Why isn't Google being honest with their Adwords Customers? They seem to be hiding behind the broad cloud of the ambiguous word "quality". It seems to me though, that you can have a website with horrible navigation, spelling and grammatical errors galore, dead links, missing images and a dozen blinking animated GIFs or horrid Flash objects and it does not affect your quality score. Add some affiliate links and/or content ads and voila! It starts to calculate a quality score. Just try to get someone at Google to define 'quality'. They will only go so far to say that 'quality' is defined so that visitors have a good experience. This seems contrary to the example above. I would not call that a good experience for the user but Google thinks it is compared to a page with affiliate links. What's up with that? Am I way off base on this? Can someone provide a counterpoint? AAAAAARRRRRRGGGHHH!!!! JJ
The word "quality" is too broad - they are not lying. They just decided the parameters to measure quality focusing their objectives. Your post for example is well written quality but I would rate it 2/5 compared to other discussions that is not so well written compared to yours but bring more quality to DP forum.
LOL! My post was intentionally childish. My point is that it is called "quality" but it does not apply to quality. If you make a website to sell something and you advertise it on Adwords, it can be a very low quality site with a horrible user experience and this does not seem to affect the "quality score" in any way. This is the lie that I'm asking about. I have examples but I don't know the owners and they may be just learning web design so I see no reason to embaress them to make a point that I agree is about a 2/5 for adding quality to DP. I was wondering if there were consequences that I had not thought of if Google just said, "We don't want adwords to be filled with ads pointing to the same product via affiliate links. Making it so that one entry per destination URL on a page did not work because people are making landing pages with different destination URL's that basically point to the same product because they are affiliate marketers. Now we are monitoring for pages like this and adding a weighted score to their ranking/min bid." Is it wrong to say that? Will they get sued? I just don't understand why they can't say it and that is my question. JJ
I just want to explain that I have been happy with the effect Landing page quality has had on adwords. It is working but it's not about quality because it only matters if it is MFA or loaded with the usual affiliate links for the keyword. Not about the quality of the landing page. JJ
I'm not sure I'd agree with your view on this. Google is judging quality via automated systems. They aren't easily going to detect subjective quality issues. What Google will detect is the language on the page and what the page itself appears to be about. That is their claim to fame! It's how they decide what ads to serve via adsense and so forth. However, automated detection systems will have quirks and be a bit fussy in some ways. Personally I'm finding I can get the minimum bid quite low on keywords even on pages that contain CJ links and no Adsense at all, however, at the minimum bid I'm not going to get any traffic because of all the competition out there.
It seems that you DO agree with me. They don't check what you refer to as "subjective quality" The reason you can get pages up with affiliate links with low minimum bids is because the algorithm was run and blacklisted various domains and then was removed during a Saturday maintenance. Domains that were not blacklisted will not be affected until the algo is run again. I'll try repeating my question again so it is clear what information I am hoping to glean from participants of this thread. Thanks for your response. JJ
Let's just say that I suspect certain "sales language" is given a low score when it comes to page quality... and if so, then it may not have anything to do with the statement you've offered.
I wish someone figured out the quality score crap of google and wrote a book on it. It is annoying, how little they say about everything.
I don't know what you mean Grok. Are you answering my question or just repeating it? (I mean no disrespect) I know that certain "sales language" is given a low score when it comes to page quality but that's what I'm saying. What I want is someone to say either "They do check for quality other than affiliate links" or "They can't come out and say that is all they do because it makes them culpable under [INSERT LAW HERE]". I'll try repeating my question again so it is clear what information I am hoping to glean from participants of this thread. I was wondering if there were consequences that I had not thought of if Google just said, Is it wrong to say that? Will they get sued? I just don't understand why they can't say it and that is my question. Thanks for your response. JJ
They do check for quality other than just affiliate links... and you keep saying you are asking one question when you are asking three or four. It is hard to answer "the" question that way...
Grok, now you are speaking in ambiguities. It must be contagious LOL I think you are just wasting my time here and have no idea whether or not as you say "They do check for quality other than just affiliate links". If you aren't pulling my chain then tell me what else they are checking for besides affiliate links. Once again here is my question... No! Wait. I think that DP must not be the right place to ask this question. I'll try elsewhere. JJ
I have affiliate links on my site, about 1 or 2 per page. So I am going to have to cloak them or something basically for google to not penalize me right? They are not javascript aff. links (which I think google ignores).
It seems like Googles definition of "quality" is slightly different from yours. That's how everyone markets their product, they sell you an illusion