

Google Bans Adwords use for Facebook - bapter
http://techblog.willshouse.com/2011/07/26/google-bans-adwords-use-for-facebook/

======
dangrossman
Google recently suspended all my ads for advertising services (AdWords
competitors) and for ad tracking services (Analytics competitors). These are
sites Google had advertised for as long as 6 years without issue. The reasons
all seem a stretch (<http://www.w3roi.com> is suspended for 'misleading
claims' - what claims?).

Someone's rewriting policies and cracking down over there, and it's a big
problem for any business when the largest display and search advertising
service in the world decides they won't allow you to be a customer anymore.
Sleepless nights for me, as I had just mortgaged a new house before my ads
turned up suddenly suspended.

~~~
SeoxyS
This is why you don't stake the well-being of your company on the good
intentions of another's.

~~~
dangrossman
Monopolistic market share makes that difficult. Every store stakes their
business on their electric company providing service.

Poor analogy, but for internet businesses whose prospects find solutions
through search, Google refusing service is going to impact you no matter where
else you advertise. They're too big to easily substitute competitors.

------
Terretta
And this wouldn't have anything at all to do with Facebook first banning
adverts for Google+?

[http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20080054-71/facebook-
bans-...](http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20080054-71/facebook-bans-google-
ad/)

Or Facebook banning Adwords in all Facebook apps?

[http://forum.developers.facebook.net/viewtopic.php?id=91182&...](http://forum.developers.facebook.net/viewtopic.php?id=91182&p=2)

More:
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=Facebook+ba...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=Facebook+bans)

------
reso
The article is a second-hand account of a discussion with a low-level call
center employee. I hardly think we should extrapolate Google's corporate
policy from this account.

Interesting to note the parallel with the post which claimed Facebook was
blocking G+ ads a few weeks ago. Many jumped to conclusions, bit in the
discussion on HN [<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2770237>], it was
determined this was more likely a trademark issue than a competitive action.

Don't jump to conclusions.

------
nostromo
Before we jump to conclusions, it's equally possible Facebook is behind this.
Google gets lots of nastygrams from companies who view ads containing their
name as trademark violations.

A few years ago I had trouble running an iPod related ad on Google, not
because of Google but because of Apple. Is there any indication this is Google
and not Facebook's doing?

~~~
fpgeek
Interestingly, a search for "find friends" on Google still returns an ad
promoting Facebook from Facebook itself. That's one data point in favor of the
Facebook-initiated trademark hypothesis.

~~~
byrneseyeview
Screenshot? I see FB as the top organic result, but not as an advertiser.

~~~
slipstream
Screenshot from just now <http://i.imgur.com/7r1Lt.png>

~~~
byrneseyeview
Thanks! Are you in the US?

------
byrneseyeview
One potential reason for this:

[http://www.byrnehobart.com/blog/a-clever-adwords-hack-how-
to...](http://www.byrnehobart.com/blog/a-clever-adwords-hack-how-to-get-your-
advertorial-on-marketwatch-com/)

When people run ads pointing to a site they don't own, it's often in an effort
to get an implicit endorsement from that site. Note: I have no evidence that
this is going on, but it is a risk with any site that has a recognizable URL
and allows user-generated content.

From what I can see, it looks like ads pointing to FB were a) big brands
advertising on their own brand names in order to promote social sites (e.g.
'windows 7' or 'hennessy'), b) big brands advertising on generic terms (e.g.
'hummus' ads taking you to the Athenos Facebook page), or c) house ads for
navigational searches, including one for the notorious "Facebook login".

These ads are also growing in popularity. It looks like they doubled between
April and June.

~~~
captainshamo
> These ads are also growing in popularity. It looks like they doubled between
> April and June.

Source?

~~~
byrneseyeview
I buy lots of data sets on this stuff. My company analyzes SEO and SEM
campaigns to help investors understand what they're getting into.

------
gavinballard
Anyone with a US legal background know if this raises any antitrust issues?

It would certainly raise some red flags under Australian competition law.

~~~
thedragon4453
IANAL, but in the US whether you actually hold a monopoly is the key. I think
it would be bough to show that Google holds a monopoly in this space. They
definitely command the biggest market share, but I'm not sure it would be
enough to show that they have a monopoly. 65% (as reported here:
[http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/02/11/googles-
lead-s...](http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/02/11/googles-lead-search-
market-share-narrows-comscore/)) is certainly the lion's share, but not quite
a monopoly by US standards.

~~~
vaksel
it's in google's best interest to get studies to show them with lower market
share. I'd bet if you tallied up the stats for 100 biggest sites, Google would
have at least 90, if not 95% of all search engine traffic

~~~
thedragon4453
I doubt that just for the fact that IE comes with bing as default. I don't
think enough people actually care to change it. I would not be surprised to
see it higher, but I highly doubt greater than 80%.

------
mikeknoop
Facebook removed Adsense from their list of "approved ad providers" earlier
this year. <http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/>

This may be a response to that.

------
byrneseyeview
[http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8...](http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=facebook+blog)

"Facebook Blog" is still showing me AdWords ads for Facebook Advertising.
(facebook.com/ads/)

------
gcarswell
Google "Facebook ads" and check out the Adwords ads. Facebook themselves
advertise directly via Adwords. I'm going to transcribe myself talking to a
brain-dead call centre rep about alien life and give it a catchy article
headline to complete the troll.

------
samdalton
Touché. It all seems rather petty, though. They can either both allow ads, or
both ban ads, and the public probably doesn't care which scenario happens.

~~~
ohashi
Perhaps not directly, but they result will indirectly affect them when
developers resort to shadier monetization practices because they can't use one
on the other.

------
flocial
This feels just like the prelude to WWII with all these conflicting alliances
or maybe the Cold War is more appropriate.

------
brg
I wonder if it is simply Eric Schmidt's ties to Google preventing a DOJ anti-
trust suit. Owning the largest advertisment platform, owning the advertising
adjacencies, and using that leverage against your competition is very much
rubbing up against illegal use of a monopolistic position.

------
mckoss
Facebook did the same thing to _me_ when I tried to advertise my social
networking service on Facebook. This is anti-competitive - on both counts. But
it's illegal if you are deemed to have monopoly power.

------
scarmig
I'd be curious to see some real numbers on this. How much is this costing
Google directly? How much does the offensive damage Facebook in the
pocketbook?

Unless there's a genuinely huge advantage at play, I think this is a bad move
by Google. They're supposed to be the good guy against Facebook, and they're
just pissing that competitive edge away.

------
imaverickk
Legal battle? I thought Google and Facebook haven't sued each other _yet_.
Have they?

------
magicalist
humorously, if you search for "facebook ads", the first ad (at least for me)
is an ad for facebook.com/ads. If you search with the quotes, that is followed
by two sites that promise to optimize your social media ad presence.

Those might be from existing contracts or something, and after the whole email
contact "reciprocity" spat I could believe some form of this is happening, but
it would be nice to see some actual confirmation.

------
darylteo
As with the Apple TOS issue, I also call shenanigans on this.

Sigh whatever happened to just competing fairly?

------
necenzurat
payback time!

