For some time now, advertisers using Shopping ads in Google Ads have been able to use alternative Comparison Shopping Services (CSS). This applies both to standard Shopping campaigns and to Performance Max campaigns. Is this option actually worth using?
The main benefit is the chance to get a lower price for clicks on your ads. How is that possible?
The European Commission’s decision
In 2017, the European Commission fined Google €2.42 billion for monopolistic practices consisting in favoring its own comparison shopping service, since only products listed in Google Shopping could use Shopping ads.
At the same time, Google was obliged to stop abusing its dominant position and to give other comparison services access to Shopping ads. The details of the EC decision are available on europa.eu.
In line with the European Commission’s requirements, Google Shopping must ensure its own profitability, and all comparison services must have access to Google ads on the same terms.
This means that Google’s Shopping ad prices for third-party comparison services had to be reduced by a certain percentage of Google Shopping’s margin. The word on the street is that this margin amounts to 20%.
Advertising with a CSS
For a user of Google search, a Shopping ad from a merchant using a CSS looks exactly the same as in the standard Google Shopping setup. The only difference is the comparison service’s name shown in the ad (e.g. instead of “By Google” it will say “By Adequate”):
For the advertiser the difference is also minor, and boils down to modifying the ad account setup (a new Google Ads account has to be opened).
Google ads will still redirect directly to the advertiser’s website, so their operation is independent of the comparison service’s technology.
Is it worth it?
The reduction in Shopping ads’ cost per click is a fact. Campaigns that were moved to an account using the adequate.store CSS did indeed lower their cost per click by about 20%.
After some initial fluctuations caused by the account migration, the cost per click stabilized at a level clearly lower than before.
Below are three example Shopping campaigns. The dashed line marks the moment of switching to a campaign using the adequate.store CSS:
It’s worth stressing that this came with a simultaneous increase in the volume of traffic acquired from these ads.
For Shopping campaigns within Performance Max, or standard Shopping campaigns using automated bidding strategies with a ROAS goal, the CPC reduction won’t always be visible, because the optimizer will use the discount to keep bidding the price up in pursuit of the set ROAS target. In that case the effect will be a significant increase in traffic and transaction volume at the same ROAS level as before.
If cutting costs is the priority, by adjusting the ROAS target we can get the campaign to deliver results similar to those before the CSS switch, but on a lower budget. An alternative is setting the optimizer to maximize conversion value within a fixed budget.
How to take advantage of it?
There are many comparison services on the market. Clients of Adequate Interactive Boutique get access to the adequate.store comparison service and the ability to buy cheaper Shopping ads. We currently offer CSS access to our Clients free of charge.
If you’re interested in lowering the cost of your Shopping ads, get in touch with us.
