PPC Chat Streamcap – New Keyword Match Types

This week Matt Umbro (@Matt_Umbro) came up with a question set about a new, mostly unliked, feature in AdWords titled “New Keyword Match Types.” The following is the transcribed Streamcap from the live chat:

Q1: What are your hesitations with AdWords near phrase and near exact match types? 

  • They apply to every keyword in a campaign. Thus, No Selective Use. – James Svoboda (@Realicity)
  • Those w/ ad groups dedicated to exact match only will require negative kws added. Big accts will take a lot of time. – Neil Sorenson (@iNeils)
  • Agree with James. I was hoping it was a match type instead of a campaign setting. Less control. Seems to be a trend. – Jeremy Brown (@JBGuru)
  • If new Near Matching options worked on a keyword by keyword basis like Modified Broad Match, then I’d be using them already. – James Svoboda
  • The fact that they explained how phrase and exact match keywords are suppose to behave as reasons to use it. If I wanted variants, I would use BMM or broad match. – Francis Shovlin (@fmshovlin)
  • Intent. A plural vs. singular term can have a varying degree of intent leading to the likelihood (or not) of purchase. – Jessica Cameron Ruud (@Camruud)
  • Campaign for a product that may be out of season and that you are scaling back on can incur additional clicks and costs. – Brian Gaspar (@BGaspar)
  • Matching, as it includes misspellings. psychic jobs and physic jobs for example, are two very different career fields. – Megan Ginecki (@megster88)

Q2: What are the positives of near phrase and near exact match?

  • A good way to lessen the workload in coming up with additional misspelling or plural variants of targeted keywords. To counter my point of Q1 the settings tab allows you to opt of this feature if not relevant to a campaign. – Brian Gaspar
  • May be able to increase relevant clicks and convs without possibly wasting budget on broad match or MBM. – Francis Shovlin
  • Will help you overcome Low Search Volume filters for valuable keywords… if you create a 2nd campaign. – James Svoboda
  • Potentially less work in kwd setup. – Richard Fergie (@RichardFergie)
  • Like BMM, can get varients that are hard to otherwise catch. Unlike BMM, can get rid of searches with any excess words. – Tamsin Mehew (@TamsinMehew)
  • Time management…? If you don’t have the resources to build and manage your campaigns, could help capture additional SQs. – Jessica Cameron Ruud
  • I completely understand not wanting close variants, but to play devil’s advocate couldn’t plural versions & misspellings be helpful. – Matt Umbro
    • Yes, helpful for mispellings. Also, helpful for brand navigational terms (company name, website, etc.) – Jeremy Brown
    • I don’t see value until this is ironed out. – Heather Cooan (@HeatherCooan)
  • I think the biggest benefit comes to people who don’t live, eat, breathe ppc. They’ll get *increased* traffic with no more effort. – Michelle Morgan (@michellemsem)
  • I must be a control freak. Having trouble seeing how less control is a positive. – Melissa Mackey (@Mel66)
  • Near match advantage – Lazy structuring and less time including exact match misspellings. – SEO PPC Guy (@SEOPPCGuy)
    • Depends on Quality Score & Bid and where Ad Rank falls. – James Svoboda
  • As Brad pointed out, some advertisers want time moreso than they want control. – David Szetela (@Szetela)
  • And assuming you are closely monitoring your search query report you get rid of the crap right away. Don’t get me wrong, I’m still adding singular/plural/misspellings in my ad groups, but I do see slight value (only if a sliver). – Matt Umbro
    • I agree with you on that point, now just need to make sure the variants are singular/plural/misspellings ONLY. – Emily Las
  • Sure it could mean less work in KW building, but can mean more work in SQ land. – Emily Las (@emlas)
  • I’m somewhat unconvinced it’s humanly possible to find *all* possible misspellings. People are inventive. – Tamsin Mehew
  • I’m leaning toward not using near phrase & exact, but I want to review SQ reports before I make a decision one way or the other. – Matt Umbro
  • I believe both recent changes ‘simplify’ the management process to reduce time needed and get more people using AdWords. – Francis Shovlin
    • I actually think it’s more about gaining additional clicks than it is making anything easier. – Heather Cooan
  • My POV, every time a channel tries to make our job easier, give us an opt-out…just in case were masochist. – Chris Kostecki (@chriskos)
  • I wouldn’t mind it so much if they didn’t opt us in to it automatically. – Cassie Allinger (@CassieAllinger)
  • I’d actually LOVE these Near Matching Options if they were Keyword or Ad Group Level settings. – James Svoboda
    • Agree on keyword or ad group setting. Why not make it an actual match type? – Jeremy Brown
  • I’d say it’s Google hitting the revenue button more than ease of use. After all, they set broad match as default. – Jeremy Brown

Q3: Though early on, have you seen queries that prove or negate Google’s claim of showing your ads for "other, close variants?"

  •  It’s not live yet (as far as I know) so I guess this question for those in the beta. I want to hear from them. The option is there, but they weren’t supposed to be in effect yet. Anyone actually seeing it live? – Jeremy Brown
  • I’m not sure yet. My main campaigns are ring fenced by match type. Anyone else’s like that? – SEO PPC Guy

Q4: What are your early impressions of @adCenter‘s modified broad match type?

  • Points to Microsoft for rolling this out. Negative points for taking so long. How about fixing DKI next? – Jeremy Brown
  • Good option for expanding reasonable reach and traffic potential for adCenter. Makes it easier to port AdWords campaigns.
  • Haven’t had a chance to try it yet. Too busy w/all these f’ing Adwords changes. – Melissa Mackey
  • I’ve tried some MBM in adCenter campaigns…no big findings yet. – Matt Umbro
    • Same here… Lower volume is a challenge. – Jessica Cameron Ruud
  • Volumes are an issue here, however I am seeing lower CPC’s. – Heather Cooan
  • I’ve tested MBM in adCenter & am thinking of re-building some campaigns where KW normalization is out of control. – Emily Las
  • I think they are great if a tight Geobase is needed and getting volume up is a challenge. – Mike Handy (@mhandy1)

Q5: How do you believe these new match types will influence new account setups and PPC education down the line?

  • Education: "Ok, exact match is ONLY when a user types this query as it’s written…except not really!" Ambiguity here we come! – Neil Sorenson
  • I see most initial users on mostly broad match, I dunno if this will really have a huge impact right away. – Heath Cooan
  • Remember "Quick Start" AdWords accts? The people who used those will have an easier time generating clicks! – Emily Las
  • SQ Reports will become even more important, there’ll be dupe campaigns with Exact-Exact, or Real Phrase, since not at kw level. – Chris Kostecki
  • One more default setting to remember to go change before launch. – Melissa Mackey
  • It’s going to inflate keyword competition across the board the same way that Expanded Broad did. – James Svoboda
  • PPC education will be harder. Match type behavior now overlaps and doesn’t make logical sense. – David Szetela
  • Keeps current practice for more established PPC pros. But gives some additional insights on variants to use to further optimize. – Brian Gaspar
  • I am not against near-type OPTIONS, just make it inline with the delivery. Camp Setting makes no sense (xcept as an auto opt-in). – Chris Kostecki
  • I’d even LOVE the new Near Matching is we could choose Phrase or Exact and not both! – James Svoboda

Q6: How will you be explaining these new match types to your clients?

  • It’s like BMM for Phrase and Exact. I’ve opted out, but we’ll do some testing to see if it’s for us. – Michelle Morgan
  • So Google has investors, and they need to make more money with what they already have, so let me tell you about near… – Chris Kostecki
  • VERY good question. They didn’t understand match types before this change; gonna be unbelievably confusing now. – Melissa Mackey
  • So far we have explained that there is not enough data to support use and will be testing. Watch for updates. – Heather Cooan
  • Another way for us to increase traffic but at a more qualified level when compared to broad or modified broad match. – Brian Gaspar
  • Maybe you guys have some sophisticated clients, but ours don’t care abt match types and KW levels; all they care abt is results. I find that the less info you give clients on this stuff, the better & if ur clients understood this stuff as well as you, they wouldn’t need you, would they? So, don’t worry about it. – Gnosis Media Group (@GnosisArts)
    • If they don’t want the info, fine, but you should make the effort to explain. – Matt Umbro
      • Why make the effort to explain something that’ll just confuse them even more? That’s not good biz sense. – Gnosis Media Group
        • It reinforces to clients how complex AdWords has become, and therefore reinforces their need for you. – Logan Durant (@THELoganDurant)
  • With an emphasis on the need to test a handful of campaigns before we determine value of new match types. – Jessica Cameron Ruud
  • Testing them out. Further question: is anyone dead against these and won’t even test? – Jeremy Brown
    • Hardly ever recommend not testing, but this won’t be at the top of my list of tests to run. – Melissa Mackey
    • I won’t test on some of my large luxury brands. Too risky, have to account for every detail. – Heather Cooan
    • No, while I have some targets that are sensitive & protected, I think it can help in moderation. – Chris Kostecki
  • Or: Google wants to hold our hands…and they know how to tickle the palm, but watch your pockets. – Chris Kostecki
  • "Google just made my job more time-consuming, so I’ll need to charge you more." – David Szetela


More PPCChats

Don’t forget to stay tuned for the next #PPCchat on Tuesday at 12 noon Eastern, 9 am Pacific and 5pm in the UK. Same Chat time, same Chat channel.

CRO Chat

Announcing CRO Chat: A Weekly Open Discussion About Digital Conversions. Read More


Check out the PPCChat Twitter list to see and connect with all current and prior participants.

You and the Streamcap’n Make it Happen

This is a guest post by Paul Kragthorpe; WebRanking SEM Manager in Minneapolis, Minnesota, #PPCChat Streamcap Grabber, SEO Blog Author. Connect with me @PaulKragthorpe, and Google Plus.

Be Sociable, Share!

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Tweets

I am speaking at SMX East
PPCChat.co was rated one of the Best PPC Blogs by Boost CTR