Google needs some ad sense

Google is secretive. This started as a deliberate marketing mystique, but endures today more as a really annoying company habit. Google folks don't understand why the rest of us have a problem with this, but then Google folks aren't like you and me. The result of this secrecy and Google's "almighty algorithm" mentality is that the company makes changes -- and mistakes -- without informing its customers or even doing all that much to correct the problems. It's all just beta code, after all. But the business part is real, as is the money that some people have lost because of Google's poor communication skills combined, frankly, with poor follow-through.

First there is click fraud. Google makes its money when people click on Google ads, but some of those clicks are fraudulent -- are not honestly intended to gain information or to buy products. Click fraud generally comes in two varieties that I'll call "buy" and "sell." An example of buy-side click fraud would be my little sister religiously clicking on every Google ad on this page (What? We have no Google ads?) in the mistaken belief that doing so would make me some money. It is mass clicking by a single person without an intention to actually buy or even to gain information. Sell-side click fraud would be one advertiser clicking on the ads of a competitor with the intention of costing that competitor money without increasing their sales. Both types of click fraud ought to be detectable, and in fact, Google says it already detects the 10 percent or so of clicks that are fraudulent (Business 2.0 magazine says it is more like 30 percent), and adjusts the bill before the advertiser even knows what is happening.

But not all click fraud is detected automatically. It is one thing to notice the same IP address being used to click 30 ads in three seconds (that is obviously fraud), but quite another if the clicks are spread out or come from what appear to be a variety of users. There, too, Google pledges to make things right, though it may take some time -- too much time, I think.

I was a victim of click fraud, which in this case is simply defined as my Google AdWords bill climbing from $250 one month to $4,000 the next with no change in the campaign or increase in sales. Mario contacted Google, which, after an "investigation," decided that I was, indeed, a victim of click fraud. Good for Google! But that was seven weeks ago and I ammy still waiting my credit card to be reimbursed for $3,750. Google has yet to explain why it is taking so long for me to get my money back. For that matter, Google has yet to actually say that I will GET my money back. They are still "investigating," which could mean anything because the company will not explain what it means.

It all comes down to the AdWords algorithm and its intent, which isn't to help customers, but to simply maximize profit for Google.

Comments

[Raghu Kulkarni]

Try searching for Gmail on Google; you see NO advertisements on the right or top. Why? If you try to advertise for this keyword, the MINIMUM is some US$25. Explain to me why this is no evil. If the Adwords program is really based on competing companies trying to gain top level access to a certain keyword, it should have been an open game decided by the market, not by Google trying to wipe out any chance of anyone trying to push anything close to Gmail. They know Gmail is extremely crucial to their plans and they will do anything to keep it that way, good or bad.

[Conference Coordinator]

There are always going to be discrepancies here and there and perhaps I am naive to think that Google would find click fraud for themselves let alone the users. At the same time all these 80% new user clicks on all these adds is a little disconcerting at times, all these small amounts can add up over the course of time of course. More most of us with low traffic volume we dont really investigate the 1.50 charge as oppose to 1.25 do we?

This guy Mario is one of the most interesting people I have listened to for a while. Where is more of your work?