I have a feeling that many Google rules that apply to SEO may sooner or later also apply to PPC.

I have a feeling that many Google rules that apply to SEO may sooner or later also apply to PPC.

Wikipedia has a good summary about arbitrage Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrage

I once clerked for brokers on the NYFE, so I do not see anything intrinsically wrong with arbitrage on futures contracts.

According to the article, PPC advertisers can be categorized into separate groups.

As an example of a type, there are PPC advertisers who are marketers (i.e. affiliates) and there are those who are arbitrageurs (i.e. those who would be more interested in pursuing the aggregate price differences among the engines to scoop up a profit). There are likely to be other types as well, but these two tend to be interesting case studies
Neither of these types are intrinsically wrong, however, their practices have contributed to the spawning of some problems in general and for the “innocent search user” specifically.

PPC is not the same as Adsense so can a “Splog Blog” be blamed as well for the “landing pages that offer no value?”

The judgment as to whether search arbitrage is “evil” or not comes into play when the user’s experience is factored in. TrueLocal shouldn’t be asking users for a zip code. Everyone knows that information about people have been aggregated and defined by zip code — Neighbourhood profiles are based on ACORN classifications.

So a question is raised: how can the user’s experience be protected while legitimate business practices are allowed to thrive as well?
Who is given authority to “dictate” the guidelines?

This point should be pondered by those using Google’s Analytics:

“Then Baillie said, ‘If you’re using their tracking products, I suppose Google could look at your conversion data and evaluate landing page quality based upon conversion metrics, but do you really want to share your conversion data with the folks who can increase your ad fees?’ “

The article is truly food for thought and thank you, Vinny, for bringing it to my attention

Wikipedia has a good summary about arbitrage Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrage

I once clerked for brokers on the NYFE, so I do not see anything intrinsically wrong with arbitrage on futures contracts.

According to the article, PPC advertisers can be categorized into separate groups.

As an example of a type, there are PPC advertisers who are marketers (i.e. affiliates) and there are those who are arbitrageurs (i.e. those who would be more interested in pursuing the aggregate price differences among the engines to scoop up a profit). There are likely to be other types as well, but these two tend to be interesting case studies
Neither of these types are intrinsically wrong, however, their practices have contributed to the spawning of some problems in general and for the “innocent search user” specifically.

PPC is not the same as Adsense so can a “Splog Blog” be blamed as well for the “landing pages that offer no value?”

The judgment as to whether search arbitrage is “evil” or not comes into play when the user’s experience is factored in. TrueLocal shouldn’t be asking users for a zip code. Everyone knows that information about people have been aggregated and defined by zip code — Neighbourhood profiles are based on ACORN classifications.

So a question is raised: how can the user’s experience be protected while legitimate business practices are allowed to thrive as well?
Who is given authority to “dictate” the guidelines?

This point should be pondered by those using Google’s Analytics:

“Then Baillie said, ‘If you’re using their tracking products, I suppose Google could look at your conversion data and evaluate landing page quality based upon conversion metrics, but do you really want to share your conversion data with the folks who can increase your ad fees?’ ”

The article is truly food for thought and thank you, Vinny, for bringing it to my attention