| Title: | A Prisoner’s Dilemma? PPC Advertising During The Current Financial Crisis |
| URL: | http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2008/10/20/prisoner-dilemma/ |
| Printed: | January 6, 2009 |
| Source: | The Rimm-Kaufman Group Blog, info@rimmkaufman.com |
- October 20, 2008
- 6 comments
Last week, Google announced Q3 earnings of $4.92 EPS, beating analyst expectations and boosting the stock. Year on year, Google’s revenue was up 31% for the quarter, with operating profit margins of 36.5% (non GAAP).
Those are astounding financial results. Google is clearly enjoying better results than many of its advertisers.
Some folks think Google must be cheating. I don’t. While both Google and its advertisers would be well-served by increased Google transparency, I believe Google’s operations and profits are honest.
This raises the question: how can Google surge while many of its advertisers slump?
I’d suggest we’re starting to see a prisoner’s dilemma playing out among Google advertisers.
Desperate for revenue, advertisers are tempted to increase the aggressiveness of their advertising. Advertisers feel they must spend more in advertising to generate each revenue dollar, because they need the sales, or because they sense their competitors are advertising harder, or because they fear their competition is about to start advertising harder.
So CPCs climb.
Meanwhile, the inventory of quality clicks — that is, clicks from searchers who go on to purchase — is a fixed quantity, independent of click prices or aggregate ad spend. Indeed, while advertiser fear puts upward pressure on CPCs, consumer fear during the financial crisis drags down conversion and average order sizes.
CPCs up. SPCs down. Profitable for Google, but a losing recipe for Google advertisers.
Short-term, the “rational” action in a prisoner’s dilemma is to “defect”. In the PPC context, considering only the short-term, this means advertisers pushing on the gas, paying more to ensure top position, and buying more clicks.
Long-term, however, in the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma, cautious “cooperation” yields better results. In the PPC context, this means advertisers should focus on their bottom lines, not their top lines. Should think long-term, not short-term. Should not pay more for clicks than those clicks are worth. Should focus on their P&L, not on how the competition is bidding.
Last week we offered six tips for PPC strategy during the current financial crisis. To whit: have clear economic targets. Use strong bid tools. Shift ad dollars to stronger channels. Don’t overpay an agency. Protect your bottom line.
And most of all, stay calm. Over-bidding helps none of us, except Google.
If you like this post, consider subscribing to our RSS feed. You can also have new posts sent to you via email.
Possibly Similar Posts
- Changes Afoot At Yahoo: Reorg Into Three Divisions, but No Layoffs
- SearchWiki For Adwords
- Brooooooad Match
- Restrict Access To Adsense API
- The Promotional Dilemma
Trackback
http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2008/10/20/prisoner-dilemma/trackback/Blogs Citing This Post
- Pingback: Economy Down, GOOGLE Up. - Gene A Wright on October 25, 2008
- Pingback: The Promotional Dilemma on November 10, 2008
Hey Alan -
I agree with you that something like what you propose is indeed happening. I think advertisers are ultimately pricing themselves out of one of their best online marketing channels. In order to break the cycle, using your analogy, advertisers need to cooperate. However, this seems unlikely, so as a group we continue to defect and bid higher.
This dynamic can’t carry on interminably, can it?
Ok, I’ll say it. Google has mastered the art of artificially inflating demand in a way that jacks up prices behind the scenes… And advertisers ain’t able to do nuttin ’bout it. It’s a great ‘black box’ model that all advertisers are forced to TRUST. Aaah, the handcuffs come out again.
Flashback to Overture days. Remember? A real, TRANSPARENT auction.
And don’t be fooled (as many have) into thinking that the equally opaque Quality Score (an ad’s quality and its impact on demand-based pricing) offsets the lack of transparency. It too is cloaked by Google (and now Yahoo too).
Jeff —
You wrote, “Google has mastered the art of artificially inflating demand in a way that jacks up prices behind the scenes.”
I do not believe that is the case.
While I fully concur AdWords is too opaque, I do not believe Google is manipulating prices. I believe the pseudo-auction is what is driving CPCs.
What data do you have to support your claim?
All Google advertisers, as well as DOJ Antitrust folks, are highly interested.
– Alan
I agree with how prices are driven by stupid bids. I work in some industries where there are weak periods of traffic. Problem is the people paid to process the clicks are not laid off so… to keep em busy the owners increase bids on less traffic hoping to get more leads.
Yes QS is a black box and the funny thing is PPC was thought of as an alternative to SEO. Turns out you have to SEO the pages anyway or you pay through the nose.