PPC Traffic

[packrat]

Seems to be some interest in arbitrage so I'll start with this question about
Adwords - do you have to have at least one active keyword for search in order for your ad to be displayed on the content network.

 

[packrat]

Mine usually doesn't suffer too much - usually between 6 and 8.

 

[netmeg]

10

 

[mrizos]

Guys... keep in mind that the higher on the radar this gets, the more likely it is that someone will decide to kill it. Publishing articles on it, these threads, etc; could very well lead to it getting killed. I'd strongly suggest that this be taken to a private forum.

I can't believe anyone even talks about this openly...remember the #1 rule to fight club and stick with it.

 

[matt_bodis]

I can't believe anyone even talks about this openly...remember the #1 rule to fight club and stick with it.

Well, if half the people in this thread don't want this info to get out in the open, then do you think this practice is helpful or hurtful for the industry?

 

[netmeg]

The writing's been on the wall for arbitrage for a long time; a few posts in the forum aren't going to make it happen any faster, nor is removing them going to make it happen any slower.

But rename it AdWords and don't mention the other a word if it makes you uncomfortable.

 

[Mike]

I can't believe anyone even talks about this openly...remember the #1 rule to fight club and stick with it.

There's just a tiny difference between mainstream Hollywood and what means a substantial part of their online revenue to many of us.
Bottom line: If you don't like to talk openly about this topic, ... simply don't participate.
For many others, the insights gained through the invaluable help of many NPers is the exact essence for this forum to exist.

M.

 

[matt_bodis]

Every little post here and there makes it worser for our industry. Honestly, I don't care. It is only going to hurt the other companies, we don't allow it so it's not like it is an issue here. But it affects the whole PPC industry as a whole. What you are doing now will affect your earnings in the future.

 

[HiSoC8Y]

Guys... keep in mind that the higher on the radar this gets, the more likely it is that someone will decide to kill it. Publishing articles on it, these threads, etc; could very well lead to it getting killed. I'd strongly suggest that this be taken to a private forum.

100% agree with you

 

[mrizos]

Well, if half the people in this thread don't want this info to get out in the open, then do you think this practice is helpful or hurtful for the industry?

The whole arbitrage thing drives me crazy. People send traffic to a site for a few pennies or dollars, the traffic converts, or it doesn’t. How is it any different than a user clicking on a parked domain that they found on google or yahoo???

I just wish SOMEONE could tell me why arbitrage is soooo bad and needs to be illegal???

I’m listening….

 

[HiSoC8Y]

its not bad

arbitrage is there in every market....

buy low from one market, sell it higher at another market....

risk is involved, to be able to sell higher....or you loose....

its legal....

 

[matt_bodis]

It's legal but it is low quality and has a lower conversion ratio.

Google doesn't allow it for a reason.

 

[GILSAN]

Every little post here and there makes it worser for our industry. Honestly, I don't care. It is only going to hurt the other companies, we don't allow it so it's not like it is an issue here. But it affects the whole PPC industry as a whole. What you are doing now will affect your earnings in the future.

There will allways be peaple that just don't listen to to those wise and more experienced domainers who dont really want this subject to come out in the open and probably cringe every time it surfaces, which is quite frequent.

Madpoet sugests "I'd strongly suggest that this be taken to a private forum." Does NamePros have a private section? Might be an interesting idea, since it appears to be a very touchy subject, that could have negative implications to many domainers in the future, as Matt mentions.

GIL

 

[mrizos]

Can anybody fill me in on the Yahoo TQ scores they get (0-10) when running purely arbitrage on parking services?

Low conversion rates for the parker or the advertiser? Definatley not the parker imo...

I've seen my ad's (I advertise my buisiness using yahoo sponsored search) on trafficz sites and the conversion rates for my firm are awesome. We got our first customers from clicks on a parked page that was being advertised via the google content network.

 

[madpoet]

I just hope no one kills the goose on this one

 

[CDS123]

100% Agreed with GILSAN on the following comments;

There will allways be peaple that just don't listen to to those wise and more experienced domainers who dont really want this subject to come out in the open and probably cringe every time it surfaces, which is quite frequent.

 

[Kenny]

100% Agreed with GILSAN on the following comments;

There will allways be peaple that just don't listen to to those wise and more experienced domainers who dont really want this subject to come out in the open and probably cringe every time it surfaces, which is quite frequent.

Welcome to NamePros.
First post in a year?

 

[tonyfloyd]

i got $1.95 max bids....all keywords are great....3 diff. ad groups.....and my stats are 0 for 42.......my avg position is 24.5.....what do i need to do???...bid $5 to move up????

i just dont get it....

 

[vbigdeli]

It's legal but it is low quality and has a lower conversion ratio.

Google doesn't allow it for a reason.

If the conversion is low,why my TQ is always 9 or 10?

 

[afarmer86]

Just like most things in life, it all boils down to money and if I had to bet, I would say big money. Let's run a scenerio here that google has to (probably already have) consider. I have no clue if my estimations are close to accurate.

Let's say there are 50,000 people/organizations activly doing arbitrage in the world (again I have no clue if this is close). And lets say those people spend on average of $200 per week on the adwords network. 50,000 x $200 x 52 = $520,000,000.

If google stoped this practice, they would loose $520 million over night under this scenerio. There would be no reason for these people to have an adwords account and spend $200 per week with no return. (again, play with the numbers any way you want, but even if you think my number is too high by 75% then now we are only talking about $130,000,000 only!).

I am sure google hates this practice. But they have already proven they will sell out for a few dollars (see the Chinese). Just like it might be considered easy money to the arbitrage players, it is also very easy money to google and their high stock price.

I am sure Serg would hate to answer the stock holders about why the earnings are several hundred million dollars light next year.

 

[tonyfloyd]

so very true afarmer..

 

[mrizos]

Just like most things in life, it all boils down to money and if I had to bet, I would say big money. Let's run a scenerio here that google has to (probably already have) consider. I have no clue if my estimations are close to accurate.

Let's say there are 50,000 people/organizations activly doing arbitrage in the world (again I have no clue if this is close). And lets say those people spend on average of $200 per week on the adwords network. 50,000 x $200 x 52 = $520,000,000.

If google stoped this practice, they would loose $520 million over night under this scenerio. There would be no reason for these people to have an adwords account and spend $200 per week with no return. (again, play with the numbers any way you want, but even if you think my number is too high by 75% then now we are only talking about $130,000,000 only!).

I am sure google hates this practice. But they have already proven they will sell out for a few dollars (see the Chinese). Just like it might be considered easy money to the arbitrage players, it is also very easy money to google and their high stock price.

I am sure Serg would hate to answer the stock holders about why the earnings are several hundred million dollars light next year.

Bingo...money talks...always has and always does.

 

[matt_bodis]

SO WHO WAS RIGHT that Yahoo now enforced the no-arbitrage rule?

 

[johname]

SO WHO WAS RIGHT that Yahoo now enforced the no-arbitrage rule?

congrats matt

 

[matt_bodis]

Thank you.

 

[madpoet]

Wow... you're so cool. Thanks.