Google announced it is rolling out Automated Local Services Ads lead credits next month, which should “credit the same or more leads on average,” than the old system. This will replace the manual lead credit methods, and use machine learning to process these credits going forward.
But this also means you cannot manually request a review, it seems.
Anu Adegbola from Search Engine Land wrote “This change aims to save time for advertisers and ensure more equitable distribution of ad credits, particularly benefiting those with limited resources. This will potentially affect advertisers’ budgets, lead quality and overall experience with the platform.”
Google said that starting in July 2024, Local Services Ads is transitioning to an automated lead crediting process for all its advertisers. You cannot opt out of this, Google said “this change is automatic, and no advertiser action is needed.”
Google said it uses machine learning for this, saying it trained “machine learning ****** to understand which leads are high quality” and “with Automated Local Services Ads lead credits, Google will review all leads and automatically credit invalid leads.” This is with the exception of health care verticals or advertisers in EMEA where lead credits are not available.
Another interesting point is that Google said the new credit system, “Google will no longer be able to support ‘job type not serviced’ and ‘geo not serviced’ leads.” What did you say Google?
#LSA: @GoogleAds is removing the ability to dispute junk leads. Advertisers will now pay for junk leads. In the legal space these can be $600 per junk call. They call this ????sandwich “good news”. pic.twitter.com/joqb5UfS50
— Len (@lenraleigh) June 24, 2024
Hey Guys! GREAT News!
Google Is REMOVING THE ABILITY TO DISPUTE LEADS in The Platform Where Disputing Bad Lead Was The Selling Point!
But Don’t Worry, “Its To Simplify” And “To Make Things Easier For Us All.”
This Way An “Ai” Will Just Make All Your Decisions For You.… pic.twitter.com/GODsxpU7lD
— Anthony Higman (@AnthonyHigman) June 24, 2024
It seems to be Google won’t be giving credits for LSAs related to the wrong job type or geo location complaints?
Google did say, “For most advertisers, we anticipate that the new system will credit the same or more leads on average, overall.”
Also those credits will be applied to your account balance within 30 days.
Google also wrote that with Automated Local Services Ads lead credits, you may notice faster and automatic reviews on every lead, resulting in:
- Equitable ad credits: A small number of advertisers were disputing a high percentage of leads, while many advertisers weren’t disputing any leads – including those eligible for credit. Automated lead credits will automatically review all leads and credit invalid ones – including ones that you might not have known were eligible for credit.
- Time savings: Automated lead credits save all businesses time and resources by eliminating the need to manually dispute leads, a particularly valuable benefit for those with limited staff or resources.
I didn’t write those bullets above, Google did.
Here is how Ginny Marvin, Google’s Ads Liaison responded to these:
Rather than waiting for advertisers to initiate disputes, we’re proactively evaluating every lead that comes in against an equitable set of standards and proactively refunding invalid leads. We were seeing a very small number of advertisers dispute a high share of their leads while most advertisers didn’t dispute leads at all. We’ve been testing it for over a year and expect most advertisers to see the same or more lead credits, on average, overall.
Hi Anthony & Joe, Rather than waiting for advertisers to initiate disputes, we’re proactively evaluating every lead that comes in against an equitable set of standards and proactively refunding invalid leads. We were seeing a very small number of advertisers dispute a high share…
— AdsLiaison (@adsliaison) June 24, 2024
Hi Drew, Instead of waiting for advertisers to initiate disputes, we’re proactively evaluating each & every lead that comes in against an equitable set of standards, and proactively refunding invalid leads. We were seeing a very small number of advertisers dispute a high share of…
— AdsLiaison (@adsliaison) June 24, 2024
Forum discussion at X.
Update: Google’s Ad Liaison responded on X and said:
Yes, credits will be handled by this new system, however we are also opening an in-product Lead Feedback survey on every lead. We’ll use that feedback to give advertisers more of the leads they want and fewer of the ones they don’t over time.
The aim is to create a more equitable system for all advertisers without them having to go through the work of disputing leads manually. Instead of waiting for some advertisers to initiate some disputes on some leads, we’re proactively evaluating every lead that comes in against an equitable set of standards, and proactively refunding on our own. With this new system, most advertisers will now see the same or more lead credits, on average.
She also posted here saying:
That’s exactly the type of lead this new system will be able to credit automatically – without you having to go through the effort of disputing the lead manually.
We were seeing a very small number of advertisers dispute a high share of their leads while most advertisers didn’t dispute leads at all. We have been testing and training this new system for more than a year and expect most advertisers to see the same or more lead credits, on average, overall.
Additionally, we’re opening an in-product Lead Feedback survey on every lead so that we can give advertisers more of the leads they want and fewer of the ones they don’t want over time.
And more…
Hi Anthony, Let me try to address your points:
1. This was not a recent or sudden update to ranking considerations. We’ve seen that proximity is often not a great indicator of relevancy – the physical location of a home cleaning business matters less to a potential customer than…
— AdsLiaison (@adsliaison) June 25, 2024
It’s a good question. Here’s the rationale for not doing both:
1. We were seeing the manual process wasn’t working equitably for advertisers. A small number were taking advantage of the system and disputing a big share of their leads while most weren’t disputing at all. That…— AdsLiaison (@adsliaison) June 25, 2024
