It seems that different markets respond differently to either Google or Yahoo's user base. In our field (legal), we used to get better ROI from Yahoo, however that has been changing over the past couple of years as they expand their 'partner network' with little attention paid to the quality of those 'partners'.
A couple of comments about the article:
Quote:
|
multiple changes to ad campaigns permitted at no extra cost
|
In theory, true, however in Google practice, this is not true. When a Google ad is modified its 'quality score' (PageRank and other factors) changes to reflect the un-tested ad copy, resulting in a higher CPC until the ad proves its worth. As time goes on and the ad does well, the CPC drops and the ad's position improves.
Quote:
|
Google’s submission procedure offers one considerable advantage; speed of use.
|
While it is true that you can login and get a few ads up and running on Google near-immediately, there is no mechanism for bulk uploading, which Yahoo does have. Unfortunately for Yahoo, the editorial delay and inconsistencies in the operation of their automated verification programming often make a large upload of ads prohibitively 'expensive' in terms of server bandwidth required (Y's bots hit the server really aggressively) and hassle (fixing or resubmitting ads that were declined due to errors made by the bots).
Then again, Google's approach forces an advertiser to only include terms that they really want, and to craft ads that really work. That's a good thing.
Lastly, Yahoo is losing MSN, arguably their best 'partner'. MSN's AdCenter has been in beta for a few months and should be dropping Yahoo's ads in favor of MSN's ads within the next few months ... or whenever MS finally gets done with the beta. At that point, there will be quite a tussle between Yahoo advocates and advertisers to determine why anyone would want to advertise with Yahoo anymore, given the disappointing condition of their 'partner network'.