12 thoughts on “It Might Be Time To Revisit Your Account’s Structure

  1. Stephen

    Hey Eric, What exactly is the advantage to having your ad groups broken out by match type as opposed to having an ad group with only one keyword in all three match types?

    1. EricCouch

      Doing it by match type – combined with embedded negatives – can help with your traffic segmentation. It also helps to maximize your exact match impression share and overall efficiency. While having an ad group with one keyword in all three match types can help with ad relevancy, it can also balloon in to a logistical beast when you start working with any substantial number of keywords – in addition to allowing your broad and phrase match keywords to compete against your exact match terms.

      But structure can also be a personal style thing – so long as it works for your account and gets you the Quality Scores you need, there shouldn’t be an issue.

      1. Tim Rowley

        I am reading here that ‘if I have match types of a keyword within one ad group that they will be competing with each other, whereas if they were in different match type ad groups they would not be competing against each other.
        If I know that for a particular keyword I have no paying competitors what is the best grouping and bid strategy to obtain the word at a cheap price? – I understand that the maximum bid of the auction runner-up is a determining factor in the final price.

  2. Scott Mckeagan

    Hi Eric, can you please elaborate what you mean by segmenting your display campaigns by targeting type? Let’s say I am targeting 5 geographical locations. Should I create individual display campaigns for each location?

    Thanks, Scott

    1. EricCouch

      Scott – I wrote that in mind thinking more of Topics, Remarketing, Interest Categories, etc. But we’ve had some accounts that also made use of Geotargeted Display Campaigns. It’s definitely valid if you’re looking to maximize performance in those locations – but if it’s just those five, it might not be as necessary. Sounds like a cop-out, but it’s best handled on a case-by-case basis. 🙂

        1. EricCouch

          Great question! Budgets, mainly. I’d rather have manual control over spend – especially for anything on Display. Remarketing/Topics/ICM/KCT all have wildly different performance, so I prefer to split them out and allocate budgets accordingly.

          1. winstonian

            Sorry to keep prying. But if you’re on Conversion Optimizer bid type–either Max CPA or Target CPA–with an unlimited budget, then Flexible Reach is probably a good choice?

          2. EricCouch

            Well, not all leads/sales are created equal, and we also report on the campaign level. For those reasons, as well as our goal to keep Campaigns tightly segmented by intent/purpose, we break out those targeting types. Remarketing and ICM are far too different to lump together in to one singular “Display” campaign.

          3. winstonian

            Ah good point… Basically sometimes the lead quality/user quality is different by targeting type (or at least in Remarketing vs. KCT or something). So for that reason it’s best to break apart at campaign level?

  3. graham

    This is basically how I’ve done my account structure in the past, but
    read something from @bgtheory that proposed a different strategy of
    only having only couple search campaigns and from there structuring more
    around geographic locations and different GDN strategies.
    Since I only recently restructured, I can’t give any feedback on this yet, but might also be a consideration for PPC managers looking to fully utilize display as well.

  4. saurabh jain

    Hi Eric, You mentioned that when creating Ad Group variants for each Match Type, have Negative Exact Matches of every keyword for Phrase ad group & for Broad/BMM have Negative Exact and Negative Phrase Matches of every keyword. Can you please explain this with the help of an example.


Leave a Reply

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