Anyone with adwords marketing experience on here?

[M3boy]

£30 per day is far too much imo

For April to date - I have spent £45.22 at an average cpc of 0.24p (26400 impr)

I am also on page one of google for most of the services/products offered

[Tractor]

£30 per day is far too much imo

For April to date - I have spent £45.22 at an average cpc of 0.24p (26400 impr)

I am also on page one of google for most of the services/products offered

Its a figure ive plucked out of thin air, £30 a day is fine if it converts to actual sales.
the way i look at it is like a real shop persons wages, if we sell a 1or more (preferable more) pairs of shoes from the £30 a day we would be more than happy.
We would be happy spending more if the sales increased at the same % , as i said being new to this it will be a learning curve.
Once im up and running I will post back and let people know how its going.

[Graham C]

£30 per day is far too much imo

For April to date - I have spent £45.22 at an average cpc of 0.24p (26400 impr)

I am also on page one of google for most of the services/products offered

That's not really a fair statement to make as it depends on so many variables, the most important being what product you are selling.  It also depends on what exposure you want and the competition for you keywords.  £30 wouldn't even get us to lunchtime, but we're top of the list for about 50 different search terms, all day Monday to Friday during working hours.  Anything less than the first page is generally a waste of money. 

For April to date, we have over 55,000 impressions, but our average CPC is higher than £0.24.  The amount you spend on Adwords is to some point, irrelevant as it should directly bring in sales if the campaign is set up correctly, but you don't want to go crazy to start with, keep it affordable so if you have a few days without a sale it's not going to break the bank.

[kinboshi]

If you're spending £1,000 a day on adwords, and you're making a return on investment - then it's fine, maybe you should be spending £2,000!  Some of our competitors are.

However, like I said about SEO, you can achieve the same targeted quality traffic for a lot less, as long as you're willing to wait for the SEO to 'kick in' - and this can take a few months.  PPC is often an ideal interim solution in the meantime, as long as you have the cash to fund it.

[RichEO]

My brother runs a company called saletrack that specialises in tracking your hits and sales. It shows your natural hits and campaigns. They help you manage your adwords too. They also sell (well rent really) e-commerce sites that are keyword optimised. Give them a call for a free demo. Whole package is worth it, but demo is free.

I suppose, PM for details, but it's not that much to do with me tbh.

[kinboshi]

Just to clarify.

Hits is the wrong term (it's been used a few times on this thread).  A hit is a request to the server.  So for example, when someone goes to this page, the server receives a hit for every file that needs to be downloaded - that's the HTML, each graphic, etc.  So everytime someone goes to this page it would be 50+ hits.  If a site gets 1 million 'hits', that is pretty meaningless really.

As you can see, that's a useless metric.

Page views/impressions and unique visitors are the important statistics.  People usually mean these when they say hits, but they're wrong.

Should this be in the whinge thread?

[Graham C]

My brother runs a company called saletrack

We use saletrack for our parcel delivery - part of the same group?  I think they do something to do with the web too,

[boldie]

Just to clarify.

Hits is the wrong term (it's been used a few times on this thread).  A hit is a request to the server.  So for example, when someone goes to this page, the server receives a hit for every file that needs to be downloaded - that's the HTML, each graphic, etc.  So everytime someone goes to this page it would be 50+ hits.  If a site gets 1 million 'hits', that is pretty meaningless really.

As you can see, that's a useless metric.

Page views/impressions and unique visitors are the important statistics.  People usually mean these when they say hits, but they're wrong.

Should I only post in the whinge thread?

Now that would be a dream come true

[gatso]

Just to clarify.

Hits is the wrong term (it's been used a few times on this thread).  A hit is a request to the server.  So for example, when someone goes to this page, the server receives a hit for every file that needs to be downloaded - that's the HTML, each graphic, etc.  So everytime someone goes to this page it would be 50+ hits.  If a site gets 1 million 'hits', that is pretty meaningless really.

when did the terminlolgy change? I used to work trafficking internet ad campaigns and 'hit' and 'page impression' were always interchangable terms

[kinboshi]

Just to clarify.

Hits is the wrong term (it's been used a few times on this thread).  A hit is a request to the server.  So for example, when someone goes to this page, the server receives a hit for every file that needs to be downloaded - that's the HTML, each graphic, etc.  So everytime someone goes to this page it would be 50+ hits.  If a site gets 1 million 'hits', that is pretty meaningless really.

when did the terminlolgy change? I used to work trafficking internet ad campaigns and 'hit' and 'page impression' were always interchangable terms

It never changed, it was always thus.  It has always been misused.

[RichEO]

My brother runs a company called saletrack

We use saletrack for our parcel delivery - part of the same group?  I think they do something to do with the web too,

saletrack parcels, same business. They are the web parcels came afterwards.

[RichEO]

Just to clarify.

Hits is the wrong term (it's been used a few times on this thread).  A hit is a request to the server.  So for example, when someone goes to this page, the server receives a hit for every file that needs to be downloaded - that's the HTML, each graphic, etc.  So everytime someone goes to this page it would be 50+ hits.  If a site gets 1 million 'hits', that is pretty meaningless really.

As you can see, that's a useless metric.

Page views/impressions and unique visitors are the important statistics.  People usually mean these when they say hits, but they're wrong.

Should this be in the whinge thread?

Are you inferring that at me cos I should know better ?

[kinboshi]

Just to clarify.

Hits is the wrong term (it's been used a few times on this thread).  A hit is a request to the server.  So for example, when someone goes to this page, the server receives a hit for every file that needs to be downloaded - that's the HTML, each graphic, etc.  So everytime someone goes to this page it would be 50+ hits.  If a site gets 1 million 'hits', that is pretty meaningless really.

As you can see, that's a useless metric.

Page views/impressions and unique visitors are the important statistics.  People usually mean these when they say hits, but they're wrong.

Should this be in the whinge thread?

Are you inferring that at me cos I should know better ?

Not aiming it at anyone, I just hear it on a daily basis and I thought I'd clarify what it meant to everyone.

[Bongo]

Most people used hits instead of page impressions as it's always bigger, so sounds more impressive.

[kinboshi]

Most people used hits instead of page impressions as it's always bigger, so sounds more impressive.

...and means absolutely nothing.

Most analytic packages don't even bother mentioning hits anymore.