Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Adwords Question

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 mrgoodfox


    One Who Engineers

  • Moderators
  • 964 posts

Posted 25 February 2014 - 09:49 PM

Are my following assumptions correct? 


If I target the following keyword match (in google search): +Latino +Immigration Lawyer +Houston Texas

It will also target searches such as  "Houston Latino Immigration Attorney" and "Latino Immigration Attorney Houston TX". 


Also, what if I want to target something similar but where the city is in two words. For example:

+Latino +Immigration Lawyer +San Jose California 


Should I put it in the following format:

+Latino +Immigration Lawyer +[San Jose] California 


Ps. Thanks for all the education  :morningcoffee:

#2 mrgoodfox


    One Who Engineers

  • Moderators
  • 964 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 11:58 AM

So I talked to Adwords team and it seems like the correct way to ad the search match type is the following:


+Latino +Immigration Lawyer +"San Jose" California 




  • Hall Of Fame
  • 5187 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 12:16 PM

Great.  I didn't know the answer.   Thanks

#4 earlpearl


    Hall of Fame

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1357 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 12:41 PM



thanks.  I'm converting a lot of adwords from broad phrase to narrower definitions.  I just looked at one campaign for both 2010 and 2013.


the campaigns have historically run on majority exact phrase and broad phrase.  We use broad phrase because its business to consumer.  The campaign covers a lot of regional geography and with it a lot of towns, big and small.  It draws from this expansive area.   There are a couple of hundred geographic terms in that region and variations on the service.   We can easily attract search phrases with tiny little town A/service   tiny little town B/service....and then  a lot of variations with every town and variations on the service phrases.  


In 2010 google reports there were 190,000 impressions for this narrow niche.  They gave us data on 94,000 impressions covering about 2700 phrases.  the bulk of their reporting covered about 200 exact phrase searches.  The rest mostly came from some variants off of long tail.


In 2013 with a campaign that hasn't changed significantly....there were about 430,000 impressions.  That is an enormous increase.  We haven't changed much.  google is showing the ads, especially the broad phrase data in many many more searches.


Of the 430,000 they gave us summary data on about 125,000 impressions and about 3500 different phrases.   Again exact match reflected the bulk of impressions and clicks.


Of the 300,000 that summary adwords didn't tell us about there were a couple of hundred more clicks than in 2010.   That wide expansion of our ads covering more phrases ended up costing us significantly more money.  


I am trying to narrow the scope using the + variations.  On the other hand I want to catch a lot of long term opportunities.   Its a process.      Meanwhile we are paying google a lot more.  


I'm testing and testing.  Not sure yet what works best.

#5 mrgoodfox


    One Who Engineers

  • Moderators
  • 964 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 04:24 PM

Im testing things too.


I wanted to put + sign beside words like Immigration and Latino because those are very important but I wanted Google to show the ads to people searching for Lawyers or Attorneys or Law Firm so I just put Lawyers without the + sign. Same with the word San Jose (if someone searches Latino Immigration Lawyer) and they are located in San Jose geographically, the ads are still shown to them

RSS Feed

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users