AdWords
1.8K members online now
1.8K members online now
Improve your AdWords performance and boost your ROI, CTR, and Quality Score
Guide Me
star_border
Reply

Which one of these is the better option in your opinion?

[ Edited ]
Follower ✭ ✭ ✭
# 1
Follower ✭ ✭ ✭

Hey everyone,


So I have a question that could create discussion / debates. This is the scenario:

 

Each ad group is a single keyword ad group:

 

Ad Group #1 (low search volume, does not trigger its ad):

Keyword: +hire +best +web +agency

 

Ad Group #2:

Keyword: +best +web +agency

Negative Keyword: +hire

 

Ad Group #3:

Keyword: +web +agency

Negative Keyword: +hire

Negative Keyword: +best

 

The user searches for: hire best web agency in san francisco

 

Ad group #1 will not trigger its ad due to low volume.

Ad group #2 will not trigger its ad since it has +hire as a negative keyword.

Ad group #3 will not trigger its ad since it has +hire as a negative keyword.

 

What would you argue?

 

1) That Ad Group # 2-3 should never have +hire as their negative keywords (since they're blocking potential traffic that yes "could've" been redirected to Ad Group #1 due to their higher relevancy)... because they fail to capitalize on the traffic, even though the relevancy is technically a guess at this point. best web agency OR web agency == same intent as: hire web agency in san francisco?

 

2) Leave everything as is, because you can't say that: best web agency OR web agency == same intent as: hire web agency in san francisco?

 

My answer:

I would go with option 2, because of its potential to maintain an account structure that's more targeted, even though I'm losing out on potential traffic that could drive relevant traffic.

 

Looking forward to hearing from everyone!

2 Expert replyverified_user

Re: Which one of these is the better option in your opinion?

Rising Star
# 2
Rising Star
Hi Michal,

First of all, I presume you mean the search query is
hire best web agency in san francisco
(otherwise Ad Group #1 couldn't trigger...)

I would go with option 2. If a keyword is low volume, nobody is searching for it. If they do start searching for it, Google will change the status:

If the number of search queries for these keywords increases even a small amount, they'll be reactivated and will start triggering your ads to show again. Our system checks and updates this status regularly.
https://support.google.com/adwords/answer/2616014

And of course if it gets so few searches that Google decides to be efficient at the cost of a potential paid click, then I wouldn't be worrying about it either.

Re: Which one of these is the better option in your opinion?

Rising Star
# 3
Rising Star
Hi Michal,

@RobSkelton has already provided you good suggestions considering both the scenarios proposed by you.

Since the ultimate goal is conversion(on any keywords used by you), I would suggest not to restrict the ad groups of a single campaign very much.
Restricting too much using cross ad group negative keywords may limit the ads triggering from any of the ad groups and hence there are chances of loosing a qualified conversion.
While on the other hand, giving some room to trigger the ads from any of the ad group(within a particular campaign) may add a valuable conversion to your campaign.

Additionally, I would recommend you to use phrase match type keywords along with modified broad match type keywords in the ad groups. As during the internal auction, keyword with high QS & bid wins the auction. Therefore, if the user query is most relevant to the phrase match type than the modified broad match type, phrase match will win the auction and will participate in the auction with other competitors.

Regards
Archit, AdWords Rising Star, Community Profile
Did you find any helpful responses or answers to your query ? If yes, please mark it as the ‘Best Answer.’

Re: Which one of these is the better option in your opinion?

Follower ✭ ✭ ✭
# 4
Follower ✭ ✭ ✭
That was my typo -- thanks for noting that, I've corrected it.