Google opens up keyword bidding

by Darren Davidson, Brand Republic 04-Apr-08, 15:10

LONDON - Google has announced that it will allow keyword bidding on all terms typed into its search engine, in a controversial move that will draw criticism from agencies and advertisers.

The internet giant announced that from May 5 its trademark complaint investigations will no longer monitor or restrict keywords for ads served to users in the UK and Ireland.

The move brings the UK and Ireland into line with the US and Canada, where Google has been operating the policy since 2004.

The move means that a user who types a trademarked brand name into the Google search engine, alongside its associated service, will now see ads in the search results from rival brands in addition to those for the brand they were searching for. For example, this would affect a Google user who enters a carmaker's brand name alongside the word 'car'.

The decision to introduce broad matching technology will increase advertising revenue and comes hot on the heels of a decline in paid-advertising clicks on Google over the last two months.

Advertisers and agencies in the UK have long argued that opening up Google's search engine to show ads from advertisers bidding against keywords allows rival companies to profit from decades of investment in building up brand names.

Google has argued that it can present its users with more ads in the sponsored links section, giving them greater choice.

Matt Brittin, director of Google UK, said: "We are making this change because we want to give users greater choices to help them make informed decisions.

"Advertisers are accustomed to the fact that users searching for their trademarked terms as part of a phrase may see ads from competitors."

However, Gavin Sinden, a director at digital agency Equi=Media, attacked the move. He said: "Putting all this together with the fact that Google's paid advertising clicks have shown decline over the last two months for the first time ever, a more cynical interpretation begins to emerge.

"This seems like an attempt by Google to increase bid values and volume of bids on a huge range of terms. This is very difficult to justify in terms of Google's avowed policy of trying to serve the consumer by increasing relevance."

Sinden warned advertisers that "you could type in a search for a particular brand and be confronted with nothing but a sea of competitors".

He added: "This is going to have a major effect on digital marketing budgets over the rest of 2008. The speed of introducing this change and the lack of consultancy make it difficult for clients to realign their budgets to ensure money is available for the increased spend on brand keywords that this will undoubtedly require."

Have your say here.

Comments

Jonathan Keane - 07/04/2008

Matt Brittin is spot on. By the time someone searches for a particular brand- they are pretty much at the end of the decision process. That is after all the essence of PPC. If you are then confronted with an abundance of messages from competitors then that is irrelevant surely. Google giving "greater choices to help them make informed decisions" is a weak argument because this is done when someone searches more general and generic terms (non-brand). The most annoying part of this is that Google is so dominant and makes up such a huge chunk of the digital industry- they can makes these changes and know the rest will have to follow. Google's moto is "don't be evil", maybe they they should update this to "don't be arrogant"!

Mike Page - 07/04/2008

We've had people bidding on elements of our brand name for years and have never been able to do a thing about it. We've always been told that as we've a geographical place name as part of our brand name that protecting that brand on search was virtualy impossible. That's not to say what Google is doing now is 'right'. Just it means that everyone else is being dragged into the same mire that us 'geographical' brand name owners have faced for years. It ain't fun.

Wise Words - 07/04/2008

It's all about money, not relevancy. Google has been so successful in the past because it's struck to it's principles of giving people the most relevant results quickly. This goes aganist this - they're happy to supply not so relevant results if there's a slug cash in it.

joe woollen - 07/04/2008

I wouldn't worry; as with all good search strategies, you will have been focusing on algorythmic search results for a while anyway to esnure that despite the competitive bombardment, you should be ranked number 1 anyway. Secondly, it creates heavier reliance on advertising to work harder in engaging an audience to make them more resolute in their brand decision. Thus making advertising more valuable.

Ben Gott - 07/04/2008

I agree that this is more a money than a relevancy thing for Google. In addition to the click fees, they wiill no longer have to handle disputes and police ad placement on trademarked terms, both time-consuming for them. I honestly cant see this having a major impact on big brands. Its almost impossible to tempt someone away from the brand that they have searched on just by showing a text ad anway.

Tom Barnes - 07/04/2008

I've got a rather more positive take on it, as an opportunity for smaller businesses.... A brand name also makes a good starting point for research online. You are saying, "I'd like something like that brand's product, but I'm open to suggestions". If the alternative doesn't match up, then the keyword sponsor is wasting their money; if it does, then the consumer gets what they want, probably for less. It should keep the brands on their toes and offers some interesting opporunities for smaller competitors.