Question

Hey guys, another question.  Someone before me has lobbed ALL match types into the same ad groups for an entire search campaign, so I'm pulling it all apart, putting the correct sort of match type in the correct ad group.Hey guys, another question. Someone before me has lobbed ALL match types into the same ad groups for an entire search campaign, so I'm pulling it all apart, putting the correct sort of match type in the correct ad group. My question; does doing this make it advisable then to add the match type that's in one group, as a negative keyword in the opposite group? In example: If [keyword] is in ad group /1 -> do I then need to set it as a negative in ad group /2? It sort of appears to me that Google would be clever enough to actually figure this one out itself, but the agency has set it like this and it's making me second guess myself. There -must- be a reason why they did this. On the other hand, this is also the agency that put [+keyword +keyword +keyword] next to [keyword] and +keyword +keyword in the same ad group, so who knows. -_o. 0_- Thanks in advance again! You guys need to start charging me. :D

Answer 1

Erm. What's wrong with different match types being in the same Ad group?  

Comments

@walkyrie not sure I follow your assumed benefits there to be honest. It's very rare that I'd split different match types of the same keywords into different Ad Groups, except for one or two scenarios. Do you have a specific need to present different Ad copy for different match types of the same keyword? If so, why so?  

---

@walkyrie well, the only hard and fast rule about Google Ads is that there are no hard and fast rules. Everything depends. It's unusual to talk about things in terms of 'mistakes' or 'errors', unless you're talking about matters of process. Is much more about hypothesis; test; assess; commit or regress.  

---

@walkyrie sure OK. Some closing advice from a world-weary Ads manager. Making changes is easy (too easy). There are 1000s of different levers & dials to fiddle with in Ads & it's tempting to move them all. But doing so is just rolling the dice really. The real art comes from having the means by which you can measure the effect of your changes. It comes down to forming a hypothesis as to some benefit arising from a change; establishing the means by which you can test that hypothesis; deploy & execute that test; come back and assess the results. That's all much harder. It can all get a bit challenging if you apply multiple changes at the same time, that each may impact on the other. So it's best to avoid making too many changes that overlap. A means to track these things over time is essential - and it's a tool that's usually outside Ads. Sometimes, however, you just have to burn it all down and start over. If you do plan to create a completely new, replacement campaign - set it up under Experiments & Draft campaigns & run in in parallel with your existing campaign first. Don't burn the bridge until you know which side is the safest to be.  

Answer 2

Actually, I and a lot of people used to follow it before with SKAG (Single Keyword Per Adgroup) strategy. However, it doesn't work anymore with Google treating the match types differently. Better stick to your thematic ad groups and no problem with putting different match types in the same ad group

Comments

@walkyrie If they are old campaigns, then I suggest you to restructure them according to the new updates of Google. If they are working well, leave them as they are. Otherwise restructure them :)

---

@walkyrie See, the thumb rule is that if it is working well, never thouch it. If you want to do some experiments, make a separate ad group and play around. So that you can always get back to your old setup if it doesn't workout.  

---

@walkyrie Oh okay. Then you better go with creating a new campaign with a proper structure according to the current match type treatment :)

---

@walkyrie Happy to help and good luck (y)

Answer 3

I agree. The purpose of the Ad Group is more about context and user intention. Don't get too caught up with having a separate ad group for every match type. That seems like a lot of extra work and not sure what the benefit is.  

Comments

@raynell9 10 years

---

@raynell9 Yes, putting in extra work in the right areas pays off. Putting extra work on the tactic of the week doesn't. Invest that time making sure the value proposition on the landing page is excellent, spend that making sure the call to action is strong, spend that time making sure the landing page has as little friction as possible. on and on. It's about deciding what's really important. I would rather increase my conversion rate by 5% than to be worrying about having 600 add groups for 200 keywords. There is a reason why you say (WAS) worth it. The time I spent fine tuning the overall structure, customer thought process, etc is something that is not effected when Google changes their algorithm. Plus, those efforts are leveraged across all other channels as well. It's about being smart enough to pick and choose your battles.  

---

@raynell9 Yeah, I've seen the writing on the wall. Not sure if you have have any "home services" clients in the US or not. If you do, you can already tell Google's next chess move and it's not pretty.  

Answer 4

Hi Kim, I agree with all (the helpful ones anyway! ) comments here, but I'll just add. You could also structure your account to have your exact match keywords/ad groups in one campaign and your phrase/BMM in another campaign. This way you may have tighter control over your budgets i. e. if your exact match keywords have lots of volume and bring in the most conversions, highest ROI etc., then you can spend less on the BMM/Phrase keywords. So with this structure you’d want to add exact match negatives to the BMM/Phrase campaign so that an exact match search can only be served by the exact match campaign.