Ask HN: Why do companies buy ads when they are the top result in search?
For example, go to google.com and type in: "Squarespace". Squarespace has an ad at the top and then they are the first result. On the surface, this seems counter-intuitive because a user searching 'squarespace' would likely choose the organic link anyway. This is very common. Why do companies do this? Is it a defense mechanism so other competitors do not win ad placements right above their organic search result?
94 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 167 ms ] threadAlso prevents someone from buying an ad for Squarespace.co or some other domain for a phishing site, which could result in bad press from a """"hack"""" (note the use of quotes, it's not hacking.)
1) Brand SEM terms are cheap - if you own the brand, especially something like Squarespace, your ad will have a high quality score and will thus pay a much lower CPC than a competitor trying to vie for eyeballs with your brand name as a keyword. This means that brand terms generally are pretty cheap to buy.
2) Real estate ownership - The more real estate on the page you own the more click share you will get. This will keep other organic listings from getting click share which may mean your competitors will get less traffic off of searches for you.
3) Control over message - Ads provide a high degree of creative control which means you can change the copy and also add on Ad Extensions like sitelinks, app download buttons, "click to call" buttons, etc. These are all things that are harder to control on your organic listing.
1. If you're not there, someone else is. If Nike didn't buy brand terms, adidas would and would steal tons of customers.
2. Paid results (and other results like maps, shopping, etc) often push organic results below the fold so no one sees them. You need to be above the fold.
TS using "Squarespace" as example, not "web shop".
Google loves branded Kws on Adwords. Bidding on competitors will have a low quality score, but drives up the competition for the brand owner. With all of the above the fold distractions, you basically have to pay if you want to be above the fold.
Source: https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/6118?hl=en
I am not discounting the validity of the argument to bid on brand terms and I bid on brand terms for most of my clients...but I always disclose this inherent bias before making a recommendation...
In truth, every brand should test for themselves how it impacts their bottom line and if protecting their brand is worth the spend...
------ The cynical voice in my head thinks that most digital advertising today is really ad tech companies hijacking revenue that brands earned already...and if not for competitors using that same tech, no one really needs it... (i.e. remarketing, custom audiences, branded search, first party data, etc...)
In reality, I actively spend my clients money on these tactics and congratulate myself on the results I generate for them... but in the back of my mind I am waiting for the ad tech bubble to burst and media companies disappearing and being replaced by branded content, content marketing, etc...
Edit:spelling
The only reason I've ever witnessed is SEO/M ego rubbing, and the conversations usually go:
"we are spending more than our monthly revenue on brand ppc ads!"
"But you cover the entire first page of Google for your terms, branded and product. Turn the ads off."
"But all our traffic cones through the ads!"
"That's because you're swamping your organic terms."
"Oh gee, I don't know, worm-tongue SEO/M-master, what do I do?"
"Spend more money with my PPC agency! We know more about web development then web developers, we studied drama and literature. And we have a certificate from google saying we're good webmasters. Do your development agency?"
http://www.lunametrics.com/blog/2016/04/21/compare-actual-vs...
https://google.github.io/CausalImpact/CausalImpact.html
Because some of the people who studied marketing did not sleep through their econometric classes.
The horror.
From attending conferences it doesn't seem like anyone is really on the ball with attribution reporting. The best thing you can do for marketing analytics is implement rigorous and scientific experiments, which require massive buy in. If anyone wants to discuss this or work towards a solution send me an email (in profile.)
There is a very cool and informative video from Google that shows what goes into bidding for and awarding the ads that are shown. I had truly encourage you watch this:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PjOHTFRaBWA
That being said they were not 100% sure.
Probably because they are less web savvy and less aware of the options they have.
As an alternative, perhaps people who click the top ad are pressed for time, which is often the case with high income individuals.
Web Savyy people have AdBlockers. It's the first thing to install right after the operating system itself.
Clicking the ad means you don't have an AdBlocker, therefore you are not web savyy.
We're talking about ads in Google search results, right? Not banner ads? Am I missing something??
(Well, except the official flavour of AdBlock Plus, which was paid a shitton of money by Google to stop blacklisting them :D)
I think increasing the clickable area is pretty important, especially with mobile users.
And customers, since they know it's an ad, might be nice and click on the organic link instead. :-)
They find no measurable short term benefit to purchasing the "Ebay" keyword on sales.
But also lots of the other reasons posted here are very true too.
In all seriousness, clients obsess about their ads and how it appears way more than the agencies do...They often don't realize that it can hurt their CTR, their quality scores, and pollute the data used to measure results... Google built an ad preview tool for this very reason.
So, if you google your keywords to see how your ad appears, you have 2 choices. Click on your ad, which will cost you money or dont click and lower your click through rate which can lower your quality score, especially if you do it often.
The issue of polluting data is that now your agency or whoever is managing your SEM sees either a lower click through rate if your dont click or a lower conversion rate if you do click and will make optimization decisions without knowing how many searches were you.
Google has an ad preview tool in Adwords to let you check without impacting your data.
In the greater scheme of things, if its a high volume query, the harm is minimal, but if its a high value term with low search volume (i.e. a big ticket local service) it can really hurt you.
There are tricks to get around this as well that sometimes work. (i.e. Dynamic Keyword Insertion)
edit: Source: https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/6118?hl=en
You choose a list of terms you want to show your ad in, but by default Google will also put your ad up in "related" searches. If your company or product is already popular enough, it's likely to end up in the related searches for the terms you chose.
This cost me quite a bit of money before I found out I was wasting money on these ads by accident.
I don't mean to be harsh, but you shouldn't be spending money on search advertising without taking the 2 minutes to understand match types. There is no default other than showing you very closely related variant matching (i.e. plural to singular)...
Yes, if you run broad match keywords and dont use negatives, you run the risk of wasting lots of money...but it's hardly a default setting.
If I understand his comment, if you select the term "sweatshirt" your add is also displayed when people search "American Eagle," and that may be yourself and you're wasting money.
https://support.google.com/adwords/answer/2497836?hl=en
Of course he and many others can advertise on Google without understanding match types. The point of the service provided by Google is that it's on the whole, significantly easier than "traditional" ad buying. Regardless of the repercussions, AdSense let him buy ads without that understanding.
With this kind of fervor, I have to presume you're either genuinely very, very bad at providing people with advice or, what I presume to be the case, angry or pessimistic about something else entirely.
Frankly I think you owe the comment an apology for your tone regardless of the validity of your opinion on what training ought to be necessary before using a particular web app.
What the hell gave you that impression?
He does not owe any appologies. He is completely right. How to have a discussion where one side doesn't know anything but pretends that it does and lectures the side that actually knows?
Being able to google every problem programmers face has given them the false sense that everything is very easy. You just need to read a couple of articles on the front page of google and you're done.
(Edit: Your post has me confused because you start off talking about tone and than you fail to take your own advice about reasonable discourse.)
Your assumptions however are way off...I would never criticize someone for something remotely excusable, but advertising on Google without taking 2 minutes or less to learn something as fundamental as match types is about as reckless as buying a rolex on the streets from a guy on a manhattan street corner and than feeling ripped off...Some things, like match types, fit into the category of reckless despite how easy you want to think running Adwords is.
My frustration is that so many people waste so much money on digital advertising because "they think they can do it themselves."
This specific guy was sharing advice warning people about adwords wasting his money. Adwords didnt waste him a penny, his unwillingness to do less than 2 minutes of preperation or asking a pro led to that...
Even with over a decade experience, I still learn new things about Adwords almost daily...The idea that people think that its simple and they can run it themselves is frustrating, but to not even know about match types, I cant think of any excuse that justifies it short of arrogance and/or laziness.
Adwords is an auction. When my competitors choose to waste money, My costs get driven up. It hurts everyone but Google...so take the 2 seconds to read up on how to do it or dont complain and tell the world it doesnt work.
Or ask me, Im happy to help with basic strategy for free, its in my best interest for my competitors to run advertising that is accountable to a bottom line and thay doesnt compete in irrelevant query auctions.
You're not very nice, calling me arrogant and/or lazy.
It was simply a false assumption that the matching would be strict by default. And possibly a mistake that a lot of people are making, considering all the companies that are advertising for themselves.
You might be right about other companies making those same assumptions...I would love to understand more about their thought process. When you started with adwords, did you consider hiring a pro or run a few searches for beginner tips or did you just follow the onboarding to get started? I am not asking to prove a point, I am asking to get an idea about what a newbie might assume when getting started with Adwords.
I would never try to fix my cars engine on my own, nor would I fix my sewer line. I would probably atleast watch a youtube video before changing my oil...I genuinely want to understand what people think when they assume they can run adwords on their own without researching how to do it effectively?
It was not clear in your previous comment that "very closely related variant matching" included as well not so closely related variants like synonyms and related searches, given that you said it meant "plural to singular."
> Broad match is the default match type that all your keywords are assigned if you don't specify another match type (exact match, phrase match, or negative match). The Google AdWords system automatically runs your ads on relevant variations of your keywords, including synonyms, singular and plural forms, possible misspellings, stemmings (such as floor and flooring), related searches, and other relevant variations. To help deliver relevant matches, this match type may also take the customer's recent search activities into account.(https://support.google.com/adwords/answer/2497828)
Edit: The critique above may not be fair because your point seems to be that "broad match" is not the default setting (so you really think that the default shows only very closely related variants and not synonyms or related searches). However, if this is what you really meant then you seem to be wrong.
That is not true except with broad match. you are confusing broad match with close variant matching. close Variant matching on phrase and exact match only triggers really close variants, like I indicated. There are also adwords scripts that give you even more control http://www.brainlabsdigital.com/adwords-scripts-reversing-th...
As far as broad match being default. I suppose you are technically right... However, anyone that gives control to Google about how they spend your money is begging to lose money.
Never ever ever use the default settings of an ad platform...it's basically inviting them to take all your money without showing results.
Probably it's good advice to never used the default settings. And maybe it's ok to ignore what is the default. But I find really amusing that you, an expert with over a decade of experience, is telling people that they "shouldn't be spending money on search advertising without taking the 2 minutes to understand match types" (implying that it was his fault and not Google's because "if you run broad match keywords and dont use negatives, you run the risk of wasting lots of money...but it's hardly a default setting") while stating as a fact that the default is something different from what it actually is.
Broad match is really not a default in the traditional sense...it is a default if you are too lazy/arrogant/dumb to understand how Google serves ads in the most basic way before flipping the switch on.
If you are too lazy to google Adwords Beginner or read Googles getting started documentation, you only have yourself to blame. Understanding match types is absolute fundamentals day one stuff.
Yes, if you want to be completely blind, you get backed into a default, but you only have yourself to blame if that happens...it is so fundamental and easy to discover that I just cant reconcile a rational scenario with not knowing enough to not end up defaulting to broad match with no idea that there is even a thing called match types.
Edit: just to add to this, I was being literal when I mentioned 2 minutes...it literally does not take more than 2 minutes to learn how Google matches ads to queries...
Edit2: I realize I am being a little defensive and unforgiving. The truth is, I can see plenty of people making this mistake...just assuming that its super easy to advertise...I guess I get a little emotional because its such a easy thing to learn. Its like my mom asking me a technical question that I simply Google and tell her the answer...she could have easily googled it herself :) understandable but frustrating!
There are great ways to make sure you dont waste money, like using different match types, writing very relevant ads that qualify people so the wrong people wont click and using negative keywords.
Its a good idea to Google, "Adwords beginner (tips, guide, pitfalls, mistakes)" any of these will surface great info. to get you started on the right foot.
shiver
Personally, as a search marketer, I always assume that someone willing to pay money to reach me probably has a more relevant offering and experience for me, so I am slightly biased to click on ads...
Your question should really be more nuanced. Are you talking about navigational searches, informational searches, or transactional searches. There is different intent and context with how and why people search at different times which probably results in different behavior.
For example, an informational search from me almost never clicks on an ad but either knowledge graph or a link half way down the page.
A transactional search will almost always go to a paid ad, and a navigational search will likely go to the organic listing that points to that page...unless the ad points to that specific page. (this is just my own experience.)
I agree with informational search, I think that clicking on an ad will put me lower in their sales funnel which means more annoying popups and remarketing.
(Yes, I'd be willing to pay a modest subscription if Google got out of the advertising business. No, I doubt this pledge will ever be put to the test...)
That would be like asking Ford to get out of the automotive business. Something like 94% of Google's revenue comes from their advertising division.
More importantly, I wish people would stop pitching the subscription model when it comes to alternatives to advertising. Study after study, after real world example, after real world example has shown that subscription models just don't work. Period. Sure, you may have one or 2 rare exceptions where a site didn't crash and burn but the overwhelming majority of sites that have tried it have fallen hard. And the ones that saw success only saw very tepid success.
It's a model that just doesn't work.
https://www.google.com/contributor/welcome/
Please let us know the amount you contributed.
Note, also, that "fewer adverts" isn't the same as "Google out of the advertising business"! Although, in practice, I probably would pay for the former as well if it were an option.
As someone else mentioned down thread, I'm happy to reward those who cannibalize their organic results and help ensure that their adwords budget doesn't go unused...