Google question

[HFE Signs]

Can anyone tell me why Google Adds want to know your marketing objectives - Drive Traffic, Get Clicks, Sales, Conversions and so on..?

In simple terms - how do they know who is likely to just click and who is likely to buy? If someone types 'Printed Banners' how do they know if the person is just looking or if they are serious about buying one? I've tried and tested all options over the years and whilst certain targeting parameters are important, I still feel many are pointless or just pot luck!

 

[fisicx]

So they can sell the data to other people.

 

[Deleted member 335660]

I am a user not media expert, but get feeling you are right on many points.

I can see how they pick out people who may be interested in certain things (I.e Golf) but whether they would buy or not is another matter.

 

[Paul Carmen]

It depend on how you're bidding and how you've set you account/campaigns up.

Essentially, its because they want you to automate your campaigns and to use their AI and data mining to try drive the right type of leads for your needs (if you don't tell them they can't).

They have a lot of similar behavioural/demographic data and often a lot of information from the cookies of the customer who's is making the search (other related searches, sites visited, time & actions on sites etc), which helps deliver the goal you've chosen based on your type of automation (target CPA, impression share etc).

This means that if you don't set your campaigns up well, and crucially ensure you track all clicks, traffic, calls, relevant actions and leads/sales etc, plus push that website data back into Google Ads, then automation won't really work well for you.

 

[HFE Signs]

It depend on how you're bidding and how you've set you account/campaigns up.

Essentially, its because they want you to automate your campaigns and to use their AI and data mining to try drive the right type of leads for your needs (if you don't tell them they can't).

They have a lot of similar behavioural/demographic data and often a lot of information from the cookies of the customer who's is making the search (other related searches, sites visited, time & actions on sites etc), which helps deliver the goal you've chosen based on your type of automation (target CPA, impression share etc).

This means that if you don't set your campaigns up well, and crucially ensure you track all clicks, traffic, calls, relevant actions and leads/sales etc, plus push that website data back into Google Ads, then automation won't really work well for you.

Thanks Paul, I appreciate what you're saying and Google say pretty much the same. However no AI can predict if I'm just looking at something or if I'm going to buy it. The skeptic in me doesn't like giving Google control over my bidding!

 

[Paul Kelly ICHYB]

how do they know who is likely to just click and who is likely to buy?

Data.

They hold so much data about the way people do things, they probably have a good understanding of who does what, why etc.

 

[HFE Signs]

Data.

They hold so much data about the way people do things, they probably have a good understanding of who does what, why etc.

I accept they hold a lot of data and they also see patterns in behavior, but it's impossible to say one person is worth £6 per click and another is worth 60p per click.

After my own testing - 10 clicks sells far more than 1 click when they all use the same search term, and are therefore actively looking for the same product.

Letting Google control your bidding means you pay far far more per click, you're budget gets exhausted sooner and your sales are less. You might see a slightly higher conversion rate but a significantly higher cost per conversion.

I conclude, it's designed to make Google richer!

 

[Paul Kelly ICHYB]

Letting Google control your bidding means you pay far far more per click

And there it is!

 

[Fagin2021]

I accept they hold a lot of data and they also see patterns in behavior, but it's impossible to say one person is worth £6 per click and another is worth 60p per click.

After my own testing - 10 clicks sells far more than 1 click when they all use the same search term, and are therefore actively looking for the same product.

Letting Google control your bidding means you pay far far more per click, you're budget gets exhausted sooner and your sales are less. You might see a slightly higher conversion rate but a significantly higher cost per conversion.

I conclude, it's designed to make Google richer!

It's not that impossible. If I give you the choice between paying 60 pence for a lead from a 12 year old schoolgirl or £6 for a lead from a 40 year old exhibitions manager, which would you choose ?

If you have a Google Ads account you can see for yourself what demographics, geographic location, audience etc are most likely to result in a conversion. Google has billions such data points so can (in theory) make a much better guess than you or I.

Having said that, your observations are correct. What Google would really like is for advertisers to hand over their budget and then leave everything to Google. You just set your objectives - maximise clicks, maximise conversions or whatever, and Google will do the rest.

The one thing you can be sure of is that Google will always spend all of your budget for you.

 

[Paul Carmen]

Thanks Paul, I appreciate what you're saying and Google say pretty much the same. However no AI can predict if I'm just looking at something or if I'm going to buy it. The skeptic in me doesn't like giving Google control over my bidding!

You're right to be somewhat sceptical, Google bought the artificial intelligence start-up Deep Mind back in 2014-15, since then they're on a journey to full AI for Google Ads. Their AI plays chess, Go and a variety of complex games at a far better success rate than human grand masters.

Their data is great and hugely complex, the AI works very well too, but it requires your data and tracking to be great too. It's still not a set and forget system, it requires careful keyword management, negative keywords and lots of massaging, especially in the early stages. As @Fagin2021 says, it has to be set carefully to what you want to achieve demographic, CPA and sales value wise, plus it will spend your budget, so you need to get this right too.

At this stage, we still think we can compete with and beat their AI, especially when you don't send enough of your data points back into the campaigns (the issue with many non ecommerce type campaigns).

However, they are on path that will be harder and harder to manage manually. RSA ads are the only search options now in new accounts, they use automation as standard. It's a journey that they're not going to stop.

 

[HFE Signs]

It's not that impossible. If I give you the choice between paying 60 pence for a lead from a 12 year old schoolgirl or £6 for a lead from a 40 year old exhibitions manager, which would you choose ?

If you have a Google Ads account you can see for yourself what demographics, geographic location, audience etc are most likely to result in a conversion. Google has billions such data points so can (in theory) make a much better guess than you or I.

100% agree, equally if you have a poor account (default settings) you can get traffic for as little as 3-4p per click on a display campaign, and never get a single conversion because its all going out on random game sites.

 

[MatMan]

As a long term Google Ads user, I can tell you that Paul Carmen is the one who is right here.

Of course, Google does want to make as much money as they can, but they also want you to succeed... otherwise you'll stop advertising and stop sending them money.

It's already been touched on here, but they have an incredible amount of behavioural data on their users, especially those who use Chrome. Their algorithms will have a good idea as to whether you will likely click on an ad, but never buy, or if you do buy how much you tend to spend. With these, and so many other factors, you can tell Google Ads what's more important to you (clicks to your site, people likely to buy, people likely to spend a lot when they buy, etc.) and they'll show your ads more often to the people who match your criteria, rather than wasting your budget and their precious advertising space on those who don't.

It sounds like most people here are sceptical as to how well they can do this, but as we move into a cookie-less future with greater privacy controls, this behaviour based learning will become far more important and Google are already well ahead of the curve, hence the introduction of their Performance Max campaign options.

That said, it can be really hard to make Google Ads work profitably, but give it a go and good luck!

 

[HFE Signs]

As a long term Google Ads user, I can tell you that Paul Carmen is the one who is right here.

Of course, Google does want to make as much money as they can, but they also want you to succeed... otherwise you'll stop advertising and stop sending them money.

It's already been touched on here, but they have an incredible amount of behavioural data on their users, especially those who use Chrome. Their algorithms will have a good idea as to whether you will likely click on an ad, but never buy, or if you do buy how much you tend to spend. With these, and so many other factors, you can tell Google Ads what's more important to you (clicks to your site, people likely to buy, people likely to spend a lot when they buy, etc.) and they'll show your ads more often to the people who match your criteria, rather than wasting your budget and their precious advertising space on those who don't.

It sounds like most people here are sceptical as to how well they can do this, but as we move into a cookie-less future with greater privacy controls, this behaviour based learning will become far more important and Google are already well ahead of the curve, hence the introduction of their Performance Max campaign options.

That said, it can be really hard to make Google Ads work profitably, but give it a go and good luck!

I've also been using Google Ads since it was launched back in 2000 so I too have a good understanding. I appreciate your points. Google Adds can be very profitable if done correctly and efficiently - letting Google manage your bids is a different story!

 

[CEP]

On Google wanting advertisers to succeed...

If they really did, they wouldn't set all of the multiple campaign set up defaults in their favour. I call these defaults Google's 'fool tax'. IMO Google act similar to the way companies treat a new radio advertiser.

Radio companies know that 95%+ of companies advertise once, and never again, because 95%+ of all ads fail to bring the business the company wants. So, they take your eyes out from the start. They know you'll start off enthusiastic and they'll take advantage of that by charging you 2X, 3X+ for non peak time ads that regular advertisers are paying for peak time. From a purely business point, they are right to do that.

They aren't going to displace a successful regular paying peak time advertiser with an unproven rookie who has a 95% chance of being here tomorrow and gone tomorrow. They also know that generating sales, and the profit to keep advertising, is not just about the radio ad but how any enquiries are converted.

Google thinks the same way, 95% of all PPC campaigns fail. So, like radio companies, they take as much of your money from the start. If you haven't got the nous to set those defaults in your favour, more fool you. Even if you do, you'll pay 2X, 3X+ to get the top page spots. That's because you start off with a Zero Quality Score whilst your established competitors will be 6-10. That means you need to have a website that converts super well, on top of a super sales team. If you don't, you'll never make the sales and profit you need to keep funding the advertising.

The simple fact is Google only wants really savvy PPC advertisers, not amateurs who bung up their system, That's why they ditched right hand ads. Savvy advertisers take more clicks away from SEO, increase Google's profits, and at the same time those savvy advertisers with high converting websites and sales teams keep earning enough dosh to keep advertising.

Google has introduced more AI to get greater control over an advertisers spend. For that read 'make it easier to raid the bank'. I'm not saying AI can't benefit advertisers, but only if you pick and choose the bits that you know work for you, or that you have a large degree of control over. The rest... don't touch with a barge pole.

Google are the most ruthless money making machine the world has ever known. And they get more ruthless by the day. But, having said that, done right, Google Ads is still THE best advertising medium that companies, and especially small companies, have ever had.

 

[Peak District SEO]

Thanks Paul, I appreciate what you're saying and Google say pretty much the same. However no AI can predict if I'm just looking at something or if I'm going to buy it. The skeptic in me doesn't like giving Google control over my bidding!

It's the type of search query you use. Google gathers search queries for all domains using Search Console data. It groups the types of queries into groups, Informational, Navigational, commercial, Transactional etc.

So if someone types:

1) 'Printed Banners' into Google, which tends to be what we call a "top-of-funnel" term....someone wants to see some banners to get an idea of what types of banners are available.

2) If they type. 'Printed Banner company' they are starting to investigate the companies who offer the service.

3) If they type 'printed banners near me" they are ready to buy and that's a transactional term'.
This is a "bottom of funnel" term.

So Google is trying to ascertain whether you want to raise awareness of your brand or make sales/leads.

Hope that helps?

 

[CEP]

Peak District SEO - that might be true, but only to a point.

I know from vast experience in PPC that even if you target keywords at the bottom of the sales funnel ie., ;buy XXXX' ads are shown for searches at the top of funnel and even for selling XXXX unless a ton of negative keywords are added and constantly updated.

Even if you geo-target ie., the North East, ads are shown for searches that include London, Manchester etc.

I don't know how this affect SEO listings but my point is Google's AI is either a) massively overrated or b) set to work in their favour especially on PPC. My money is on b.

 

[Peak District SEO]

Well, I think you answered your own question..

"unless a ton of negative keywords are added and constantly updated."

Has to be done, boring but... has to be done.

Secondly,

"Even if you geo-target ie., the North East, ads are shown for searches that include London, Manchester etc."

if you know how to GEO target properly...that won't happen.

I cant comment on whether google's AI is massively overrated...probably is...but they have plenty of money to spend on improving it ...so expect it to improve a lot over the coming years.

Or ...Whether the questions are set to work in their favour....hmm, well I don't disagree that Google is definitely weighting the SERP towards ads and ad spend.

But...until there's a better tool, we have to learn it and work with it.

 

[CEP]

if you know how to GEO target properly...that won't happen.

I know how to GEO target properly... and it still happens. GEO targeting is dependent on IP address and they aren't 100% area specific.

90%+ of businesses, and agencies, won't add anywhere near enough negative keywords to compensate for Google's AI shortcomings. IMO many of Google's advertising methods would attract the attention of Trading Standards if they were applied by offine advertising agencies.

 

[fantheflames]

Probably to improve their services. But I suspect there's other reasons.