The specific example that Google stated in their announcement used differences between US and Canada – so YES, “location” means “countries.” But that can probably be extrapolated out over regions and cities, too. Regarding individual search queries, these could be based on the exact, phrase or broad match versions of your keywords. It all depends on which keyword triggered your ad in that particular query event. The only time match type is a factor is when Google is calculating their “first page bid.” In that instance, only the exact match is considered.

How do you think, is there any way we can prepare our accounts to this changes? They say that the take in count the location (does it means different countrys?) Depending on the query (is that on phrase and broad match?)

Maybe you have a clue. Or have we just to wait to see ….

The dynamic QS calculation does seem to be the next logical progression, but as you suggest – it’s pretty easy to start waiving the “Google Wants More $$” flag. : )

@ Steve,

As I said in my post, the fact that Google didn’t discuss how they’ll report QS is what bothers me most about this announcement. Transparency is so important for us PPC advertisers so that we can make the **Best** decisions for our accounts. Regarding how “first page bids” will change the bidding landscape, we’ll just have to wait and see!

@ Craig,

Good post! But I have to say, the image said it best: “The race for quality has no finish line – so technically it’s more like a death march.” Good stuff… I do think that a loss of visibility is a bad thing, but for now I’m still optimistic. I’m pleased that they realized that “inactive for search” was ridiculous. I think the common theme here is going to be “wait and see.”

Also, i’m worried that the new “1st page bids” will spur many advertisers to increase their bids, as this figure will most certainly be higher than the current “minimum bids”, which are usually very low for high quality score keywords ($0.05, etc).

Scariest of all: the new “1st page bids” could fool people into thinking high bids are required due to high advertiser competition, when the real cause could be poor quality score, or a combination of the two. One more thing, have a look at the Google keyword tool; Google is notorious for suggesting outrageously and unnecessarily expensive bids for first page positioning!

I fear advertisers are going to lose transparency, and bids are going to rise across the board as a result of these changes. Please prove me wrong Google!

In hind-sight, analyzing a QS for each individual search performed seems to be a logical step in the direction they have always been headed.

Removing the inactive for search and minimum bids is clearly an attempt to get more money out of some searches that had inadequate competition. Some of the affected keywords might suddenly be activated on first page results. I’d like to see how much more they make from it.