Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    .
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,973
    Google AdWords Quality Score
    Yesterday, I commented that I wasn't able to find an "Poor" quality scores in my Google accounts.

    This morning, I finally found out how to get a "poor" quality score for AdWords bidding: just do everything you can possibly do wrong for keyword-optimization.

    I was launching an AdWords PPC test campaign for a merchant (not QuoteProducts), which had what I thought were some very nice-looking landing pages -- a little bit verbose, but the images and text seemed likely to trigger pretty good conversion once a prospective customer arrived.

    But Google flagged the pages as "poor" matches, so I did some homework. This merchant had done almost everything I can think of to screw up search-engine keyword optimization.

    (1) The merchant was "keyword-stuffing" the names of MANY competitors and MANY essentially unrelated terms in the meta-tags.

    (2) I think that there are three "core keywords" for the product page. The primary keyword is the 6th word in the title tag; the other two words don't appear in the title tag at all. These "core keywords" appear about 5 times total (not each) in the 75-word "description" meta-tag, and don't appear individually (nor in relevant combinations) in the "keywords" tag at all.

    (3) Within the visible text on the page, the "core keywords" appear only a few times. As I read the page, I identified several words that Google probably picked up as being the "main keywords" on the page -- and of course they were unrelated to the "core keywords."

    (4) The 3rd paragraph of visible text is simply a "list" of related terms, which I'm sure Google views as another attempt at keyword-stuffing. If Google didn't simply penalize this, these words would provide even more distraction from the "core keywords."

    (5) The images have no alt-tags.

    (6) There is a cross-promotion zone in the right margin which lists completely unrelated products (that is, someone coming to this page would absolutely NEVER be interested in any of the products listed). (I don't want to disclose the merchant or product niche, so here's an example: imagine that someone searching for Ford auto parts were shown cross-promotions for Toro lawn mower parts.)

    (7) The "core keywords" did not appear in any headlines ( H1/H2/H3).

  2. #2
    Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    January 17th, 2007
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by markwelch
    Yesterday, I commented that I wasn't able to find an "Poor" quality scores in my Google accounts.

    This morning, I finally found out how to get a "poor" quality score for AdWords bidding: just do everything you can possibly do wrong for keyword-optimization.

    I was launching an AdWords PPC test campaign for a merchant (not QuoteProducts), which had what I thought were some very nice-looking landing pages -- a little bit verbose, but the images and text seemed likely to trigger pretty good conversion once a prospective customer arrived.

    But Google flagged the pages as "poor" matches, so I did some homework. This merchant had done almost everything I can think of to screw up search-engine keyword optimization.

    (1) The merchant was "keyword-stuffing" the names of MANY competitors and MANY essentially unrelated terms in the meta-tags.

    (2) I think that there are three "core keywords" for the product page. The primary keyword is the 6th word in the title tag; the other two words don't appear in the title tag at all. These "core keywords" appear about 5 times total (not each) in the 75-word "description" meta-tag, and don't appear individually (nor in relevant combinations) in the "keywords" tag at all.

    (3) Within the visible text on the page, the "core keywords" appear only a few times. As I read the page, I identified several words that Google probably picked up as being the "main keywords" on the page -- and of course they were unrelated to the "core keywords."

    (4) The 3rd paragraph of visible text is simply a "list" of related terms, which I'm sure Google views as another attempt at keyword-stuffing. If Google didn't simply penalize this, these words would provide even more distraction from the "core keywords."

    (5) The images have no alt-tags.

    (6) There is a cross-promotion zone in the right margin which lists completely unrelated products (that is, someone coming to this page would absolutely NEVER be interested in any of the products listed). (I don't want to disclose the merchant or product niche, so here's an example: imagine that someone searching for Ford auto parts were shown cross-promotions for Toro lawn mower parts.)

    (7) The "core keywords" did not appear in any headlines ( H1/H2/H3).
    Have you tried a campaign yet with minimal text on the pages? For instance a mainly graphical landing page where the text is in the graphic? What are you seeing happen with these types of pages? Im seeing a lot of poor ratings on pages like this even though the landing page itself is highly highly tageted.

  3. #3
    .
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,973
    sthbodyjewelry wrote: > "Have you tried a campaign yet with minimal text on the pages? For instance a mainly graphical landing page where the text is in the graphic? What are you seeing happen with these types of pages? Im seeing a lot of poor ratings on pages like this even though the landing page itself is highly highly tageted." <

    I was simply creating PPC campaigns that went straight to the regular product pages. As I mentioned, the pages looked as if they'd convert well, but it appears that someone did the "wrong" things when working on SEO.

    I've emailed the merchant, and will probably call and talk with them this week, to determine what to do next. I don't like creating "affiliate bridge" pages (landing pages on my site that require the user to click again to go to the merchant site), unless it's absolutely necessary. However, it certainly looks like that's what I'll need to do (and who knows, perhaps I'll be able to draw natural search traffic also).

    It is interesting to notice that the "quality score" appears to use the same criteria that Google uses when determining "natural" search relevance. It makes sense, but in this case, I honestly think the current page should convert pretty well if I can just get customers to it. The page is certainly not optimized -- and unfortunately went in the other direction to a sort of "negative optimization."

    I suppose it's really useful for less sophisticated advertisers to get this "heads up" in the form of Google's quality score -- but of course the less sophisticated folks won't know to enable the column.

  4. #4
    Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    January 17th, 2007
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by markwelch
    sthbodyjewelry wrote: > "Have you tried a campaign yet with minimal text on the pages? For instance a mainly graphical landing page where the text is in the graphic? What are you seeing happen with these types of pages? Im seeing a lot of poor ratings on pages like this even though the landing page itself is highly highly tageted." <

    I was simply creating PPC campaigns that went straight to the regular product pages. As I mentioned, the pages looked as if they'd convert well, but it appears that someone did the "wrong" things when working on SEO.

    I've emailed the merchant, and will probably call and talk with them this week, to determine what to do next. I don't like creating "affiliate bridge" pages (landing pages on my site that require the user to click again to go to the merchant site), unless it's absolutely necessary. However, it certainly looks like that's what I'll need to do (and who knows, perhaps I'll be able to draw natural search traffic also).

    It is interesting to notice that the "quality score" appears to use the same criteria that Google uses when determining "natural" search relevance. It makes sense, but in this case, I honestly think the current page should convert pretty well if I can just get customers to it. The page is certainly not optimized -- and unfortunately went in the other direction to a sort of "negative optimization."

    I suppose it's really useful for less sophisticated advertisers to get this "heads up" in the form of Google's quality score -- but of course the less sophisticated folks won't know to enable the column.
    True, an unsophisticated advertiser may not know about the column. I don't particularly like that Google uses the same kind of scoring to rank whether the ad and landing pages are relevant as they do with an organic search. Technically its a different game. One page used as a landing page on a paid search campaign may need to be used for many terms. A landing page is typically 1 page used to convert a visitor to a customer or lead. Lets say a local car dealer is doing a lead generation campaign and using one page as a landing page. The page has a call to action "Get a quick quote on an acura" and the ad says the same. The keywords the dealer is bidding on are "acura new york," "acura manhattan" & "acura dealers 11224" among about 250 different keywords describing his location. The keywords get a minimal amount of traffic each (typically the case for local search) but overall get about 500 clicks per month. This advertiser will be penalized because their landing page cant possibly rate well for every one of the 250 terms although all are very relevant, to the searcher and the landing page (not to mention they have high click through rates and conversion rates due to their relevance.) With organic search it is more fair to rank the pages based on perceived relevance by using keywords because a complete website can have hundreds of pages custom tailored to each keyword. I hope im making sense, im just venting about the inherent flaws of this new system to certain types of advertisers.

  5. #5
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Nunya, Business
    Posts
    23,684
    Mayne the merchants domain was tagged by Google in the past.

  6. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. 7 Google AdWords Quality Score Facts You Need to Know Before Setting Up a Campaign
    By Chuck Hamrick in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 7th, 2012, 04:04 AM
  2. PPC Google Adwords.. Poor Quality Score
    By KODea in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: November 20th, 2009, 11:47 AM
  3. Would Adwords Quality Score Be Affected By This
    By mweidner2782 in forum Midnight Cafe'
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 29th, 2008, 12:30 PM
  4. Google Quality Score
    By Howard Gottlieb in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: August 26th, 2008, 09:44 AM
  5. Quality Score with Google
    By KODea in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 24th, 2008, 01:18 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •