AdWords

The fine folks at Web monitoring service Pingdom are out with their latest list. This time it's Goole AdWords ads that have gone contextually wrong. From a new brain on eBay to visiting Hell with Kayak, these ads are a hoot.

Here are a couple of my favorites from the list:

Here we find that selling on eBay is like selling your soul - with all of the fees they charge and the PayPal fees, I guess it makes sense.

We already know that the Germans make the best knives (see latenight tv), now we know they make the best AdWords ads. I just love these ascii ads -- too bad Google has banned them. I've watched that second car for hours and it never gets any closer to the car in front of it.

Yesterday Google started a beta test with their Adwords product with regards to PPA (Pay-per-action) advertising. Mike has an excellent overall recap of the service. I want to discuss my views on a couple of his points from a publisher standpoint.

Mike says... "Affiliate marketing networks like Commission Junction and LinkShare are screwed."

My belief is that CJ ruined themselves with their horrible signup process and poor customer service. But from this Google announcement, I have to disagree. Sure Google will pound on them like they P&G pound on everyone, but from what I can tell, from the publisher perspective, this will probably follow the other Adsense model which is: tell them nothing, pay them whatever and they will like it. Will publishers see what the PPA amount is? If so, there is nothing that says this on the blog post or FAQ.

Whether you use CJ, Jim Kukral's blog kits, or most other PPA ad options, you know how much you are going to make. 25c, 2% of sale, etc. If Google shows me what I am making before hand, that will certainly change things. If not, I am not sure publishers will be so willing to move to this. We already deal with the lower and lower earnings from Adsense.

Mike says... "And Yahoo is now in the unenviable position of playing follow the leader again, even as they catch their breath from the massive Panama release earlier this year."

Yep! Yahoo should have moved forward instead of moving closer. When you take one step forward, you are in reality not moving at all. Yahoo needs to innovate and the simple truth is that text ads are text ads - no matter how much fancy icing you put on them, they are still text ads to most advertisers.

Mike says... "Google also announced a new “text link format” ad unit today. They’ve crossed a hazy ethical line here. If this product was announced on its own, it would be heavily debated by the blogs and press."

Google notes the following in their FAQ... "For example, you might see the following text link embedded in a publisher’s recommendatory text: “Widgets are fun! I encourage all my friends to Buy a high-quality widget today.” (Mousing over the link will display “Ads by Google” to identify these as pay-per-action ads)."

Now correct me if I am wrong, but is this Payperpost or not? So Google is suggesting here that you make up good wording to "sell" the product. They don't even suggest you should try or test the product first. And their "disclosure" is only a mouseover. Everyone bitches and moans about PPP and their disclosure, yet this is ok? I am very confused. I agree with Mike about the ethical line. I just don't get why Google has been pushing and pushing lately.

Seattle-based Turn, a CPA-based search advertising firm gets funding to compete with the mammoth Google AdWords.