EP121 - The Great Google ads Query Caper of 2020

1
00:00:09,500 --> 00:00:11,700
Hello and welcome to this week's
Roundup.

2
00:00:11,700 --> 00:00:13,600
Episode of the PPC chapter 2
discussion.

3
00:00:13,600 --> 00:00:15,800
That happens on Tuesdays at 5
p.m.

4
00:00:15,800 --> 00:00:18,800
GMT.
I'm your host a new of mine Swan

5
00:00:18,900 --> 00:00:22,300
and brain Labs.
Now I use this platform to share

6
00:00:22,800 --> 00:00:27,700
not just experts ideas but also
my ideas and considerations and

7
00:00:27,700 --> 00:00:30,300
considered even best practices
about paid searches.

8
00:00:30,500 --> 00:00:34,000
Actually automation paid media
and the direction of the digital

9
00:00:34,400 --> 00:00:37,400
industry.
And yeah, this week is is very

10
00:00:37,400 --> 00:00:39,400
much going to be at the
direction of the digital

11
00:00:39,400 --> 00:00:43,600
industry and advices on how to
continue to do paid.

12
00:00:43,600 --> 00:00:46,300
Media paid search, especially
much better.

13
00:00:46,900 --> 00:00:49,200
So, yeah, if you want to keep up
to date with my tips and tricks

14
00:00:49,200 --> 00:00:52,400
in the industry, or even just
gets my favorite script of the

15
00:00:52,400 --> 00:00:55,500
week, like, comment and follow
on Facebook, Twitter or

16
00:00:55,500 --> 00:00:59,200
Instagram, on my handle, mind
Swan PPC, or just to see

17
00:00:59,200 --> 00:01:01,900
Snippets and quotes.
From the previous podcast,

18
00:01:01,900 --> 00:01:06,000
follow our dedicated pasta
podcast, Instagram, PPC, chat

19
00:01:06,000 --> 00:01:09,700
underscore round up.
So it's been a busy few days but

20
00:01:09,700 --> 00:01:12,200
I was yeah.
Luckily able to sneak into this

21
00:01:12,200 --> 00:01:16,400
week's discussion little bit
about from that was led by Julie

22
00:01:16,400 --> 00:01:23,200
bikini on the topic of the grid.
Google ads query, Caper of 2020.

23
00:01:23,200 --> 00:01:26,700
So yeah, if you've not heard
about this yet, Google has

24
00:01:26,700 --> 00:01:30,100
decided to increase the amount
of such items.

25
00:01:30,500 --> 00:01:34,300
Search queries and such terms
that it hides from us in the

26
00:01:34,308 --> 00:01:37,500
search query analysis report.
So, one thing I actually saw

27
00:01:37,500 --> 00:01:41,100
that I was like, that was quite
I found quite incredulous, is

28
00:01:41,100 --> 00:01:45,800
that it even hit for somebody
some keywords that had actually

29
00:01:45,800 --> 00:01:49,300
generated conversions, and these
are really one of the key things

30
00:01:49,300 --> 00:01:51,500
about optimizing because we're
always trying to look at the

31
00:01:51,500 --> 00:01:54,800
keywords that are not just
performing efficiency wise, but

32
00:01:54,800 --> 00:01:57,200
especially are delivering
converging, so that we can get

33
00:01:57,200 --> 00:02:00,300
more control on the bid and
improve.

34
00:02:00,400 --> 00:02:04,700
Are really so yeah, that was not
really good news for us.

35
00:02:05,000 --> 00:02:06,600
A lot of our people see
practitioners.

36
00:02:06,600 --> 00:02:12,000
So, yeah, we are going to talk
about that today and yeah,

37
00:02:12,000 --> 00:02:15,100
definitely the Expos.
Do share the tips on how to keep

38
00:02:15,100 --> 00:02:18,200
saying during these times.
But before we get into that,

39
00:02:18,200 --> 00:02:23,100
we've got our quiz of the week.
So the question is topic,

40
00:02:23,100 --> 00:02:27,300
related is about search queries.
So what is known to be the three

41
00:02:27,300 --> 00:02:30,100
different types of search
queries again?

42
00:02:30,500 --> 00:02:32,500
According to Google and this was
just a Google search.

43
00:02:32,500 --> 00:02:36,400
I did what is known to be the
three different types of search

44
00:02:36,400 --> 00:02:40,200
queries and for their answer,
come back, listen and knocked on

45
00:02:40,200 --> 00:02:44,800
combat, stay on listening to the
podcast and keep on listening to

46
00:02:44,800 --> 00:02:47,700
the end of it.
So, getting straightened back

47
00:02:47,700 --> 00:02:50,300
into our chat, Julie, advise us
and says, hello.

48
00:02:50,300 --> 00:02:51,600
Thank you all for joining me
today.

49
00:02:51,600 --> 00:02:54,400
We are going to be talking about
the great Google ads.

50
00:02:54,400 --> 00:02:58,100
Query, Kpop 2020.
Again, that we have had a little

51
00:02:58,100 --> 00:03:02,000
time to digest it and see data.
Impacts refers to how we all

52
00:03:02,000 --> 00:03:03,900
doing today.
And yeah, we've got some like

53
00:03:04,300 --> 00:03:07,900
really great entries from some
of our experts yet.

54
00:03:08,000 --> 00:03:12,100
Joining us like John kagan's
Answer saying I woke up today.

55
00:03:12,100 --> 00:03:13,800
I'm not sick.
I can't complain.

56
00:03:13,800 --> 00:03:17,100
Yeah, that's a good reason to be
grateful and Julie also shares.

57
00:03:17,100 --> 00:03:20,300
Another picture of her nice and
lovely little popping to

58
00:03:20,300 --> 00:03:23,300
brighten our day.
She is looking very cute.

59
00:03:24,200 --> 00:03:26,500
And so going on to question one,
Julie tasks.

60
00:03:26,500 --> 00:03:28,400
Has your opinion or thinking
about Google ads.

61
00:03:28,400 --> 00:03:31,800
No longer showing queries.
Without significant levels of

62
00:03:31,800 --> 00:03:34,800
searching changed.
Since you first heard about it,

63
00:03:34,800 --> 00:03:39,400
why or why not confetti replies
saying I'm, if anything that has

64
00:03:39,400 --> 00:03:42,900
gotten worse, the data is bad.
As I had predicted, it would be,

65
00:03:43,200 --> 00:03:46,500
I'm absolutely livid about the
whole thing, it's just total

66
00:03:46,500 --> 00:03:49,400
garbage.
So, yeah, a very strong opinion

67
00:03:49,400 --> 00:03:51,400
there.
John, King, replies, I don't

68
00:03:51,400 --> 00:03:54,600
know if my opinion of Google ads
could be any lower.

69
00:03:54,600 --> 00:03:57,600
Yeah, this is not really good
good for their rap and I don't

70
00:03:57,600 --> 00:04:00,700
even know if they really even
care, Julia, Applies.

71
00:04:00,700 --> 00:04:03,300
My opinion has not changed.
I was outraged from the reading

72
00:04:03,300 --> 00:04:05,300
of the announcement and nothing
that has happened.

73
00:04:05,300 --> 00:04:08,800
Since has moved me off that
position and my little fellow

74
00:04:08,800 --> 00:04:10,600
replies.
I am off to Minds.

75
00:04:10,600 --> 00:04:13,800
Now, the first is that, this is
not good, I'm losing visibility

76
00:04:13,800 --> 00:04:16,700
into something.
Like, 60% of my clients spend

77
00:04:17,100 --> 00:04:19,700
the second is I have to adapt
because I don't think our

78
00:04:19,700 --> 00:04:22,000
outrage has ever made Google
change anything.

79
00:04:22,000 --> 00:04:25,600
I give myself a week to mourn,
that's good.

80
00:04:25,600 --> 00:04:28,800
So yeah, to mentally prepare for
yourself, but how long you going

81
00:04:28,800 --> 00:04:31,800
to be annoyed 'full?
Our boys have reply saying, yes

82
00:04:31,800 --> 00:04:36,000
we have seen about 50 percent of
spend being reported on for some

83
00:04:36,000 --> 00:04:38,300
ad groups.
I'm missing key conversion data

84
00:04:38,300 --> 00:04:40,800
as well.
Since Google has decided to not

85
00:04:40,800 --> 00:04:44,300
show certain Search terms, AKA,
we have queries converting, but

86
00:04:44,300 --> 00:04:46,700
have no idea.
What those are.

87
00:04:46,700 --> 00:04:49,600
Yes, I've seen a report of that
from somewhere else, as well.

88
00:04:50,000 --> 00:04:52,100
Sean, Ellie replies.
My feelings haven't changed.

89
00:04:52,100 --> 00:04:54,600
I just did a big cut of data
from across all client.

90
00:04:54,600 --> 00:04:58,600
And I'm actually more upset than
when the news first broke while.

91
00:04:58,600 --> 00:05:00,200
So feelings, not getting better,
too.

92
00:05:00,300 --> 00:05:03,300
All Greg Finn replies.
Actually, it actually seems

93
00:05:03,300 --> 00:05:06,100
worse significance.
Doesn't appear to actually have

94
00:05:06,100 --> 00:05:09,600
anything to do with the numbers
and seeing some of the horror

95
00:05:09,600 --> 00:05:12,200
stories.
I calling Slattery.

96
00:05:12,200 --> 00:05:15,300
I'm very nervous.
Steve Gibson, reply seemed.

97
00:05:15,300 --> 00:05:18,000
When I first heard about it, I
didn't think it would be a big

98
00:05:18,000 --> 00:05:20,000
deal, then I thought he might
be.

99
00:05:20,100 --> 00:05:24,200
Now, I'm back to thinking, it's
not to worrying, I'd like him to

100
00:05:24,200 --> 00:05:29,600
explain that more and then yeah,
you know replied, I read your

101
00:05:29,600 --> 00:05:31,500
post this morning.
Interesting takeover.

102
00:05:31,500 --> 00:05:36,400
I wonder what that post that one
is Leslie, Dressler reply saying

103
00:05:36,400 --> 00:05:38,700
yes, it has been quickly.
Gotten worse already seen the

104
00:05:38,700 --> 00:05:41,500
change in data.
You Jordan Stark hasn't changed.

105
00:05:41,500 --> 00:05:45,500
I think we should be able to at
least opt into the data we want

106
00:05:45,500 --> 00:05:47,900
just because Google doesn't
think it's relevant, they could

107
00:05:47,900 --> 00:05:50,700
be an overarching pain that we
could pick out that Google

108
00:05:50,700 --> 00:05:54,000
warrant and then we've got
Christian Shepherds.

109
00:05:54,000 --> 00:05:56,500
Replying saying my opinion has
not changed.

110
00:05:56,600 --> 00:05:59,600
We have a right to know what
we're paying for and which

111
00:05:59,600 --> 00:06:03,700
queries Serrated clicks on our
ad very well set.

112
00:06:04,500 --> 00:06:06,300
And then, yeah, we got you a
voice replies saying.

113
00:06:06,300 --> 00:06:08,700
Nope, it sucks.
And now that I have, I have, I

114
00:06:09,100 --> 00:06:12,400
had a chance to Think Through
the effect of my Dynamic ad, it

115
00:06:12,400 --> 00:06:17,800
seems even worse and then, yeah.
We've got James Roberto

116
00:06:17,800 --> 00:06:20,800
replying.
No has not changed at $3, $5,

117
00:06:20,800 --> 00:06:25,600
and $10 plus per click the data,
transparency is warranted.

118
00:06:26,500 --> 00:06:28,800
And then, yeah, we've got more
boo to that said, when he had

119
00:06:28,800 --> 00:06:30,200
said yes, we've seen about 50
percent.

120
00:06:30,400 --> 00:06:33,700
Spend been reported on for some
ad groups and missing key

121
00:06:33,700 --> 00:06:36,900
conversion data as well.
Since Google has decided not to

122
00:06:36,900 --> 00:06:40,600
show certain Search terms.
Yeah, Miley replies.

123
00:06:40,600 --> 00:06:43,400
The converting queries not
showing, give drives me crazy.

124
00:06:43,400 --> 00:06:46,100
How is a click of that equals to
A conversion?

125
00:06:46,200 --> 00:06:50,800
Not significant Julie, replies,
are, but significance has in no

126
00:06:50,800 --> 00:06:52,200
way?
Been defined?

127
00:06:52,200 --> 00:06:54,200
Yeah, exactly.
What the significance actually

128
00:06:54,200 --> 00:06:56,400
means.
Greg friend reply.

129
00:06:56,400 --> 00:07:00,900
So troubling scene query data
for a single click with With a

130
00:07:00,900 --> 00:07:04,200
names in the query with no
previous impressions of a

131
00:07:04,200 --> 00:07:09,000
clegg's really hard to believe
the explanations they Givin ya

132
00:07:09,000 --> 00:07:11,700
no explanation is going to make
sense to me.

133
00:07:12,200 --> 00:07:15,400
And then we've got more brutal
that replied to a male with a

134
00:07:15,400 --> 00:07:17,100
Mariota.
The conversion queries not

135
00:07:17,100 --> 00:07:19,200
showing drives me crazy.
How is a click that?

136
00:07:19,700 --> 00:07:21,500
Click that equals to A
conversion.

137
00:07:21,500 --> 00:07:23,200
Not significant my booty
replies.

138
00:07:23,200 --> 00:07:27,600
I know it's forcing to us to
only use exact matches keywords

139
00:07:27,600 --> 00:07:30,200
so we assume the query is
somewhat relevant.

140
00:07:30,400 --> 00:07:34,900
But for some industry, we have
to use bmm or broad Emergency

141
00:07:34,900 --> 00:07:36,200
Services.
Etc.

142
00:07:37,000 --> 00:07:38,500
Yeah.
So I actually think that one

143
00:07:38,500 --> 00:07:41,700
solution for this will be like
to use exact match and also make

144
00:07:41,700 --> 00:07:46,400
sure you exclude close variance
and using a script that term

145
00:07:46,400 --> 00:07:49,100
brain labs are actually come up
with when you are close, friends

146
00:07:49,100 --> 00:07:52,400
came into place that will
definitely help with that.

147
00:07:52,400 --> 00:07:56,400
Limiting, the keywords that will
be shown and Stephanie was

148
00:07:56,400 --> 00:07:58,800
replies that seeing some new
accounts need to start with

149
00:07:58,800 --> 00:08:01,400
Broad and bmm as a way of
Fishing for good terms.

150
00:08:01,400 --> 00:08:04,400
Google also took away the
ability to get good keyword

151
00:08:04,400 --> 00:08:08,000
research so that so the data
they show us is also limited.

152
00:08:08,200 --> 00:08:11,200
Also, some Industries, don't
have a ton of surges and exact

153
00:08:11,200 --> 00:08:15,200
will drive no traffic, and
that's a fact as well.

154
00:08:15,800 --> 00:08:20,400
And I mean response in response
to Julie advice when Julie had

155
00:08:20,400 --> 00:08:22,600
said, nope, it sucks.
And now that I've had a chance

156
00:08:22,600 --> 00:08:26,400
to Think Through the effects on
my Dynamic ads, it seems even

157
00:08:26,400 --> 00:08:27,700
worse.
Molly replies.

158
00:08:27,700 --> 00:08:30,200
I've told my team.
We aren't logic launching new.

159
00:08:30,200 --> 00:08:33,900
Cancel with DSA, which is
something we used before.

160
00:08:33,900 --> 00:08:38,200
To look for ways to build out
the account or get traction on

161
00:08:38,200 --> 00:08:41,299
things.
We did in think of can't use -

162
00:08:41,299 --> 00:08:43,900
the same way.
So can't use DSA the same way

163
00:08:44,100 --> 00:08:47,000
Julie replies.
It does take away a big reason

164
00:08:47,000 --> 00:08:50,300
for doing the essay, doesn't it
or at least lessons or weakens

165
00:08:50,300 --> 00:08:53,600
the case for it, Miley replied,
unless you have a similar

166
00:08:53,600 --> 00:08:58,000
account with a very solid lead
of - list of negatives, you can

167
00:08:58,000 --> 00:09:01,900
borrow from you're doing just as
much As much research to guess

168
00:09:02,400 --> 00:09:06,500
at negatives and that outweighs
the benefits with the lack of

169
00:09:06,500 --> 00:09:10,000
invisibility.
In my opinion, my booty replied

170
00:09:10,000 --> 00:09:13,800
agreed.
Our team is reviewing, how we

171
00:09:13,800 --> 00:09:16,700
could even be able to implement
DSS again.

172
00:09:17,300 --> 00:09:19,900
And so we've got time, Julie
going on to question 2 going

173
00:09:19,900 --> 00:09:22,900
Google ads, clarify their
reasoning for their change after

174
00:09:22,900 --> 00:09:25,500
the initial announcement did
day.

175
00:09:25,900 --> 00:09:29,900
And before we first chatted
about this, to say it was

176
00:09:30,500 --> 00:09:34,100
Privacy reasons, thoughts?
Yeah, I was like, I called

177
00:09:34,100 --> 00:09:36,900
poppycock on that one was mine
on say, exactly.

178
00:09:37,100 --> 00:09:39,000
So I probably clogged.
What's the difference between

179
00:09:39,000 --> 00:09:42,100
what they're showing on what
they aren't, like, literally

180
00:09:42,100 --> 00:09:44,800
that hole.
So, like significant searches,

181
00:09:44,800 --> 00:09:49,000
what significant there's just so
many like, you know, fluffy

182
00:09:49,000 --> 00:09:52,500
reasons that they give that
really has no substance and

183
00:09:52,500 --> 00:09:57,600
that's really even more
infuriating in my opinion and my

184
00:09:57,600 --> 00:09:58,400
life.
Father replied.

185
00:09:58,400 --> 00:10:00,100
If previous equals 2, we need
money.

186
00:10:00,200 --> 00:10:02,800
Why?
Cause we're losing it then sure

187
00:10:04,000 --> 00:10:07,400
and then yeah I think Greg
helped replies to question 2

188
00:10:07,400 --> 00:10:10,100
goes IBS.
Yeah, totally agree with that

189
00:10:10,100 --> 00:10:12,500
one.
Julie advice who's and how and

190
00:10:12,500 --> 00:10:14,900
is this an admission that you
can find people's based on the

191
00:10:14,900 --> 00:10:17,700
aquarias?
What on Earth is this?

192
00:10:18,200 --> 00:10:20,400
And then we've got jeans for
Boda replying.

193
00:10:20,400 --> 00:10:24,900
Sure, then allow us to opt out
of those searches and then we've

194
00:10:24,900 --> 00:10:26,800
got Colin, Slattery replying to
question 2.

195
00:10:26,800 --> 00:10:28,800
Saying, the privity reason is
bullshit.

196
00:10:29,000 --> 00:10:31,300
It is obviously an Maximize
Revenue.

197
00:10:31,300 --> 00:10:34,000
It's the same reason they
stopped allowing us to block

198
00:10:34,000 --> 00:10:36,500
mobile app, placements on
display.

199
00:10:36,500 --> 00:10:40,200
They need to aggressively
monetize, garbage inventory.

200
00:10:41,000 --> 00:10:43,400
And they are, we've got to do,
dog, are Thomas replied question

201
00:10:43,400 --> 00:10:45,900
once a know especially after
looking at the data in my

202
00:10:45,900 --> 00:10:49,200
account, I've got bigger fish to
fry with my account, especially,

203
00:10:49,200 --> 00:10:53,100
starting out, then using insight
into 20 to 40 percent of my

204
00:10:53,100 --> 00:10:56,800
Search terms with strategy, will
always be secondary to Market

205
00:10:56,800 --> 00:10:59,400
strategy.
Marble to replace the question

206
00:10:59,400 --> 00:11:01,100
to saying very Interesting,
right.

207
00:11:01,100 --> 00:11:03,600
I think it's more of an issue
that we can't see full

208
00:11:03,600 --> 00:11:06,700
conversion data versus come
converting queries that we're

209
00:11:06,700 --> 00:11:09,400
spending dollars on.
I need to chat with my agency.

210
00:11:09,400 --> 00:11:13,100
Google web about these changes
and get his thoughts to.

211
00:11:13,100 --> 00:11:15,400
Yes, I think they'll just be
like just go with it.

212
00:11:15,400 --> 00:11:19,200
It's doing they're doing it for
your own good and then yeah

213
00:11:19,200 --> 00:11:23,000
we've got some yeah dude Miley
replying to Julia where Julie

214
00:11:23,000 --> 00:11:25,600
had said who's and how and is
this an admission that you can

215
00:11:25,600 --> 00:11:27,600
find People based on their
queries?

216
00:11:27,800 --> 00:11:30,100
What on Earth is this Miley
replies, right?

217
00:11:30,300 --> 00:11:33,000
Like, I've seen such as like
medicine, that makes you poop

218
00:11:33,000 --> 00:11:36,000
instantly well, sperm, facial,
Etc.

219
00:11:36,000 --> 00:11:39,500
I have no desire to find these
people and sit through analytics

220
00:11:39,500 --> 00:11:43,000
data on the off chance, they
contacted me and Stephanie

221
00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:43,800
replies.
Exactly.

222
00:11:43,800 --> 00:11:47,100
I run an account for University
and lots of searches around.

223
00:11:47,100 --> 00:11:50,400
People looking for pictures of
University girls ill.

224
00:11:51,200 --> 00:11:55,100
I could guess that some of these
way to add as negatives but not

225
00:11:55,100 --> 00:11:58,600
all, not all these queries, had
nothing to do with the course

226
00:11:58,600 --> 00:12:02,600
doesn't give me Confident.
Yeah, Google, very bad at

227
00:12:02,600 --> 00:12:04,800
targeting these days.
Grant replies.

228
00:12:04,800 --> 00:12:07,500
I understand the Privacy piece
of this, especially with apple

229
00:12:07,500 --> 00:12:11,100
focusing heavily on privacy.
If just sensitive health care of

230
00:12:11,100 --> 00:12:14,300
financial queries, where hidden,
this will make more sense, but

231
00:12:14,300 --> 00:12:17,100
there's no Clarity around.
What hidden and what isn't?

232
00:12:17,100 --> 00:12:20,400
And that's the point.
I'm Greg friend replies, while

233
00:12:20,400 --> 00:12:24,400
there may be privacy element to
its a 1% of rationale.

234
00:12:24,600 --> 00:12:27,200
I'd say, the majority of the
reasons is to make more short

235
00:12:27,200 --> 00:12:30,000
term, short term dollars and
exact match.

236
00:12:30,300 --> 00:12:34,000
Adkins variance explained, close
variance, hide variance, seems

237
00:12:34,000 --> 00:12:37,600
that would be leading a Ai and
machine learning.

238
00:12:37,600 --> 00:12:43,100
They could hide any any peace, I
need search queries, Judy

239
00:12:43,100 --> 00:12:47,400
replies, question to say Rings
just as Hollow as now as it did

240
00:12:47,500 --> 00:12:51,600
when they clarified Christian
replies, total the total baloney

241
00:12:51,600 --> 00:12:55,200
I'm if machine learning is as
good as Google says, Google

242
00:12:55,200 --> 00:12:58,200
should be able to selectively
remove sensitive queries from

243
00:12:58,200 --> 00:13:00,600
the Search terms report.
PS Iraq.

244
00:13:00,600 --> 00:13:03,200
Where he's so sensitive that I
shouldn't see.

245
00:13:03,200 --> 00:13:07,400
I don't want my ad showing up
for that query precisely

246
00:13:07,800 --> 00:13:10,500
shontella replies.
Think had has nothing to do with

247
00:13:10,800 --> 00:13:15,100
privacy and everything to do
with pushing automation, John,

248
00:13:15,100 --> 00:13:17,400
King, replies, complete and
utter BS.

249
00:13:17,600 --> 00:13:21,400
Then explain showing consumer,
phone numbers on call tracking.

250
00:13:21,400 --> 00:13:24,200
Yeah exactly.
That definitely does not seem

251
00:13:24,800 --> 00:13:28,600
like Percy issues at all dog.
Artemis reply saying I really

252
00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:31,600
appreciate Emily Fowler who Of
the analytics connection.

253
00:13:31,600 --> 00:13:35,300
If the Privacy part is true.
I can see that staying for a

254
00:13:35,300 --> 00:13:37,700
while since analytics is heavily
encrypted.

255
00:13:37,900 --> 00:13:41,200
Ultimately, it's not like we're
going to spend less on Google.

256
00:13:41,200 --> 00:13:44,000
It's not like it changes How I
build account and it's not like

257
00:13:44,000 --> 00:13:47,600
I can do a thing about it.
So change tactics, keep the same

258
00:13:47,600 --> 00:13:50,800
strategy in my clients have
asked more about their recent

259
00:13:50,800 --> 00:13:54,800
about other recent changes and
then we've got Steve Gibson

260
00:13:54,800 --> 00:13:56,600
replying.
I don't buy it in my opinion,

261
00:13:56,600 --> 00:13:59,100
it's no difference to them
turning exact and phrase Match

262
00:13:59,100 --> 00:14:02,300
Into broad idea.
A variance that wasn't about

263
00:14:02,300 --> 00:14:04,400
privacy and in my opinion
neither is this.

264
00:14:04,400 --> 00:14:07,600
It's about creating more
competition for low value at

265
00:14:07,600 --> 00:14:10,800
inventory and then yeah we've
got some ground replying to

266
00:14:10,808 --> 00:14:12,800
question to say.
I also think about Google's

267
00:14:12,800 --> 00:14:15,400
numbers over the last couple of
quarters.

268
00:14:15,900 --> 00:14:18,400
I'm sure there are plenty of
smart people would run the in

269
00:14:18,700 --> 00:14:22,500
the numbers on there and to
quantity to quantify the dollar

270
00:14:22,500 --> 00:14:24,800
impact of these kinds of
updates.

271
00:14:25,400 --> 00:14:28,100
And then in response to question
one, we've got Elche saying my

272
00:14:28,100 --> 00:14:32,100
opinion has not changed a bit
and Reclined, I talk to about it

273
00:14:32,300 --> 00:14:35,500
is not happy about it either.
Nobody likes pay for things.

274
00:14:35,500 --> 00:14:38,100
They have no idea what they're
getting.

275
00:14:38,100 --> 00:14:41,600
I don't pay good money and just
trust, someone has my best

276
00:14:41,600 --> 00:14:46,300
interest at heart.
My name, Julie replies to Grant,

277
00:14:46,300 --> 00:14:48,500
where granted said.
I think also think about

278
00:14:48,500 --> 00:14:50,800
Google's numbers over the last
couple of quarters.

279
00:14:50,800 --> 00:14:53,000
I'm sure there are plenty of
smart people, running the

280
00:14:53,000 --> 00:14:56,100
numbers on there and to quantify
the dollar impact of this kind

281
00:14:56,100 --> 00:15:00,000
of updates and reply, Julie goes
also search activity is not

282
00:15:00,100 --> 00:15:02,800
Static, but it's also not
infinite.

283
00:15:02,800 --> 00:15:05,800
There's only so much that
happens in a given time.

284
00:15:06,000 --> 00:15:09,500
They earnings can't continue to
go up without one more

285
00:15:09,500 --> 00:15:13,900
inventory, to higher cost per
click Miley replies.

286
00:15:13,900 --> 00:15:17,400
Plus if this if what they say is
true and fifteen, fifteen

287
00:15:17,400 --> 00:15:21,000
percent of searches each month
or day, can't remember our new

288
00:15:21,000 --> 00:15:23,100
searches.
Then how in the heck am I

289
00:15:23,100 --> 00:15:26,200
supposed to even begin with the
- Julie replies?

290
00:15:26,200 --> 00:15:28,400
One of my arguments on this as
well?

291
00:15:28,400 --> 00:15:31,400
They have been touting that.
For the past two years.

292
00:15:31,400 --> 00:15:35,800
And now this and then we've got
a nice little quote from James

293
00:15:35,800 --> 00:15:37,300
were booed.
Oh, there's and reply to all

294
00:15:37,300 --> 00:15:38,800
Chase.
Wild Chase Girls, by opinion,

295
00:15:38,800 --> 00:15:42,300
has not changed a bit and every
client I talk to about it is not

296
00:15:42,300 --> 00:15:45,000
happy about it.
Either James replies, probably

297
00:15:45,000 --> 00:15:48,600
the PPC chat quoted at some says
our best, nobody likes to pay

298
00:15:48,600 --> 00:15:51,300
for things.
They have no idea what they are

299
00:15:51,300 --> 00:15:53,400
getting exactly.
You don't go to a shop and just

300
00:15:53,400 --> 00:15:56,900
spend money and, you know, come
home and you're like I do not

301
00:15:56,900 --> 00:16:00,200
know whether I'm going to get a
full bag of kristallnacht And

302
00:16:00,200 --> 00:16:03,000
then Julie goes on to question,
3, saying, what are you seeing

303
00:16:03,000 --> 00:16:06,100
in your account query data?
How much is no longer visible?

304
00:16:06,400 --> 00:16:10,200
What impact is it having?
But I'll Chase replies question

305
00:16:10,200 --> 00:16:15,100
to say, no filter opinion.
Is this no filter opinion.

306
00:16:15,400 --> 00:16:18,500
Is this is total BS.
In a nice wrapper, privacy

307
00:16:18,500 --> 00:16:20,800
sounds really nice and he's
great in theory.

308
00:16:21,000 --> 00:16:23,700
I feel the real reason is a bit
more nefarious.

309
00:16:23,700 --> 00:16:27,400
However, they don't want you to
see how bad my chin is now and

310
00:16:27,400 --> 00:16:29,400
they want more profit for
shareholders.

311
00:16:29,400 --> 00:16:31,200
I actually think.
Very good points.

312
00:16:31,200 --> 00:16:33,600
They don't want to see how bad
they are doing in terms of

313
00:16:33,600 --> 00:16:35,800
clothes variants.
I was supposed to be a really

314
00:16:35,800 --> 00:16:39,200
great.
Greg, Greg asked with reply say

315
00:16:39,200 --> 00:16:42,400
this is really bringing back,
memories around in dbm, as it

316
00:16:42,400 --> 00:16:46,100
was then, before a load of
sites, used to get categorized

317
00:16:46,100 --> 00:16:49,700
as low volume inventory in
reports which basically meant we

318
00:16:49,700 --> 00:16:54,000
don't know or care where this ad
ran blank hitting URLs even in

319
00:16:54,000 --> 00:16:57,400
log files with no opt out.
Oh, that sounds awful.

320
00:16:58,300 --> 00:17:00,000
And then we've got John Keegan
replying to questions.

321
00:17:00,100 --> 00:17:04,099
Questions, three things, still
up in the air and then we've got

322
00:17:04,099 --> 00:17:08,800
Greg been replying saying vary,
widely from 20% to 40%.

323
00:17:09,099 --> 00:17:12,500
These are all on account that
have been thoroughly mind for

324
00:17:12,500 --> 00:17:14,400
negatives up until this point
though.

325
00:17:14,400 --> 00:17:18,300
Surprisingly so far the CPAs of
the Hidden terms, have been

326
00:17:18,300 --> 00:17:20,700
roughly equal to that of non
hidden though.

327
00:17:20,700 --> 00:17:25,300
I am likely an outlier here and
they were Godly opinion replying

328
00:17:25,300 --> 00:17:27,900
saying that it really depends
for an e-commerce clients.

329
00:17:27,900 --> 00:17:31,500
I've seen 25% of searched.
Hums hidden in the last seven

330
00:17:31,500 --> 00:17:35,400
days, but my colleague are both.
So, has seen up to 50% for some

331
00:17:35,400 --> 00:17:39,700
btb clients and the alkaline
Saturday reply say, so what is

332
00:17:39,700 --> 00:17:43,200
missing ranges from 30 percent
to thirty sixty percent for the

333
00:17:43,200 --> 00:17:46,300
accounts, but almost
universally.

334
00:17:46,300 --> 00:17:50,700
It is, it is at significantly
elevated cpc's with were CPAs.

335
00:17:50,700 --> 00:17:54,400
I haven't looked at this week,
but yet, but it has been

336
00:17:54,400 --> 00:17:56,000
terrible.
Jordan, stock replies to

337
00:17:56,000 --> 00:17:58,600
question.
Two saying, I really think it's

338
00:17:58,600 --> 00:18:02,100
about the money and control us.
Not really about put policy.

339
00:18:02,600 --> 00:18:04,500
I'm Ali replies saying I
honestly worry.

340
00:18:04,500 --> 00:18:07,300
We're on the path to being
forced into the Smart Systems.

341
00:18:07,300 --> 00:18:11,200
Not sure how far away it is, but
they slowly remove one or two

342
00:18:11,200 --> 00:18:16,200
things we need to do our job as
PPC experts properly every yeah

343
00:18:16,200 --> 00:18:19,000
yeah that is true.
I'll Chase reply certain looks

344
00:18:19,000 --> 00:18:25,400
to be 20% plus so far and those
smaller click volumes were where

345
00:18:25,400 --> 00:18:28,600
where I tended to find those
really bad offenders to matches.

346
00:18:28,600 --> 00:18:32,700
So it hurts pretty bad.
Sean any replies a few cuts that

347
00:18:32,700 --> 00:18:36,100
I have pulled.
Ecomp missing 29% of cuts of

348
00:18:36,100 --> 00:18:39,600
cost lead, gen missing nearly
40% smaller council meeting

349
00:18:39,600 --> 00:18:45,200
missing, 36% medium accounts 31%
large accounts for 24%.

350
00:18:45,400 --> 00:18:49,000
Sized is based on trying to get
equal numbers of accounts into

351
00:18:49,000 --> 00:18:54,600
each group based on ad spend and
then Julie replies to question 3

352
00:18:54,600 --> 00:18:57,400
saying lower budget and or
volume accounts are being hit

353
00:18:57,400 --> 00:19:01,400
harder at least in my mixer.
Average would be at least a

354
00:19:01,400 --> 00:19:04,000
third gone ground and Renton
replies.

355
00:19:04,000 --> 00:19:07,200
Question 3 saying, varies by
account and campaign, but 20 to

356
00:19:07,200 --> 00:19:10,200
50 percent is what I've been
seeing the CPA difference

357
00:19:10,200 --> 00:19:13,400
between hidden and visible is
definitely there but I tried to

358
00:19:13,400 --> 00:19:17,200
look at account-wide performance
instead of drilling super deep

359
00:19:17,200 --> 00:19:19,200
and that's what people are just
going to do and that's what I

360
00:19:19,200 --> 00:19:21,100
don't think.
Google don't want us to do

361
00:19:21,100 --> 00:19:23,000
anymore to be drinking drilling
deep.

362
00:19:23,000 --> 00:19:25,900
Just look at the performance.
See that it's doing well and

363
00:19:25,900 --> 00:19:29,800
keep throwing more money at it.
Greg asked quick replies.

364
00:19:30,600 --> 00:19:34,300
In the two main accounts I run,
I'm seeing 55 to 65 percent of

365
00:19:34,300 --> 00:19:36,300
clicks coming through for this
month.

366
00:19:36,300 --> 00:19:40,400
So far both with high cpc's in
the hidden terms, not quite as

367
00:19:40,400 --> 00:19:44,500
drastic as colon surgery but
definitely not good.

368
00:19:45,300 --> 00:19:49,000
And then we've got some replied
question 3 saying, it ends up

369
00:19:49,000 --> 00:19:52,100
being between 20 to 70 percent.
Depending on the client, we are

370
00:19:52,100 --> 00:19:56,800
seeing a trend emerging with
visibility inversely, correlated

371
00:19:56,800 --> 00:19:59,600
to spend.
But that could honestly be noise

372
00:19:59,800 --> 00:20:03,200
all Also seen a significant
performance Gap regardless of

373
00:20:03,200 --> 00:20:07,500
client spend and then we've got
Judy going on to question 14.

374
00:20:07,500 --> 00:20:11,300
Have you been able to figure out
figure any Rhyme or Reason as to

375
00:20:11,300 --> 00:20:14,500
what the thresholds might
actually be?

376
00:20:15,000 --> 00:20:17,700
But before that, I replied to
question 3 and unfortunately, or

377
00:20:17,700 --> 00:20:21,000
fortunately, even I don't work
with this kind of data anymore

378
00:20:21,000 --> 00:20:25,600
still annoyed and then we've got
Colin Slattery replying to

379
00:20:25,600 --> 00:20:28,000
question.
Forcing absolutely no view into

380
00:20:28,000 --> 00:20:29,900
what is significant time seeing
one?

381
00:20:30,600 --> 00:20:33,500
One impression stuff in there
still I hate to assume the worst

382
00:20:33,500 --> 00:20:37,300
by bit by significant.
They mean relevance and hide

383
00:20:37,300 --> 00:20:42,000
least relevant stuff to avoid us
filtering out and then yeah

384
00:20:42,000 --> 00:20:44,200
we've got some Daniel body
replying to question 3.

385
00:20:44,200 --> 00:20:47,200
Seen we have seen such lost
visibility on accounts, rating

386
00:20:47,200 --> 00:20:51,100
from 15 percent, to 53 percent.
How are you guys seeing more

387
00:20:51,100 --> 00:20:52,500
than that?
Less than that.

388
00:20:52,900 --> 00:20:56,300
Like, to know, some red lights
question, forcing not really

389
00:20:56,300 --> 00:20:59,000
other than based on traffic
performance, it's likely

390
00:20:59,000 --> 00:21:02,300
garbage.
That they know any competent am

391
00:21:02,300 --> 00:21:05,300
would quickly filter out the
lack of transparency around.

392
00:21:05,300 --> 00:21:08,400
This is galling, dog are Thomas
replies.

393
00:21:08,400 --> 00:21:12,300
I think about how Gary Italy's
has talked about thresholds for

394
00:21:12,300 --> 00:21:14,800
SEO stuff.
It's not ever specific thing.

395
00:21:15,100 --> 00:21:18,900
Not a complicated set of fuzzy
map, but of complicated, set of

396
00:21:18,900 --> 00:21:21,900
fuzzy marks in short.
It's explicitly designed as a

397
00:21:21,900 --> 00:21:26,000
black box because it's very
complicated set of instructions

398
00:21:26,300 --> 00:21:28,100
and my late father replies.
Not really obscene.

399
00:21:28,100 --> 00:21:31,400
Competitor terms to go to
another Takes a more hidden in

400
00:21:31,400 --> 00:21:34,900
low-volume accounts.
I've also seen one clink one

401
00:21:34,900 --> 00:21:38,100
impression shown and conversions
being hidden to be honest.

402
00:21:38,100 --> 00:21:40,400
I don't know.
That Google knows what it's

403
00:21:40,400 --> 00:21:43,400
thresholds is.
Yeah, definitely not doesn't

404
00:21:43,400 --> 00:21:45,100
seem to be any Rhyme or Reason
To That.

405
00:21:45,700 --> 00:21:47,900
Grant Edmonton replies question,
14.

406
00:21:47,900 --> 00:21:50,400
Very unsure.
As to what these are, I'm still

407
00:21:50,400 --> 00:21:53,100
seeing one impression and
one-click queries come through.

408
00:21:53,400 --> 00:21:56,500
And I also wonder if threshold
or Village visibility changes

409
00:21:56,500 --> 00:21:59,800
over time, if a one-click term
is search for again.

410
00:22:00,000 --> 00:22:02,300
Would that be enough for it to
show?

411
00:22:02,300 --> 00:22:06,600
That's a good hypothesis, Greg
friend replies, no idea

412
00:22:06,600 --> 00:22:09,900
mentioned before but I saw this
last week a history of no

413
00:22:09,900 --> 00:22:13,200
Impressions and this term and
got one click.

414
00:22:13,400 --> 00:22:17,000
It has a name of a person in the
query will chase replies.

415
00:22:17,000 --> 00:22:20,300
I'm not seen a pattern because
I'm still seeing single, click

416
00:22:20,300 --> 00:22:22,700
Search terms wondering if
they're selecting.

417
00:22:22,700 --> 00:22:25,100
What is hidden?
We don't want to get into

418
00:22:25,100 --> 00:22:26,900
trouble for this one, so let's
hide it.

419
00:22:27,000 --> 00:22:29,200
I wish I could have done this a
few times.

420
00:22:30,100 --> 00:22:33,900
Kid and then yeah, Julie then
goes on to question five saying,

421
00:22:33,900 --> 00:22:38,000
what if anything are you doing
or plan to do to combat or work

422
00:22:38,000 --> 00:22:42,600
around this in your accounts?
But before we get into those

423
00:22:42,600 --> 00:22:46,200
answers, Greg asked with reply
saying, I imagine we'll never be

424
00:22:46,200 --> 00:22:49,800
able to work it out, looking
out, our own accounts as it will

425
00:22:49,800 --> 00:22:52,000
likely.
Look at searches that weren't

426
00:22:52,000 --> 00:22:56,300
eligible for ads, EG Knowledge,
Graph results shown instead, or

427
00:22:56,300 --> 00:22:59,800
we would never have been in the
auction for anyway.

428
00:23:00,200 --> 00:23:03,100
Due to budget and then we got
John Keegan replying to a

429
00:23:03,108 --> 00:23:05,900
question for as well saying.
Nope, just assuming it is a

430
00:23:05,900 --> 00:23:09,200
relative threshold, to question
five.

431
00:23:09,200 --> 00:23:12,900
We've got a male saying so far,
no, dsa's, unless we have a

432
00:23:12,900 --> 00:23:17,200
client in a similar industry, we
can look at negatives for our

433
00:23:17,200 --> 00:23:20,800
strategy, dogs and now including
negative keyword research

434
00:23:20,800 --> 00:23:24,100
instead of our usual and
checking analytics to see if we

435
00:23:24,100 --> 00:23:28,500
can get a bit of increased
visibility gone to Edmonton

436
00:23:28,500 --> 00:23:30,500
replies controlling what we can.
Troll.

437
00:23:30,500 --> 00:23:33,200
If you look at the full
optimization tool box, you have

438
00:23:33,200 --> 00:23:37,200
beds, budget cro and much more.
If you do a great job at the

439
00:23:37,200 --> 00:23:40,600
other tactics that will
hopefully be enough to mitigate

440
00:23:40,600 --> 00:23:43,400
any negative impact from the
update.

441
00:23:43,700 --> 00:23:46,000
I'll Chase replies to question.
Five saying, one funny thing, I

442
00:23:46,000 --> 00:23:49,000
mentioned this week is looking
at the Google recommendations

443
00:23:49,000 --> 00:23:52,200
for adding new keywords and
making them negatives.

444
00:23:52,500 --> 00:23:55,100
I will not be using Dynamic.
Keyword insertion.

445
00:23:55,100 --> 00:23:57,700
Dsa's are also pretty sketchy to
do.

446
00:23:57,700 --> 00:24:01,300
Now, Sam applies, question 5.
Seeing we've been getting much

447
00:24:01,300 --> 00:24:05,100
more aggressive on the negative
side, as well as rely more on

448
00:24:05,100 --> 00:24:09,500
audiences to try to hopefully
filter out more of the garbage

449
00:24:09,500 --> 00:24:13,300
we've been using sem Rush plus
Moss, more to generate low,

450
00:24:13,300 --> 00:24:16,800
volume turns to actively include
John King and replies to

451
00:24:16,800 --> 00:24:18,300
question.
Five saying no much.

452
00:24:18,300 --> 00:24:23,200
I can do expect lean heavy into
except lean heavy into negatives

453
00:24:23,200 --> 00:24:27,000
and right strongly worded letter
to the Big G and strongly worded

454
00:24:27,000 --> 00:24:29,800
tweets, even tagging them in
jail.

455
00:24:30,000 --> 00:24:32,700
The Buddha replies, exact ish
match keywords.

456
00:24:32,700 --> 00:24:37,800
Produced fewer hidden queries,
turned off broad bmmm phrase in

457
00:24:37,800 --> 00:24:40,500
a client's account and
performance improved testing

458
00:24:40,500 --> 00:24:44,200
this as a new practice.
So, yes, guys, use more exact

459
00:24:44,200 --> 00:24:46,700
match and you might actually see
better performance.

460
00:24:47,100 --> 00:24:49,100
Although, this is always just a
Mite thing.

461
00:24:49,400 --> 00:24:51,700
Greg replies to question.
Five, seen nothing special so

462
00:24:51,700 --> 00:24:53,700
far.
Would bring example queries from

463
00:24:53,700 --> 00:24:57,700
being over if I ride any
thinking about using tools, like

464
00:24:57,700 --> 00:25:01,200
people also asked from the tough
of boy.

465
00:25:01,400 --> 00:25:04,000
That's a tough.
A boy to suggest potential

466
00:25:04,500 --> 00:25:06,300
negatives.
Yeah, that's some interesting

467
00:25:06,300 --> 00:25:08,300
solution.
Julie replies, question,

468
00:25:08,300 --> 00:25:09,800
fighting.
I feel like I want to start

469
00:25:09,800 --> 00:25:11,700
making industry negative keyword
list.

470
00:25:11,700 --> 00:25:16,000
As a side gig, instant in
systems on Google search console

471
00:25:16,000 --> 00:25:20,700
being hooked up to the GI ads
accounts for starters, not

472
00:25:20,700 --> 00:25:24,700
recommending dies, a go to even
Tighter and focus of what is

473
00:25:24,700 --> 00:25:28,500
being targeted.
And then yeah, we've got John

474
00:25:28,500 --> 00:25:29,800
Ellie replying to a question for
say no.

475
00:25:30,000 --> 00:25:31,400
It all.
Here's what I can see.

476
00:25:31,400 --> 00:25:34,100
In one campaign spoiler.
The only visible search queries

477
00:25:34,400 --> 00:25:37,700
have one Impressions.
PS maybe has to do with the time

478
00:25:37,700 --> 00:25:40,700
range.
I'm looking month to date.

479
00:25:41,400 --> 00:25:42,700
What?
Daniel body replying to

480
00:25:42,700 --> 00:25:44,800
question.
Five saying, use more shared -

481
00:25:44,800 --> 00:25:48,200
lists and upload ahead of
launch, pay more attention to

482
00:25:48,200 --> 00:25:50,400
close variance.
Try to think of suitable

483
00:25:50,400 --> 00:25:52,900
negatives.
We already have pretty specific

484
00:25:52,900 --> 00:25:55,000
small.
Ad groups, if something matches,

485
00:25:55,300 --> 00:25:58,200
it should be correct.
We've also got like an

486
00:25:58,200 --> 00:26:02,100
interesting advice from granted.
I'd written which was similar to

487
00:26:02,100 --> 00:26:04,500
Greg's amongst question 5 wait
says here.

488
00:26:04,500 --> 00:26:07,800
He says it's also worth
reviewing queries and Bing or

489
00:26:07,800 --> 00:26:10,900
Microsoft if you have mirrored
campaigns there.

490
00:26:11,100 --> 00:26:14,400
This might be a Google update
that big doesn't actually

491
00:26:14,400 --> 00:26:17,100
doesn't copy.
Oh my God, that's such an idea.

492
00:26:17,100 --> 00:26:21,600
Being please, do not take on
this new update and yeah be

493
00:26:21,600 --> 00:26:24,000
start doing better than what
Google are doing.

494
00:26:24,000 --> 00:26:28,000
That's some very nice thought
and then we also have Julie

495
00:26:28,000 --> 00:26:33,600
saying that And we will be
tweeting will rain or when

496
00:26:33,600 --> 00:26:37,600
Reynolds will raynolds answer to
question five saying, I just

497
00:26:37,600 --> 00:26:40,900
chatted a team member, chatted a
team member about using

498
00:26:40,900 --> 00:26:45,400
increasing our About Us.
Increasing our usage of NLP or

499
00:26:45,400 --> 00:26:49,600
dictionary apis on engrams to
try to expand out with the data.

500
00:26:49,600 --> 00:26:52,800
We have wasn't on the road maps
from might be a while.

501
00:26:53,400 --> 00:26:57,000
I replied that I'll repeat that
again saying I just chatted to a

502
00:26:57,008 --> 00:27:01,600
team member About Us.
Increasing Our usage of NLP or

503
00:27:01,600 --> 00:27:04,900
dictionary apis on engrams to
try to expand out.

504
00:27:05,100 --> 00:27:07,300
With the data.
We have wasn't on the road maps,

505
00:27:07,300 --> 00:27:10,600
for might be a while Collins
lateral replies.

506
00:27:10,900 --> 00:27:12,400
Love.
This was thinking about how

507
00:27:12,400 --> 00:27:15,400
something like this might be
able to be done.

508
00:27:15,400 --> 00:27:17,600
Figured out, all would be the
ones.

509
00:27:18,400 --> 00:27:21,500
Figured you all be the ones to
get rolling on it, which I had

510
00:27:21,500 --> 00:27:25,600
the resources and expertise to
try something like this.

511
00:27:26,100 --> 00:27:29,000
Yeah, bringing out really great
solutions that Leslie Dressler,

512
00:27:29,000 --> 00:27:31,100
replace question.
I've seen checking out a little

513
00:27:31,100 --> 00:27:35,000
more often relying on Bing query
reports and probably going to

514
00:27:35,000 --> 00:27:39,600
see how site search can provide
inside depending on client just

515
00:27:39,600 --> 00:27:43,800
going bonkers on - build-outs
worried next update will be so

516
00:27:43,800 --> 00:27:48,500
limited will be too limited that
to and then Julie goes on to

517
00:27:48,500 --> 00:27:50,800
question six in.
Are you practically discussing

518
00:27:50,800 --> 00:27:53,100
this with clients?
If so what are you saying to

519
00:27:53,100 --> 00:27:54,900
them?
If not why not?

520
00:27:55,200 --> 00:27:57,500
Well, before we get into that
Daniel body replies to question,

521
00:27:57,500 --> 00:28:00,500
five, same try to divert
diversify clients, Portfolios

522
00:28:00,500 --> 00:28:02,800
even more and reduce dependency
on Google.

523
00:28:03,200 --> 00:28:07,700
Yeah that might be difficult, if
this is the trend we're going

524
00:28:07,800 --> 00:28:09,800
then, what would happen in five
to ten years?

525
00:28:09,800 --> 00:28:12,000
Advertisers will just give
Google money and Trust the

526
00:28:12,000 --> 00:28:16,400
targeting is right, like a TV
media by shontella replies,

527
00:28:16,400 --> 00:28:19,600
focus more on the keyword level,
cutting keywords with below

528
00:28:19,600 --> 00:28:23,500
average, CT are also looking
more at keyword conversion rate,

529
00:28:23,700 --> 00:28:27,300
then we have the then we have
before probably testing smart

530
00:28:27,300 --> 00:28:31,500
bidding more than before.
Gibson replace question 5

531
00:28:31,500 --> 00:28:34,700
saying, definitely not dear.
See, as to me the only value of

532
00:28:34,700 --> 00:28:37,000
the essay was, the query report
data.

533
00:28:37,700 --> 00:28:41,500
I'm Ali replies saying so fun.
No, replying to question six.

534
00:28:41,800 --> 00:28:44,900
I'll bring it up Case by case
with clients who are usually

535
00:28:44,900 --> 00:28:47,900
invested specifically in your
queries but if the overall

536
00:28:47,900 --> 00:28:50,500
bottom line is good, then I'm
not bringing it up.

537
00:28:50,500 --> 00:28:54,200
Not sure if it's the right move
just following my gut on this

538
00:28:54,200 --> 00:28:55,500
one.
And yeah, guys, the best.

539
00:28:55,500 --> 00:28:58,700
We've got at the moment so on
any replies.

540
00:28:58,700 --> 00:28:59,700
Yes.
Bring it up.

541
00:28:59,900 --> 00:29:03,000
On reporting calls, and sending
emails out, trying to reassure

542
00:29:03,300 --> 00:29:06,700
that Google changes things all
the time, and we are paying

543
00:29:06,700 --> 00:29:09,600
attention.
And adapting to The New Normal

544
00:29:10,200 --> 00:29:12,800
camera, cameras, replace
questions, 5 saying we're

545
00:29:12,800 --> 00:29:16,200
literally going to end any
campaigns that were on the edge

546
00:29:16,200 --> 00:29:19,700
in favor of their venues more
audience targeting title.

547
00:29:19,700 --> 00:29:22,900
Keyword controls more.
Keyword research for - planning

548
00:29:23,500 --> 00:29:27,900
Julie replies question 6, and
I'm talking with with them about

549
00:29:27,900 --> 00:29:31,100
it, putting language and other
reports About it as well.

550
00:29:31,700 --> 00:29:33,500
Andrea Crews replaced question,
6.

551
00:29:33,500 --> 00:29:36,000
Same that visibility has been
greatly limited and we're

552
00:29:36,000 --> 00:29:39,800
creating tactics to continue to
improve performance.

553
00:29:39,800 --> 00:29:42,900
After the change, I'm also
sharing with them.

554
00:29:42,900 --> 00:29:46,500
The tactics we have come up with
Colin replies.

555
00:29:46,500 --> 00:29:49,800
Question 6, saying yes I am I
try to be super transparent with

556
00:29:49,800 --> 00:29:52,100
clients on things that will
impact their accounts.

557
00:29:52,600 --> 00:29:56,500
I think it's important that they
know what possible had had

558
00:29:56,500 --> 00:29:57,300
winds.
They are.

559
00:29:57,300 --> 00:30:01,400
I purchased one has the problem
to his Are we going to work to

560
00:30:01,400 --> 00:30:04,700
address it or show that your
performance is still doing?

561
00:30:04,700 --> 00:30:06,000
Well?
The overall bottom line

562
00:30:06,000 --> 00:30:09,800
performance is still doing well.
Irregardless of the issue, I'd

563
00:30:09,800 --> 00:30:13,400
say Daniel, father, replies to
question 6, and we communicated

564
00:30:13,400 --> 00:30:15,300
right away.
Give them the data of search

565
00:30:15,300 --> 00:30:18,000
query, lost then discuss, why
it's impactful.

566
00:30:18,200 --> 00:30:20,200
Transparency is really important
to us.

567
00:30:20,500 --> 00:30:24,300
There are still a lot of stuff
we can do, but we have to adapt

568
00:30:24,300 --> 00:30:28,600
to this because this won't be
reverted and then ground hydrant

569
00:30:28,600 --> 00:30:32,200
in replies, question 6, Yes,
some clients are more interested

570
00:30:32,200 --> 00:30:35,800
than others but we've been
focused on how much data is

571
00:30:35,800 --> 00:30:38,100
invisible.
Is this heavy impacting

572
00:30:38,100 --> 00:30:42,000
performance or not?
What are the tactics tactics?

573
00:30:42,000 --> 00:30:45,200
Are we exploring to mitigate
possible negative impacts from

574
00:30:45,200 --> 00:30:48,800
Lost Square?
Visibility, John Keegan replies.

575
00:30:48,800 --> 00:30:53,100
Question. 7 saying we have most
don't care all that much as it

576
00:30:53,100 --> 00:30:58,600
is something they view as minute
and as they view as minut and

577
00:30:58,600 --> 00:31:01,400
have better things in R life to
be angry about.

578
00:31:01,400 --> 00:31:03,400
I don't think there's anything
more thing to be angry about

579
00:31:03,400 --> 00:31:08,400
right now, if your Google PPC
pick a specialist than this at

580
00:31:08,400 --> 00:31:11,600
the moment and then in response
to question 6, we've got Sam

581
00:31:11,600 --> 00:31:15,300
going brutal impartial honesty.
Most of my clients know, my

582
00:31:15,300 --> 00:31:18,300
feelings on the Chain, but at
the end of the day, my job is to

583
00:31:18,300 --> 00:31:20,100
help them make their business
better.

584
00:31:20,100 --> 00:31:23,800
If Google search does that and
for many, it still does then.

585
00:31:23,800 --> 00:31:26,300
We'll work within the
constraints to do that.

586
00:31:26,300 --> 00:31:28,100
But yeah.
How far these constraints going

587
00:31:28,100 --> 00:31:32,200
to go really?
Then yeah, Julie comes to us

588
00:31:32,200 --> 00:31:33,400
with the last question of the
day.

589
00:31:33,400 --> 00:31:36,600
Question 7 saying, what is your
biggest concern with regard to

590
00:31:36,600 --> 00:31:40,300
query data going forward and
Miley replies to this one

591
00:31:40,300 --> 00:31:44,200
saying, I mean the same as it
has, as was earlier, losing more

592
00:31:44,200 --> 00:31:46,400
of it, never understanding
parameters.

593
00:31:46,700 --> 00:31:51,100
We adapt though I'll be looking
at Optimizer and we'll Reynold

594
00:31:51,100 --> 00:31:54,300
at Sea are interactive for
potential adaptations,

595
00:31:54,700 --> 00:31:58,900
workarounds and yeah, that's
handled Optimizer opt em.

596
00:31:58,900 --> 00:32:04,500
Why Zero and that is Frederick
valleys company and will run.

597
00:32:04,500 --> 00:32:09,700
Also that's WIIL Reynolds at at
see an interactive that's

598
00:32:09,700 --> 00:32:12,800
another handle.
Seee our interactive for

599
00:32:12,800 --> 00:32:16,100
potential adaptations and work
arounds.

600
00:32:17,000 --> 00:32:19,500
And then yeah we couldn't react
you saying the other day.

601
00:32:19,500 --> 00:32:24,000
I was talking with Mike pico
about recalculating how much

602
00:32:24,000 --> 00:32:26,700
time it takes to manage your
Google ads account.

603
00:32:26,800 --> 00:32:29,700
Even just set up one from
scratch so many minimal changes.

604
00:32:29,900 --> 00:32:33,900
Have to be made.
It's insane to reply to

605
00:32:33,900 --> 00:32:36,700
question, seven and replied.
Question 7, Daniel body goes,

606
00:32:36,700 --> 00:32:38,700
it's not query.
Specific is the trend.

607
00:32:38,700 --> 00:32:41,300
We are going with Google and
other companies.

608
00:32:41,600 --> 00:32:45,300
They believe they are The
Gatekeepers of all data to do as

609
00:32:45,300 --> 00:32:48,900
they please to increase their
revenue and profit at the

610
00:32:48,900 --> 00:32:51,200
expense of the people at the
middle.

611
00:32:51,500 --> 00:32:54,500
I'll Chase replies to question.
Seven saying it sets a very bad

612
00:32:54,500 --> 00:32:58,200
presidents, movie forward.
It's if companies are allowed to

613
00:32:58,200 --> 00:33:01,900
charge but not give You data on
that you own what you are paying

614
00:33:01,900 --> 00:33:03,200
for?
This is not good.

615
00:33:03,300 --> 00:33:05,500
There are ways to address
privacy without harming.

616
00:33:05,500 --> 00:33:09,400
The Advertiser, I believe there
is James foreboding replies.

617
00:33:09,400 --> 00:33:12,700
Honestly, the cost of the hidden
or lost data with know what

618
00:33:12,700 --> 00:33:14,300
negatives are.
We missing.

619
00:33:14,300 --> 00:33:17,400
That can be excluded to
eliminate unwanted at bend it

620
00:33:17,400 --> 00:33:21,300
down to the road down the road.
What positives can we add?

621
00:33:21,300 --> 00:33:24,600
That have converted round,
Edward turn replies.

622
00:33:24,600 --> 00:33:27,900
A few forward-looking questions.
Come to mind will certain

623
00:33:27,900 --> 00:33:32,100
visibility get worse over time?
I think so will the quality of

624
00:33:32,100 --> 00:33:35,700
performance of hitting queries
deteriorate over time?

625
00:33:36,400 --> 00:33:40,300
I don't know will Google look to
change match types or the

626
00:33:40,300 --> 00:33:43,000
procedure.
The process of keyword selection

627
00:33:43,000 --> 00:33:45,200
in the future.
I think it will just keep

628
00:33:45,200 --> 00:33:47,200
getting worse.
Really some replies.

629
00:33:47,200 --> 00:33:51,100
Question seven seeing if I were
a pessimist I'd imagine that

630
00:33:51,100 --> 00:33:55,000
Google will continue to press on
the significant changes to the

631
00:33:55,000 --> 00:33:58,300
reporting threshold as well as
potentially start to remove

632
00:33:58,500 --> 00:34:02,200
conversion.
Plus Formance data and in

633
00:34:02,200 --> 00:34:04,300
response.
Some to question seven I believe

634
00:34:04,300 --> 00:34:07,000
where to go out and do a
cruising with my client that I

635
00:34:07,000 --> 00:34:09,300
can only see nine percent of The
Impressions.

636
00:34:09,900 --> 00:34:13,100
I am at a crossroad.
I am Flying Blind, I have seen,

637
00:34:13,300 --> 00:34:15,300
I've been using sem rush to pick
keywords.

638
00:34:15,300 --> 00:34:18,600
They think I'm bidding on and I
am most definitely not.

639
00:34:18,800 --> 00:34:23,300
I use those for - patterns Alex
turbot replies to question seven

640
00:34:23,300 --> 00:34:27,199
saying what's coming next smart
shopping app campaigns, Etc.

641
00:34:27,199 --> 00:34:30,900
Never gave us this data.
Get ready for Else to win for

642
00:34:30,900 --> 00:34:33,000
clients with more campaigns
types.

643
00:34:33,400 --> 00:34:37,600
There that don't rely on keyword
targeting and search term data

644
00:34:37,900 --> 00:34:41,300
Greg fin replies to question,
seven seen that the hidden terms

645
00:34:41,300 --> 00:34:44,300
will grow and so will the
clothes variants matching but

646
00:34:44,300 --> 00:34:47,500
now we won't be able to see it.
The expansion of the matching

647
00:34:47,500 --> 00:34:51,000
that has been a big problem and
if it continues, it could be

648
00:34:51,000 --> 00:34:55,300
catastrophic for smbs or be to
B's Grant replies.

649
00:34:55,300 --> 00:34:58,900
Question 17.
Also, we will will we ID fewer

650
00:34:58,900 --> 00:35:02,600
opportunities to To improve
messaging landing page content

651
00:35:02,600 --> 00:35:05,800
SEO strategy with less search
term data viewing.

652
00:35:05,800 --> 00:35:09,500
Search terms to better
understand sub-themes or more

653
00:35:09,500 --> 00:35:11,700
specific.
Ad groups is a common practice

654
00:35:11,700 --> 00:35:14,600
to improve efficiency and user
experience.

655
00:35:15,000 --> 00:35:18,000
Christine replies question, 7
saying it's a further indication

656
00:35:18,000 --> 00:35:21,400
of where Google is headed, less
data, more automation, poor

657
00:35:21,400 --> 00:35:24,300
poorer results.
Yes, we will adapt to this

658
00:35:24,300 --> 00:35:27,000
change, but what's next?
That's what we always have to

659
00:35:27,000 --> 00:35:29,500
keep asking myself.
What's next?

660
00:35:29,800 --> 00:35:32,400
Sean, any replies in the
short-term, trying to optimize

661
00:35:32,400 --> 00:35:35,300
accounts with a fraction of the
data and wasting client budgets

662
00:35:35,300 --> 00:35:37,700
on irrelevant traffic in the
long term.

663
00:35:37,700 --> 00:35:39,900
What's next?
I doubt they are done.

664
00:35:40,100 --> 00:35:42,700
Pushing their automated
strategies.

665
00:35:43,300 --> 00:35:46,300
John Keegan replies question. 7,
cm the low volume queries in the

666
00:35:46,300 --> 00:35:48,500
sketch sketchy area, network
sites.

667
00:35:48,800 --> 00:35:51,900
We trigger on that totally
screwed us later from a PR

668
00:35:51,900 --> 00:35:53,900
perspective.
Jewelry price.

669
00:35:53,900 --> 00:35:57,800
Question, 7 saying, I'm with
significant not being defined,

670
00:35:58,000 --> 00:36:02,900
it will continue to engulf More
and more data, some replies to

671
00:36:03,400 --> 00:36:06,300
the, I think that this will be a
continuous is undercutting 70.

672
00:36:06,300 --> 00:36:10,000
And after that, it's likely that
a significant nerve to negative

673
00:36:10,000 --> 00:36:13,600
keywords is coming, but you can
only do that once you remove

674
00:36:13,600 --> 00:36:18,300
visibility or you have a Revolt.
Yes, I do think a Revolt is

675
00:36:18,300 --> 00:36:21,800
coming and we've already done a
fear Leslie Dressler replies to

676
00:36:21,800 --> 00:36:25,500
question, seven saying that that
we are seeing just the tip of

677
00:36:25,500 --> 00:36:28,600
the iceberg, less and less
Village visibility over time

678
00:36:28,600 --> 00:36:31,700
until it's gone.
Not provided all together.

679
00:36:31,900 --> 00:36:37,800
And like I said before, I worry
about limit or negative keywords

680
00:36:39,200 --> 00:36:43,000
and then yeah before we go, just
can't gonna give a few on says

681
00:36:43,000 --> 00:36:46,200
well maybe if you are so it's
just yeah I'm Steve Gibson

682
00:36:46,200 --> 00:36:49,700
replying saying all advertisers
are in the same boat so I don't

683
00:36:49,700 --> 00:36:53,300
really have any concerns.
When we land auction medium, we

684
00:36:53,300 --> 00:36:55,400
still have plenty of tools to
outperform.

685
00:36:55,400 --> 00:36:58,600
Our competitors can make Harris
replies with Google.

686
00:36:58,600 --> 00:37:01,300
Muddying the waters.
It really throws off the value

687
00:37:01,300 --> 00:37:05,600
proposition clients already are
overwhelmed by the choices.

688
00:37:05,600 --> 00:37:08,900
So if you take away
transparency, that was showing

689
00:37:08,900 --> 00:37:12,500
that worked, it worked it leads
to that mindset.

690
00:37:12,500 --> 00:37:15,500
That makes the grass.
Look, Greener elsewhere.

691
00:37:16,600 --> 00:37:18,500
And yeah, that brings us to the
end of our chat.

692
00:37:18,500 --> 00:37:20,900
And Julie, says, if you have any
ideas for chat topics, please

693
00:37:20,900 --> 00:37:24,300
treat them or DM me.
My DMs are always open.

694
00:37:24,300 --> 00:37:27,400
And yes, it's always nice to
have a nice little chat with

695
00:37:27,400 --> 00:37:31,200
Julie, but yeah.
That brings us to the end of our

696
00:37:31,200 --> 00:37:36,500
round today about Google
prevention, us from Yassin.

697
00:37:36,500 --> 00:37:38,700
Allah such queries.
Especially the ones that

698
00:37:38,700 --> 00:37:41,100
actually showing conversion
data.

699
00:37:41,300 --> 00:37:43,700
I think, one of the best advice
that I actually seen here is

700
00:37:43,700 --> 00:37:47,600
that, you know, looking at
Microsoft search query data is

701
00:37:47,600 --> 00:37:52,100
and really, really hoping to all
the such goals that yapping,

702
00:37:52,100 --> 00:37:54,200
does not follow suit in this
update.

703
00:37:54,200 --> 00:37:58,200
And that, which I feel could
give them a marketing Edge

704
00:37:59,100 --> 00:38:01,800
Market Tej even I mean
definitely I'm Chief marketing

705
00:38:01,800 --> 00:38:05,700
officers and now now I'm always
talking about marketing, I

706
00:38:05,700 --> 00:38:07,600
wonder how long it will take
before I really start missing

707
00:38:07,600 --> 00:38:13,400
this advertising World anyway,
so we hope you found this

708
00:38:13,400 --> 00:38:16,100
tutorial useful, taking some
great takeaways from it.

709
00:38:16,100 --> 00:38:20,500
But before we finish off our
clothes off, we've got the

710
00:38:20,500 --> 00:38:21,900
answer to our quiz.
Ready.

711
00:38:21,900 --> 00:38:26,300
So just to remind you of what
the question was, what is known

712
00:38:26,300 --> 00:38:30,000
to be the three different types
of search queries and our Is

713
00:38:31,100 --> 00:38:36,000
navigational, informational and
transactional and transactional.

714
00:38:36,000 --> 00:38:40,500
So that's navigational,
informational and transactional.

715
00:38:40,600 --> 00:38:42,700
I hope you got that, right?
And yeah, I just think

716
00:38:42,700 --> 00:38:46,700
navigational is like trying to
move between the website

717
00:38:46,700 --> 00:38:51,300
informational if all the how to
W and transactional buy

718
00:38:51,300 --> 00:38:53,100
something.
Now, I'm looking for a red

719
00:38:53,100 --> 00:38:55,300
dress.
I'm looking for something where

720
00:38:55,300 --> 00:38:59,500
you're very product specific or
sometimes skew specific and

721
00:38:59,700 --> 00:39:03,500
Meaning that you go directly to
the landing page, you want to go

722
00:39:03,500 --> 00:39:07,300
directly to the page where you
can buy your item or complete

723
00:39:07,300 --> 00:39:12,100
your lead generation form.
So I hope you found this talk

724
00:39:12,100 --> 00:39:14,300
useful.
And yeah, if you want this chat,

725
00:39:14,300 --> 00:39:17,400
if you want to chat about this
topic or any paid media data,

726
00:39:17,900 --> 00:39:21,000
analysis solution do get in
touch with me by sending me an

727
00:39:21,000 --> 00:39:25,000
email at hello at - one.com.
And remember for your campaigns

728
00:39:25,300 --> 00:39:28,600
or businesses to Glide smoothly,
there's a lot of hard work

729
00:39:28,600 --> 00:39:31,100
needed beneath the surface.
Faces, so keep your songs

730
00:39:31,100 --> 00:39:32,100
kicking.
Bye.