(2)
A DigitalPoint Forums member suspects that if there are no changes performed on any given ad campaign, the ads will drop off the first page and perform progressively worse over time. He wonders if anyone else has run into a similar issue and if Google is taking preference over new advertisers instead of old ones.
Some advertisers feel that Google is hiding the true costs of their campaigns. They feel that Google is estimating lower costs and then hitting them up with higher costs. This may be perceived as a typical "bait and switch" ploy by Google. But you and I know this as the "quality score" weighing in on pricing.
And truthfully, I am not seeing the same results on any campaigns I monitor. A few people believe that the space that the particular advertiser is focusing on is either very competitive or that Google is figuring out the quality score, as GuyFromChicago suggests.
From my experience, this quote sums it up nicely:
It's simply because you have no history so they anticipate a best case scenario. After a couple days google knows if you have a decent click through rate and has calculated your quality score. At this point they know if you deserve a good position or not. It's pretty simple when you get down to it. They aren't going to penalize you for being a new user.
Do you feel the same way? Do you think you have better results whenever you start a campaign and then it gets worse? Do you think you should start a new campaign every time you want to hit the front page?
Forum discussion continues at DigitalPoint Forums.
