AdWords
2.2K members online now
2.2K members online now
Improve your AdWords performance and boost your ROI, CTR, and Quality Score
Guide Me
star_border
Reply

Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Follower ✭ ☆ ☆
# 1
Follower ✭ ☆ ☆

Hello Guys

 

I'm sure this subject has been covered but I wanted to ask some questions please

 

I am changing my account to use EXACT, PHRASE & BMM Match Types - I currently only use Exact and Phrase.

 

I have two questions, I have read that I need to stagger my bids, in that I need to bid highest for Exact, a little less for Phrase and a little less still for BMM.

 

Is anyone able to explain why to me, it was my understanding that google uses the keyword most closely matched to the customers search query.

 

So if a customer searches for [Hulk Collectible Figure]

 

In my account I have [Hulk Collectible Figure] and "Hulk Collectible Figure" and +Hulk +Collectible +Figure all with the same landing page and adcopy.....why wouldn't google ALWAYS select [Hulk Collectible Figure] why is it necessary to bid higher?

 

My second question is tied into the first question, am I required to copy the positive keywords of the previous match type into the negative keywords of the next match type.

 

I.e Exact Positve Keywords need to be pasted into Phrase Negative keywords. Phrase Positive Keywords > BMM Negative keywords.

 

I'm not 100% sure why....could do with being enlightened Smiley Happy

 

Thanks

 

 

 

2 Expert replyverified_user
Marked as Best Answer.
Solution
Accepted by topic author Michael F
September 2015

Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Participant ✭ ✭ ✭
# 2
Participant ✭ ✭ ✭
Hi Michael,

As you correctly stated, this is a subject that is dealt with often. And their are differences in how some people choose to structure their match typing.

From what you describe to me it sounds like you are using both at the same time. Which is not necessary.

One structure uses a tiered bidding, so you bid higher for the more restrictive match types, this has the advantage of allowing you too have all the match types in one ad group.

The other structure is with embedded negatives, here you have to have separate ad groups for the different match types. And by using the embedded negatives (so exact match as a negative in phrase match ad group etc) you know do not need to tier your bidding as the exact match search query can only trigger the exact match keyword.

I personally prefer the second, as it does not tie you down to having to bid higher with more restrictive match types, you can bid what is most profitable for you. It also allows you to ensure that the search query in question is going to the exact ad that you want it to, depending on your structure.

The first structure does not require embedded negatives which alone is an advantage but it does require your bidding to be tiered, whether in the same ad group or not. If it is in the same ad group then you do not have the control over your ads as you do with embedded negatives (you either need specific ads for all match types or general ads to fit various search queries that could trigger your keywords). My biggest dislike of the second structure though is that it drives the price of exact match up more than it should. Yes it tends to be the most profitable keywords (hence you making it exact) and can be more expensive just based on that factor, but when you couple that with the fact that people are increasing their max CPC on the match type because of structure, prices become more inflated.
A large advantage to the tiered structure though is that it gives AdWords the freedom to match according to a variety of factors that you have no control of with the first structure. Exact match goes to exact match but in the tiered structure exact match could go to broad match which may have a better ad suited to the users need as determined by recent user behaviour (for example) which only Google can take into factor. You may also find CPC's drop in some cases as the most relevant match type is triggered given the circumstances.

But I digress, at the end of the day neither way is wrong, it all comes down to how you prefer to do things and what is best for you & your account.

Does this all make sense?

Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Follower ✭ ☆ ☆
# 3
Follower ✭ ☆ ☆
Hi Clynton

Thanks for the response.....

I have all the same type of keywords in the same adgroup, so I keep all the Exact matches in one ad group and then all the phrase in one ad group. So now I know I need to use the embedded negative method - thank you.

This brings me onto another point, at the moment what I have been doing was scouring my search terms and finding new keywords and then adding them into my phrase and exact ad groups.

For example I may find that "Red Hulk VInyl Figurine" triggered my add....I will then start 2 new adgroups, (one Exact, one phrase) and send this search term a landing page that has a red hulk and also write new ad copy that includes [Red Hulk Vinyl Figurine] in the text.

Based on what you say should I always be doing this? In my mind I do so to give my customer a better experience when they click the advert which hopefully improves my quality score.....but often I guess keywords are not as obvious as what I have described and Im not sure how to approach them. For example what happens if I find a keyword which is similar to
a keyword I already have (I cannot think of an example right now), what should I do?

Do I add it in? or do I need to qualify that keyword first? i.e see how many impressions or clicks I am getting first?



Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Participant ✭ ✭ ✭
# 4
Participant ✭ ✭ ✭
Hi Michael F,

While this is a nice approach: Crafting targeted landing pages and specific ad copy for separate keywords you need to know where to draw the line.

Is it really worth crafting a new landing page & ad group & ad copy for a search term that gets searched for once a month? I would certainly not think so, you just need to decide where the line lies for you, how many searches will justify the effort.

How I like to approach the SQR is with 3 main objectives in mind. First and foremost is negatives, it is used mostly for adding negatives and reducing 'wasted' spend. Then I look for new keyword ideas and lastly use it to identify problems with account structure.

For a simplified example if I were to look at a SQR for the past year I would order it by impressions and then approach it as such:

Anything over 200 impressions gets considered for addition, anything over 20 impressions gets considered for negatives and the whole time I am looking at what search terms are matching what keywords in which ad groups.

The reason for more emphasis on negatives is simply due to restricted data. We do not see all the search queries that triggered our ads. We only see the ones that got a click or had a substantial amount of impressions. So by considering the negatives a lot further down it is meant to pick up on those search queries similar to the ones that we can't see. For this reason you need to carefully consider what you will add as your negatives to the campaign, as you want it to be as broad as possible (catch all related irrelevant searches) without restricting the traffic you actually want.

But to answer your question specifically, I would always 'qualify' every keyword you add whether it is positive or negative, more so in your case as you are going through additional effort in each case.

Good luck

Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Top Contributor
# 5
Top Contributor

Hi MIchael, I'm going to muddy the waters here a little following Clynton's excellent responses.

 

I'll admit, I'm not a big fan of the embedded negatives approach or the tiered approach, primarily because Google has algorithms that handle multiple matching Keywords and which do so to the Account's best advantage, but I'll expand a little.

 

When you use the embedded negatives approach you're forcing AdWords to match against a particular Keyword when two or more have the potential to match.  Google's algos will automatically choose the "best" Keyword to use as a match so it's really not necessary to force anything - especially when "best" will often mean the cheapest.  The only situation where you might want to override these automated processes is where you want to show specific Ads for the match types and/or have specific landing pages for those types and I'd argue that if it is clear enough that a user has a different intent when matching against a Phrase Keyword as opposed to matching against an Exact Keyword, you should be using entirely different Keywords, not just different match types.

 

I cannot advocate using the tiered method because your bids for your Keywords should always be based upon their performance, not blindly set simply because of their match type.  If your Phrase match returns a better conversion rate at a higher ROAS than your Exact match, why would you bid more for the Exact?

 

All this said, I have to say not only do I have a lot of respect for Clynton, so I would recommend you consider his comments equally against mine, but also that with AdWords there are nearly always situations that do require an unusual approach so it's very rare that anyone can say this is definitely the right way to do something.  In almost all cases, questions such as this can only really be answered by your own testing and that testing could take some time as you'll need to give each experiment time to return significant data.

 

If you haven't already done so, I recommend you read this help article which I present as my primary case against embedded negatives:

 

https://support.google.com/adwords/answer/2756257?hl=en

 

Jon

AdWords Top Contributor Google+ Profile | Partner Profile | AdWords Audits

Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Participant ✭ ✭ ✭
# 6
Participant ✭ ✭ ✭
Haha! With a question as this thread poses there will always be muddying of the water.

Jon Makes some excellent points as always, but as he has echoed my thoughts about what is best for you & your account, that should be the main point to take away. You need to decide what is best for you and your account (done through testing) and make the call.

I think I am one of the few here that actively support embedded negatives, so I expect some debate, but it comes down to the fact that I prefer the type of control (Freud may have fun with that one) it gives especially given the granularity that I like to use in my accounts. I also only use exact and modified broad (no phrase), so this does play a factor as each match type has a specific goal.

Good luck!

Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Top Contributor
# 7
Top Contributor

Small addition from my side:

I like the embedded bidding when a tightly themed ad-copy is used with "exact match"  OR  extensive use of DKI -for the latter, it's convenient to use DKI with exact match. (The ad-copy "seamlessly fits" to the keyword)

Moshe, AdWords Top Contributor , Twitter | Linkedin | Community Profile | Ad-Globe
Did you find any helpful responses or answers to your query? If yes, please mark it as the ‘Best Answer’

Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Top Contributor
# 8
Top Contributor

@MosheTLV as far as DKI (Keyword Insertion) is concerned it will work in exactly the same way regardless of match type if all the Keywords are the same.

 

"buy red shoes", +buy +red +shoes and [buy red shoes] will all appear in an Ad as Buy Red Shoes when using DKI.

 

Jon

AdWords Top Contributor Google+ Profile | Partner Profile | AdWords Audits

Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Top Contributor
# 9
Top Contributor

@Jon_Gritton ; You miss understood me: I did not mean in terms of functionality.  What I meant was that it's easier to check the "integration"   of DKI in the ad-text when  exact match used.  

 

When you go through a list of keywords, and check / verify what it would look like when inserted -  with exact match you could instantly  see if  the text makes sense... (With broad match I start thinking whether close variant will change the meaning, while in exact match, I only look for plurals- though close variants are not limited to plurals. 

Moshe, AdWords Top Contributor , Twitter | Linkedin | Community Profile | Ad-Globe
Did you find any helpful responses or answers to your query? If yes, please mark it as the ‘Best Answer’

Re: Questions regarding using Exact, Phrase & BMM Match Types

Follower ✭ ☆ ☆
# 10
Follower ✭ ☆ ☆
@Clynton very Interesting point you make.....(you are probably going to wish you never answered my question so well lol)

I have been racking my brain over how to deal with different versions of the same character.

Lets take Batman for instance, there is 1966 Batman, Arkham Asylum Batman, Dark Knight Batman and others too....previously I was only targeting generic terms as I said.

However I was wondering how to tackle this problem (of so many different versions but now it's clear there won't be sufficient traffic to warrant spending that level of time spliting everything out in that way so I shall just do a Batman landing page and use BMM to capture all the versions of this.

I do use Search Query mainly for negatives but I do remember someone said not to go too crazy with the negatives so I would be interested in hearing some more about how you (or anyone else) handle negatives they find here?