you are thinking by now ), I would just say that I'm 99% confident that my estimates are correct because other sites I have are dead on. Thoughts?
for the particular site I'm talking about... about 1/3 of my expected $ per click. I think CPC will always vary to some degree but this cpc has never been at the level it should be, which is what I find confusing/interesting.
The old times of building a website, adding some high paying keywords, earning big bucks seems to be over. Its called Google's smart pricing system
Yes this seems true, the system is being tweaked more and more and the day of building around keywords is out. But then, it should of NOT been about that anyway. Just stick to one site you love, or multiple ones whose subjects you truly enjoy. Don't just pick a subject thinking the keywords are going to make me rich, and I can hire folks to write content for me, I mean come on, that's not what life or how the net should be at all.........
Thanks for assuming that this is what I have done. It is possible to build a good site (meaning quality content, good traffic, natural linking, etc) that covers a topic with keywords that pay well. In fact, it's possible that some people actually enjoy the topics that pay well also. CrazyHorse - the smart pricing thing could be partially responsible I suppose. I think there is more to it than that though. Could be a combination of things. I'm still interested to hear if anyone else is having a similar experience.
It dosen't matter at all I see keywords going up while others are going down all the time. Some, when high, stay for a while others disappear quickly again. It's a question of supply and demand, isn't it? ...and as time passes it's rolling faster and faster...
I remeber that G anounced a cut some time ago, but the principles remain the same. Earnings per click have indeed been hit and decreased by approx. 10+% I guess.
I saw my value per click drop significantly earlier in the year, probably in-line with Smart Pricing implementation. Somewhat frustrating because traffic and click count were growing at a good pace. The last month or so, however, the value per click has rebounded nicely. Who knows? I try to keep the attitude that the website thing is intellectually stimulating, fun, and provides some supplemental cash. Other hobbies I've had were money pits.
In my experience: If your traffic come from a G search, they pay handsomely for clicks. If your clicks come from other search engines (Y!, MSN, etc.) AS will pay well, but not top dollar. If your clicks come from non-search websites, you'll get paid for clicks, but not very well. As always, IMO. AmCy
I think you're right, great observation indeed. Since I'm gone from Yahoo my earnings per click are increasing again
That's something to think about and tinker with. I hadn't noticed any particular association with $ per click and the traffic's source before but I will definitely see what I can see now. How did you first come to this conclusion?
My server has very detailed logs. I can see where all my traffic is coming from, including the search terms that were entered into search engines that surfers used to get to my sites. I use AS channels. I can compare the channel data with the data from my logs and I can see where the traffic is coming from and how much traffic is paying, especially when certain sites have very slow days with just one click. It's not an exact science, but over time you can definintely pickup on patterns. AmCy
I think G gives us less than 20%...that is my guestimation. I have one site that I think they give me about 3%...I use other areas to see what people pay, then divide it by my average click...anywhere between 10-15% is average...google is making money like crazy...I can't wait for Yahoo. I hope people keep making sites that they enjoy...that leaves and the sites that pay well to me. Out of all of my sites that make money, I don't care about any of the topics. They are there to make me money. If you can find something you like that makes money, great. My hobbies must be different.
I like the AS program A LOT, but I find myself anxiously awaiting the new Y! program as well. My major complaint about AS is covered in this thread: why should a click that is generated as a result of a 100% legitimate Y! search pay less than a click that was generated from a G search? I think that's unfair. AmCy
AmCy, the thing that doesn't make sense in your theory is that Google has no good reason, that I can think of, to pay less for traffic originating from sources other than their engine. What do they gain by doing this? Unless they just pay a lower % for some reason (which really only punishes the webmaster for having the gall to attract traffic from non-google sources), I just can't think of their motivation for factoring the traffic's source into the click payout amount. And I agree with both of you that the coming of Yahoo's program will be good for business.