I think I speak of everyone, when I say: WTF
You just found out you missed on the biggest opportunity in the world? I thought so.
They really show Google ads on these pointless pages?
If I did that my adsense account would be terminated.
There’s no comparison between content pages to direct navigation. Direct navigation is as close as it gets to user’s intent.
At the end of the day all of us pay for the clutter created by domain names which exist only to capture page views. Presently to put a domain on line you just need to pay for registration and hosting on two DNS servers. The distributed nature of DNS takes care of the rest.
Should a way be found to make domain squatters pay the true cost of their collections?
Hey, I’d like to own all houses in my neighborhood as well but “At the end of the day all of us pay for the clutter created” by other property owners who are there just to occupy the property, some regularly, and some, as here in South Florida, a couple of months a year.
So now this kind of domain squatting has become respectable? Yeah right.
Better get some education before you keep talking. This is really an ignorant comment all around and besides making the writer look like a total fool it doesn’t say a thing.
There are a couple of positive comments here, one I really like..
>An obscure Web address may have four or so visitors a month
Dude, I need to invest in this.
Very rare on Slashdot’s domain discussions. Finally someone is thinking here!
Sahar, I think Google and Yahoo have created a problem for the domaining industry. Think about this from the other side - who is ultimately paying domainers? Yes, PPC advertisers. Here’s the problem, though. PPC advertisers have no idea their ads are being placed on parked domains. Google AdWords has a “search network” and a “content network” while Yahoo! Search Marketing has “sponsored search” and “content match” but no mention of parked domains. You have to read the fine print (and/or log files) to find the truth.
PPC ads running on parked domains are not contextual advertising. There’s no content on these sites. A domain name in and of itself is not sufficient content for their algorithms. PPC ads running on parked domains are not search engine advertising. Yes, you can make a case that some generic keyword domains are essentially the same as a search. However, much of the PPC traffic I see is NOT from generic keyword domains.
Google needs to create a “domain network” and Yahoo! needs to create a “domain match” so the parked domain traffic can stand on its own. If advertisers want it, they can choose it. If it converts well, they will keep it. To distribute search engine ads or contextual ads on parked domains is distribution fraud. This fraud makes domainers look bad, but the real culprits here are Google and Yahoo! themselves. It is in the best interest of both PPC advertisers and domainers to increase the transparency of parked domain traffic.
Somehow, though, I doubt most domainers welcome the idea. What do you think?
—-ANSWER—-
Hi Richard,
I think the philosophy here of both Google and Yahoo is advertisers don’t understand domain traffic enough, so they make the decision for them based on internal data or some other motives (read: $$$). It’s kind of like water in your house. It doesn’t really matter where it’s coming from as long as its clean and it’s coming.
I don’t know what google and Yahoo should do, it is for them to decide. I think the whole ppc industry is a house of cards that will fall flat on its face one day, then we will look back and say how have we lived with it for so long? Real conversions is directly related to sales, not to ip numbers and clicks.
I do see another major issue that is hurting domainers even further, and that is arbitrage players, either domainers who get into arbitrage or arbitrage players getting into domains.
Pure type-in portfolios will still be worth their weight in gold but if Google/Yahoo don’t differentiate between these two types of portfolios I think domainers in general will again look like the ones at fault, even though many of us don’t do arbitrage at all.
I agree with you most domainers would not welcome this idea, nor Google and Yahoo. There’s too much money on the table for Google/Yahoo to try something so radically different when they know what exist work well (they did say few times direct nav traffic is of the highest quality).
Think of it in terms of money. If google/yahoo implement an “opt in” approach it means most who don’t understand the domain channel will not opt in, making google and yahoo lose many billions of dollars on the channel. I don’t see this happening.
Isn’t the line blurring though between arbitrage ad buyers and domain buyers anyway?
Many of the parking sites are generating fuller, more “real” looking sites, with detailed template choices that help you qualify the traffic better, clearly not just aimed at spiders, but at real human traffic.
The keyword fields are being augmented with mini CMS systems and short articles and other content are being inserted to further qualify the adsense ads.
Ultimately, it’s still all about conversions.
I think it’s inevitable that the PPC model will follow the CPM model and fade as advertisers become more sophisticated and understand the chances for fraud and manipulation by advanced users.
Cost per Conversion based commission structures I think will become the norm as players like google can track a users path across multiple domains that are all using analytics.
Paying a higher fee, even a % of the sale for a fully converted sale / signup / action is a far more manageable business expense than wildly fluxuating and easily manipulated CPC campaigns.
Plus, it’s fair.. win/win will always prevail in the end.
Your point about different types of domainers (arbitrage vs type-in) is important. I’ve seen too much garbage traffic from searchportal.information.com on the Google AdWords search network that I’ve started blocking all domainsponsor.com traffic. Google has reluctantly divulged how to block parked domain traffic. Trouble is, it can’t be done on a domain by domain basis. It’s blocked at the partner level. So, I’m having to throw out the baby with the bath water. Any type-in domains that use domainsponsor will be blocked for all of my clients. Yes, Google needs to address this issue.
Regarding an “opt in” to a domain network, both Google and Yahoo! would make it on by default and force an “opt out” choice, I’m sure. That’s what they do with contextual advertising. Most PPC advertisers don’t realize they’re purchasing search advertising contextual advertising ( parked domain advertising). If they put the burden on the advertiser to opt out, I don’t think there’d be a big change from the point of view of domainers in the short term.
BTW, if it was possible to isolate genuine type-in domain traffic in a separate ad campaign on Google, PPC advertisers would likely choose this over content ads and/or bid higher. Revenues would actually increase for type-in domainers if Google (and Yahoo!) created a new distribution option for type-in domains.
—-ANSWER—-
Its not a bad idea Richard, an opt-out model. Why do you think they are not doing it? Maybe it’s in the works?
Thanks, Sahar. Yes, I think a separate domain network in AdWords which would be the flip side of the AdSense for Domains program would be logical. It would be beneficial both to PPC advertisers and domainers. Many parked domains are classified as content sites and have deflated PPC revenue because PPC advertisers set lower bids on the content network and Google also applies smart pricing. This would help the search engines, too, as the perception of click fraud would diminish. Win-win-win.
I don’t think it’ll happen, though, without outside pressure. Perhaps Google and Yahoo! are waiting for the other to blink. Yahoo! might be forced to make ad distribution / syndication changes due to the YahooSyndicationFraud.com class action. If that happens, I suspect Google will follow suit. You’d expect Google to take the lead, particularly as they are currently cracking down on MFA sites. I think they’re making too much money off of ignorant advertisers, though. Now that they’re a public company, it’s growth at any cost.
If neither big PPC vendor makes changes, this could actually create a business opportunity for a new company. Imagine a PPC advertising network solely for keyword-rich generic domains. PPC advertisers would want to buy. Domainers would want to sell and remove Google and Yahoo! from their realm. Would be difficult to get started, though, since there’s so much inventory with the big PPC vendors. Perhaps a company like Sendori would slowly build out a domain-only PPC network in tandem with their core service. Maybe a company like AdBrite would create a domain-only marketplace. Somehow, there needs to be more transparency and better value both for domainers and advertisers, without sharing the pie with Yahoo! and Google.
—-ANSWER—-
It’s all very interesting Richard, to hear your perspective on this issue. I guess like gas, there’s different grades, and it should be priced different. I do think domain traffic is better then direct search traffic for many reaosns but you can expect Google/Yahoo to never admit this, as it contradicts their businesses.
Domain owners are aware we’re too depandant. The biggest risk in the domain business is the fact there’s only two major players. if one drops then we’re at the mercy of the other. Not good from where I sit.
Thinking more about it, domainers really have no say here, we don’t make the rules, we just follow them. This is strictly Google/Yahoo issue and they have their own calculation of what they do, and without sharing data (which they don’t), we’re all guessing.
I am very intersted and intrigued with the domain business. I would like to learn as much as possible about how to get started and is there any material out there that is worth buying to expediated the learning process. Thanks.
w.s.
—-ANSWER—-
Nothing is worth buying to learn here, just read everything you can find on sites and forums related to domains and you wull learn in no time.