Am I alone in noticing that Google searches often load relatively slowly now, with unpaid results appearing about a half second before the paid ads at the top of the page? More than once, at a particularly impatient moment, I've reached to click on the first (unpaid) result at the top of the page, only to discover that an ad had loaded into that same space a split second before my finger managed to complete the click. I've then been directed to the advertiser.
This is a little irritating for me (though I've also accdientally landed on a the same page - except through a paid click.) But I have to think this could be very irritating to those advertisers who pay for my uninteded visit. It's not like I stay on the page. I quickly back out, re-google, and wait for the results to fully load.
I wonder if this is just a glitch or an actual strategy?
Google loading that slow? ok..... Remove the malware from your machine or maybe its time to nix the dial-up modem.
Posted by: Click here | July 06, 2012 at 07:39 AM
I don't think they would view this as a viable strategy, because people are actually paying for conversions. Online advertising is heavily tracked, so if advertisers had a lower conversion rate to sales, they would just adjust their pay per click bids accordingly.
Posted by: 155 | July 06, 2012 at 08:03 AM
Google knows exactly what it is doing. Not satisfied with the income provided by a 15% click fraud rate, they have come up with a new way to rip off their advertisers. This is something the next congress should investigate. Make Google refund click fraud money to advertisers.
Posted by: jasond | July 06, 2012 at 08:49 AM
I have to wonder if it is on purpose. My husband is an AdSense affiliate and the deduction out of his earnings for "false clicks" has gone up dramatically in the past couple of months. So they charge the advertisers and then refuse to pay the affiliates. Sounds like a win for the Google balance sheet.
Posted by: Jenny | July 06, 2012 at 10:30 AM
I have noticed the exact same thing and wondered about it several times. Google can't NOT know that this is happening. It seems very intentional to me. Would be nice to see the tech press make a stink about this.
Posted by: KeithF | July 06, 2012 at 10:46 AM
No idea if it's by design or not but Firefox has no add-on whatsoever to block this disgusting annoyance (I've looked hard for one as recently as early this week). Someone has to come up with one, just a matter of time.
Posted by: twotents | July 06, 2012 at 01:05 PM
If you pay to be in the top links and pose as top relevant results, then a side effect of that will be miss-clicks.
Just like products in the easy to reach shelves (which companies pay supermarkets for) are often put back in a random place or at the till when a cheaper, but similar product is selected later.
I'm not sure it is fair to fault Google for this very predictable side-effect of a rather in-your-face strategy that advertisers have chosen.
Also note that it inconveniences the user who now has to scroll down the page to find what they were looking for. True, it's only a second and a click, but, add it up millions of times and suddenly it all looks somewhat anti-social, and in a way, the cost of miss-clicks are a good thing here, a bit like charging per spam-email.
Then again, the catchment rate probably makes spending the money worthwhile, which is why it's not gone away yet.
Posted by: RightwingHippyChick | July 06, 2012 at 05:08 PM
ust like products in the easy to reach shelves (which companies pay supermarkets for) are often put back in a random place or at the till when a cheaper, but similar product is selected later.
I'm not sure it is fair to fault Google for this very predictable side-effect of a ratheust like products in the easy to reach shelves (which companies pay supermarkets for) are often put back in a random place or at the till when a cheaper, but similar product is selected later.
I'm not sure it is fair to fault Google for this very predictable side-effect of a ratheust like products in the easy to reach shelves (which companies pay supermarkets for) are often put back in a random place or at the till when a cheaper, but similar product is selected later.
I'm not sure it is fair to fault Google for this very predictable side-effect of a rathe
Posted by: nike shox running shoes | July 09, 2012 at 11:45 PM
I'm not sure it is fair to fault Google for this very predictable side-effect of a ratheust like products in the easy to reach shelves (which companies pay supermarkets for) are often put back in a random place or at the till when a cheaper, but similar product is selected later.
Posted by: coach hadnbags on sale | July 15, 2012 at 10:40 PM
This is a little irritating for me (though I've also accdientally landed on a the same page - except through a paid click.) But I have to think this could be very irritating to those advertisers who pay for my uninteded visit. It's not like I stay on the page. I quickly back out, re-google, and wait for the results to fully load.
Posted by: coach hadnbags on sale | July 15, 2012 at 10:41 PM