Stop dropping words from exact match keywords
Bing has started dropping words from exact match terms and calling it under 'same search intent'. For example, they are dropping PURCHASE intent keywords like buy, order, online, ship, delivery and mapping it to the root words.
For example, the keyword 'buy sticky toffee pudding' will show for the search 'sticky toffee pudding' because they say the intent is the same. The data I have absolutely differs - people do not convert on the root word, or if they do, it's a rate that makes the ROAS exceptionally poor.
Also, Google does not do this. They do not drop words like this.
Here's the reply back from Bing that this is as intended.
{startquote}
I have received a reply from our technical team. They have informed me that this behavior is expected from exact match keywords. I did push back several times to ensure this was accurate information as even I am surprised by this.
The team explained that Exact match can also match to search queries that are minor variations of the keyword. These are considered close variations. Close variant search queries can include singulars, plurals, abbreviations, misspellings, punctuation, accents, stemming, reordered words, synonyms, paraphrases, implied words, and same search intent. ?
In this particular case, the matches fall under 'same search intent'. People searching for 'sticky toffee pudding' on Bing, have the same search intent as 'buy sticky toffee pudding online': {endquote}
This needs to stop - this is not the way to get volume - it's causing the results of clients to degrade and we spend too much time having to chase negatives that we should never have to be adding.
We appreciate your feedback. We do not currently have plans to roll back the update to exact match, which included synonyms/implied words/same search intent. Our algorithms are constantly learning to improve the matching quality and we closely track close variant performance. For many advertisers, we have seen lower CPAs and higher CTRs for EEM compared to True Exact. It should also be noted that we will prefer true exact matches over any close variant where applicable. We will continue to monitor close variant quality as well as incorporate your feedback into our planning around any algorithm changes. We encourage you to continue to open support tickets if you are dissatisfied with the traffic your campaigns are receiving.
8 comments
-
Aputsiaq Geisler
commented
It is so important to stay updated about the changing trends in education field and we must seek the help of experts in such issues. Glad to know about the assistance provided from you about the topic. Keep updated with more details. https://www.bestcertsexams.com/AZ-900-exam.html
-
Johan
commented
This is very shady. Let me guess, "buy sticky toffee pudding" has a higher bid than "sticky toffee pudding".
"...It should also be noted that we will prefer true exact matches over any close variant where applicable." This statement is false, it will go where it can yield msft the highest cpc.
-
Tim
commented
Please reconsider this request. While some expansion of match types has been ok (such as including plurals, slight misspellings, etc.), I'm seeing cases where queries with the opposite intent of the original keyword are being matched.
-
Chris
commented
Ben, the admin, appears to be missing the point. OP has a point, MS Ads is taking bottom of the funnel keywords and matching them to ambiguous searches and calling it similar intent. Buy sticky coffee is pretty **** targeted and the intent of the searcher is obvious. Sticky toffee is not targeted at all, do they want a recipe or what? Seriously, all you MS Ads folk need to do is look at the Bing SERPs to see that they are not the same intent, even Bing's search algo gets that. 'Buy sticky toffee pudding' returns sites SELLING sticky toffee, but the query 'sticky toffee pudding' returns sites with recipes. But hey, that's 'similar intent', right?
I am personally fine with close variant expansion. My problem with it is the constant stream of trash MS Ads sends my way under the guise of similar intent. It gets old needing to contact support and get refunds every month due to garbage matches. Google expanded their definition of close variants, and it works just fine. Why can't a multi-billion dollar company like MS get it right?
-
Anonymous
commented
Same here. I bid on keywords such as +buy +(competitor product) or [buy (competitor product)] and Bing completely ignores the word 'buy' in my keyword, so that I get such lovely queries as 'how to use (competitor product)' or essentially any query that contains our competitor's name. When contacting support, I wait 2-4 weeks while my search term report is being 'diligently reviewed', only to get a reply that somehow 'buy' and 'how to use' show similar intent. I think MS Ads is using similar intent as a blanket statement to nickel and dime us with low value queries. They can point to whatever data they'd like to justify what they are doing, however my sales data shows me that these queries are not nearly as valuable. It's stupid that I need to add 10s-100s of negatives to EXACT MATCH ONLY campaigns.
-
Mike
commented
There is one reason for this and it has nothing to do with assisting the searcher. Pathetic that they would reply with an ersatz 'in our defense'. It is a disturbing trend of tech companies to carry the idea in their ****** pocket they have a monopoly on deductive reasoning and can thereby come up with any excuse and we will buy it without question.
That behaviour is only expected when it its intentionally programmed. This is one of many reasons I have no use for Bing. If MS is so arrogant as to think they know my intent, they can take that boon-doggle and shove it.
The sheep will continue to "buy it" - until something less insulting comes along.
-
Serena
commented
Thanks for sharing your concerns! At this time, we have no plans to and don’t foresee rolling back the close variant expansion to synonyms/implied words/same search intent. We closely monitor the quality of all EM at the marketplace level and have seen that EEM CVR is comparable to True Exact CVR, and EEM CTR is in fact slightly higher than True Exact CTR. We're always continuing to monitor and adjust our algorithms to maintain our quality thresholds.
For those advertisers that are uniquely impacted by the changes, please continue to open support tickets – our engineering team closely reviews the matches and patterns that cause DSATs and takes that into account.
In the meantime, we’re partnering with our Reporting team to distinguish our close variant matches in the Search Term Report, to better allow our customers/AMs to manage their expected matches and negatives negatives.
-
Anonymous
commented
I would ask this
Does
"buy sticky toffee pudding"
have the same intent as
"make sticky toffee pudding"Clearly one is looking to purchase
The other looking for a recipe