Posted December 13, 2006 10:19 am by with 1 comment

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on FacebookBuffer this page

It seems like the conversation I started about Google’s click fraud rate, has rolled down the hill and picked up some momentum.

Matt Cutts wants his readers to read my article and Shuman Ghosemajumder’s own blog post. Danny Sullivan also digs into the numbers.

As my updated report suggested, Google’s user-detected click fraud is less than 2% of all invalid clicks (and not all clicks, as first reported). If that number is in the single digits, isn’t Google now admitting that click fraud across all clicks is less than 0.2%?

I was roasted for helping spread the word that the rate was at 2%, what kind of fury will appear with the suggestion that the rate is actually less than 0.2%?

The conversation continues.

  • Oh my, now you’re going to be taking some hits. 🙂

    I would have to point to Donna Bogatin’s article on the zdnet site as a reference to why it doesn’t totally make sense to trust Google’s word. The article posted at brings up the point that they’re certainly giving the right numbers from their “perspective” but when they’re determining what a valid vs invalid click are it pretty significantly biases the stats. I can have a 100% conversion ratio if I only count valid visitors as those who convert. 😉

    But that’s just one SEO’s opinion (oh, and a zdnet writer). 🙂