• http://twitter.com/mark_barrera Mark Barrera

    Great story highlighting the future of ecommerce.  However, I do want to point out that while you say that this change to charging for Google Shopping hurts some small business, it also serves to help many others.  I have a client who had little visibility in Google shopping when it was a free model since the results were dominated by the big boys with big feeds (Amazon, Walmart, Target, etc).  We spent good time optimizing these feeds to little avail. Now, with the paid model, my client is able to compete and we have seen some of our highest returns (double our typical ROAS) in our paid account coming from these new ad options.  So there is a down side for some, there are also great opportunities for others that I think should be mentioned.

  • http://twitter.com/CPC_Rick Rick Backus

    I 100% agree Mark. I should clarify that this change hurts (unsophisticated) small businesses. For the retailers (small or large) that have a sophisticated bidding strategy, the new Google Shopping is a great opportunity to scale out their paid traffic more aggressively. 

    The question has changed from – “How do I get more traffic from Google Shopping?” to “How do I get more qualified traffic from Google Shopping?”.

  • Trish Keenan

    Isn’t this much the same as when Yahoo! first decided they were going to charge a fee to be listed on their search engine? And shortly thereafter made it an annual fee? Finding a profitable model that keeps customers happy is no easy task, yet if any organization has the adaptability and agility to sort out how to make it work, it’s Google.

  • Nigel Burke

    Wasn’t this just for the Yahoo Directory? and not for the SERPs?

  • http://twitter.com/CPC_Rick Rick Backus

    @google-ec554c159001a6570d750caba0c56839:disqus – I think @google-3a6bc4282da6609a66e256ae68a38db1:disqus was referring to the Yahoo Paid Inclusion program 

  • http://twitter.com/ContentAxis Content Axis

    It’s very sad that Google is now charging money from companies for clicks that they will get through Google Shopping platform. Still, when we see it from user perspective it will have positive impact on the overall performance of this product. Since Google is investing so much of time, money and energy in developing these products they should get the money from somewhere. Though, I believe that the charged fee should be somewhat less so that Small businesses too can sustain in Google Marketplace.

  • http://twitter.com/ContentAxis Content Axis

    Agreed with @google-3a6bc4282da6609a66e256ae68a38db1:disqus Trish that Google is the only Search Engine that is investing a huge amount of money, time and energy in developing products that can satisfy user at the end of the day. And since they are investing this much money it should come from somewhere, hence I guess it’s fair charging a price on the basis of clicks at the same time however i believe that the charging should be agreeable to Google as well as small businesses which is a debatable issue.

  • Robert Schroeder

    Where does it say – “Google Trusted Stores 1,000 order / month minimum to qualify for being considered for the program”?

  • UWSseo

    The problem I’m having is that as of July 1st, I discovered, almost totally by chance, that my Google Feed traffic fell to almost zero overnight. No warning from Google that this was coming. I quickly linked the our merchant account with my Adwords account (after searching around for instructions) but so far, after two days, not even an impression! I’m in the wine business and noticed that when I enter a wine product into Google search there are NO Google Shopping results at all, as if our entire industry was somehow just turned off! I can enter other products in other realms and there are Google Shopping results. This is all very frustrating as I see traffic and revenue losses at a significant level (our revenue from the feed was about 8% of our total). If anyone out there has an idea of what is happening I would love to hear it!

  • Robert Schroeder
  • http://www.rimmkaufman.com/ George Michie

    Great article, Rick.  I agree that the stakes have been raised in feed optimization (both the feed itself and the bidding).  I wouldn’t be surprised to see Google have more success as a marketplace than did Nextag.  The huge volume that they enjoy, like Amazon, gives them the ability to take money from two sources:  rev share with the listings, and advertisements along the side.  Another major competitor for resellers of other folks merchandise, potentially.

  • http://twitter.com/CPC_Rick Rick Backus

    You’re right Robert, thanks for catching that. I’ll edit the post. 

  • http://twitter.com/CPC_Rick Rick Backus

    @UWSseo:disqus – @google-82ec2c5a11e85876864a9e5bcbb88cdc:disqus is correct. You can’t purchase ads for alcohol related products. Therefore your products will no longer be eligible for Google Shopping. You should focus on Amazon which still allows bidding on Wine products. 

  • UWSseo

    Wow, you guys are correct, it appears that Google has just destroyed the significant revenue stream for our industry from Google Shopping. And I don’t understand why. We can still use Adwords…it’s just that our ads are listed as “non-Family Friendly” with a few minor restrictions like no graphics in display ads. In reality there is no difference between what was being displayed from the feed and what is being displayed in Google Shopping. I guess our only option is to take those products that were getting the best results in the feed and translate them over to individual product ads in the “regular” Adwords. Hmmm, is Carrie Nations’ grandchild working at Google?

  • http://www.facebook.com/dmitry.pakhomkin Dmitry Pakhomkin

    Google Shopping is not the only shopping search engine out there. And clearly not the most comprehensive. And now it’s not free. Hm…

  • http://twitter.com/MaryKayLofurno Mary Kay Lofurno

    Interesting article.  Funny you said local fulfillment through local merchants, or at least that is what I took it to mean.  There has been a lot in the news lately about Amazon loosing its tax advantage and will start charging tax.  One article asked why Amazon once fought this aggressively and then stopped fighting.  Their supposition was because this would give them nexus in each of those states.  And that Amazon would be setting up local distribution centers so they could also do same or next day delivery.  They also pointed to Amazon’s purchase of Kiva Systems [a robotics company develops smart shipping/warehouses using robots]

    All that said, each side/strategy {Google vs. Amazon} has its pros and cons.  When it comes to setting up warehouses and distribution centers for same day delivery, I would have to side with Amazon here.  Its more in their wheelhouse.

    Granted, Google has done a lot to beef up its local presence but embarking on this type of program [local fulfillment through local merchants] seems like it has a host of different issues associated with it that are not in say Google’s wheelhouse.  [I apologize for the use of wheelhouse/buzz word]

    Just my opinion. Thanks, Mary Kay

  • Billteud

    So now when I search for products, instead of getting the most appropriate results that benefit me, I’m going to get results from your “client” who couldn’t scam their way to the top, so they just paid to be placed there instead.

  • Jerrywhyte

    G wants to kill internet its entirety with most of their self-centered products and brands that sucks

  • Joe G

    I am not that much concerned that it is PPC, but that it is big. Overstock.com etc. already dominate, not based on quality merchandise or content but due to large amount of Google advertising.

    Explain to me this: how does it BENEFIT CONSUMERS when product listings are not based on price competitiveness, shipping, taxes or product description but product listings are based on how much a merchant pays Google.

    It’s just them preparing to take on Amazon again. And probably fail again. Google should stick to what it does best: be a search engine.