AdWords to Vary Number of Ads Displayed Based on Commercial, Noncommercial Terms

[mandy]

We constantly evaluate how our users interact with the ads we display and look for opportunities to show more ads when we think they'll be useful -- and fewer ads when we think that users might not want to see them. With this in mind, on queries such as 'car insurance' or 'flowers,' we try to show a wide selection of relevant ads to our users. And, for queries where users are most likely not interested in a product or service, such as 'dog friendly parks in Mountain View,' we may aim to show fewer ads.

Starting today, and over the coming weeks, we'll be implementing an ads quality change designed to show fewer ads on queries for which our users might prefer not to see them and more ads on queries for which ads are useful. The impact of this change will vary from advertiser to advertiser, so we wanted to give you a heads-up and suggest that you keep an eye on your keyword performance over the next few weeks.

If you notice a decline in impressions or clicks on some of your keywords, you may wish to ensure that your most important terms are each specifically entered as keywords in their own right, rather than relying on broad or phrase match to include them. Or, if you notice an unwanted increase in impressions or clicks for some keywords, consider adding negative keywords to more finely tune your targeting...

full blog entry: http://adwords.blogspot.com/2006/04/ads-...d-you.html

Depending on broad match or phrase match to get listed on Google? A new tweak to Google AdWords means that in some cases, that might no longer get your ad listed as in the past...

For queries that are less commercial in nature, broad matching is becoming more conservative, less likely to put some advertisers on Google's search results pages.

The upshot for users, Google says, is less likelihood of getting irrelevant ads. For advertisers, it means that for those ads where you absolutely, positively want to show up, exact match is the way to go...

full article: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060427-162151