Sistem Pembayaran Baru Adsense Menguntungkan atau Merugikan Pihak Publiser?

Update terbaru mengenai perubahan pada publiser Adsense yakni tidak lagi berdasarkan CPC atau perclik namun sistem pembayaran pertayang, mungkin lebih mirip seperti sistem adsense pada Youtube. Dengan perubahan tiba-tiba ini membuat para publiser bertanya-tanya dan menjadi polemik dikalangan blogger. Bagi mereka yang mendapat keutungan dari google adsense tentunya bertanya-tanya apakah ini ini akan menguntungkan atau malah merugikan.  

Sebelumnya, adsense membayar penerbit 68% dalam jaringan Google AdSense. Tapi, pernyataan terbarunya Google akan membagi hasil Adsense menjadi tarif terpisah untuk sisi beli dan sisi jual. Dan, penerbit akan menerima atau mendapat 80% pendapatan. Jika, dilihat dari pembagian hasilnya saja menurut pertanyaan Google, tampaknya publiser mendapat lebih banyak keuntungan.  

Kita belum mengentahui dengan pasti seperti apa sistem yang akan dijalankan di tahun depan. Meskipun demikian, sudah banyak pendapat yang berbeda-beda mengenai pembaharuan tersebut. Ada yang mengatakan bahwa 'ini akan menguntungkan publiser', tapi ada juga yang mengatakan bahwa ini akan berdampak buruk bagi publiser. 

Berikut dilansir dari tulisan dari seorang blogger India bernama Sarang Kumar (Linked In, 05/11/2023) ia menjelaskan apa dampaknya perubahan baru dari google adsense tersebut : 

[Introduction

Google recently announced changes to the way they will pay publishers who use AdSense to monetize their websites and content. On the surface, Google framed these as minor "upcoming updates" intended to provide transparency and a consistent payment structure across the digital advertising industry. However, a deeper look reveals the changes primarily serve to boost Google's bottom line at the expense of publishers. In this in-depth analysis, I will break down exactly how the new Upcoming AdSense system works, explain how it benefits Google financially, consider the lack of rationale for the timing of these changes, address counter-arguments from Google's perspective, and provide a look at alternative monetization options now available to publishers.

Breaking Down the Key Changes

To understand the impact, we must first examine what exactly Google is changing with AdSense. There are two major components:

Switching to Per-Impression Payments

Previously, AdSense paid publishers primarily based on clicks, with payments triggered each time a user clicked an ad on their site. Google is moving to paying on a cost-per-mille (CPM) basis. While Google claims this aligns with industry standards, it hides a key impact - pay-per-click has generally resulted in higher earnings for publishers.

New Revenue Share Structure

AdSense previously took a 32% cut of total ad revenue, providing publishers with 68%. Google is splitting this into separate "buy-side" and "sell-side" fees: - On the buy-side, Google Ads will now retain around 15% of what advertisers spend to purchase ad space on AdSense publishers' sites. - Publishers will receive 80% of the remaining revenue, with the remaining 5% going to AdSense as the "sell-side" platform fee. This means that out of every $1 spent by an advertiser, Google will now earn roughly 15.2 cents in fees, leaving publishers with around 68.8 cents. Previously publishers received the full 68 cents. So in summary - publishers will be paid less per ad viewed or clicked, and Google will extract a bigger cut of overall spending through their new fee structure. But how exactly does this impact the bottom lines of publishers and Google?

Following the Money: How Publishers Will Earn Less

To really understand how this will affect publishers, it's important to trace exactly where advertising dollars end up before and after Google's changes.

The Current AdSense Revenue Share

Under the current system, here's what would happen with a $1 ad budget from an advertiser: - Advertiser spends $1 on Google Ads to purchase an ad placement. - AdSense takes a 32% fee off the top, leaving $0.68 - The full $0.68 goes to the publisher hosting the ad placement. So the publisher received the entire 68 cents from that original advertising dollar. Google's fee came off the top.

The New Upcoming AdSense Revenue Share

Now with Google's changes, this is how the same $1 ad budget flows: - Advertiser spends $1 on Google Ads - Google Ads takes a new 15% fee, leaving $0.85 - That $0.85 goes to AdSense - AdSense takes a new 5% fee, leaving $0.80 - The publisher only receives $0.80 So while Google claims publishers still get around 68% total, in reality: - They only see 80 cents of the original dollar - Google now directly takes 15 cents in their new buy-side fee - Publishers are earning less per advertising dollar on their sites By obscuring fees and imposing an unbalanced revenue split, Google is quietly shifting millions from publishers into their own coffers annually through this policy update.

How Google Benefits Financially from the Changes

To understand who really benefits from Google's "updates", we must examine the financial implications. While Google claims neutral or positive effects, let's consider three ways their changes boost profit:

Google Earns More Per Advertising Dollar

By separating buy-side and sell-side fees, Google is now able to directly take 15% off the top of all ad spends on their platform. Previously they shared one 32% fee with publishers. This allows an additional estimated 3.2% of revenue, or billions per year, to flow directly to Google versus under the old setup.

Publishers Earn Less Per Interaction

Switching to a per-impression model means publishers are rewarded based on sheer ad exposure rather than user value. Since CPM rates are generally far lower than CPC, publishers will earn significantly less for the same amount of user attention. Google thus shifts more money from publishers to advertisers annually.

Google Has Increased Leverage Over Publishers

By implementing publisher-unfavorable terms at a time when AdSense dominates the market, Google demonstrates their power to dictate terms. Publishers are now more reliant as alternative networks cannot match Google's scale. This increased leverage allows Google to more aggressively optimize rates in their favor down the road. So in reality, Google stands to gain billions each year in increased profits through these "updates", which primarily serve to decrease publisher revenues and increase Google's control over the relationship. While neutral on paper, a financial analysis confirms this benefits one party far more than the other.

Questioning the Rationale and Timing

Given the lopsided impacts, a natural question is why did Google deem these changes necessary now? Their rationale of alignment with industry standards and increased transparency deserves more scrutiny:

"Alignment" Overlooks AdSense's Dominance

Google cites norms of other platforms, but AdSense has 70%+ market share, making it an outlier in ability to unilaterally set terms. Publishers have little leverage to opt-out of a "standard" Google enforces due to lack of quantity/quality alternatives.

Transparency Claims Avoid Discussion of Rates

Google frames this as publishers now understanding costs like buy-side fees. However, they provide no visibility into factors like CPM rates. And without alternatives, decreased rates can pass as "neutral" changes on publishers' own sites.

Timing is Curious Given AdSense Monopoly

AdSense has operated profitably for over 15 years on the old model. If industry alignment was a priority, why make publisher-unfriendly changes now versus gradual adoption? The timing suggests financial motivations over user-experience focused ones.

No Consultation With Publishers is Odd

For such impactful policy updates after decades of partnership, one would expect collaboration and input from the very parties whose businesses are most affected. But Google made no effort towards that. So while transparency and norms are given as rationale, a more critical analysis finds the timing and rollout raise doubts about true priorities here - namely maximizing new revenue streams through AdSense. But Google maintains publisher interests remain top of mind. How do they justify this stance?

Addressing Counterarguments From Google's Perspective

Google will likely respond to criticism by reiterating core talking points:

"Tests Show No Impact on Publisher Earnings"

But these tests are on Google's own terms - they control metadata and opportunity to bias results. Even if earnings are temporarily flat, long term health is questionable as rates and Google's cut inevitably increase over time.

"Advertisers Demand Transparency on Platform Fees"

Yet Google provides no insight into buyer criteria/rates that impact publisher payouts most. The lack of explanation suggests they optimize costs in non-transparent ways. Rules that lack publisher input primarily serve one side of the marketplace.

"Publishers Benefit From AdSense Reach and Ease of Use"

This was true when alternatives were nascent. But now publishers can assess various platforms empowered with better data/tools. While onboarding was once a moat, it no longer offsets an unbalanced revenue split that grows Google faster than partners.

"Advertising Support Funds Free Content For All"

But over-optimization risks reducing publisher profits to unsustainable levels, threatening long-term diversity, innovation and small players. Monopolies also face regulatory risks, so protecting partners aligns with being good stewards of the ecosystem. In the end, Google's rationale rings hollow as they avoid discussing financial impacts or objections around lack of consultation/leverage imbalance. Their arguments do not negate that the changes appear self-serving to Google's growth over the interests of publishing partners.

Alternative Paths Forward For Publishers

To adapt, publishers now have more choices for advancing their businesses without needing to fully rely on Google:

Direct Sales & Header Bidding

Bypassing platforms lets publishers negotiate directly with advertisers and exchanges using header bidding to maximize rates. However, it requires investment in ad operations talent.

Minimum Guarantees from Demand Partners

Larger publishers can attract direct deals with fixed costs from buyers via private marketplaces. But this model works best at higher traffic/engagement levels.

Independent Ad Networks

Publishers can explore diverse networks like AppNexus, Index, OpenX who compete on transparent, rev-share partnerships relative to Google's dominance. Liquidity varies.

Collaborative Ad Products

Joining ad syndicates and coalitions diversifies access to demand beyond Google. Examples include Alfred and GroupM's Marketplace. Strength in numbers mitigates leverage imbalance.

Subscriber & Affiliate Revenue

Commerce/affiliate links, memberships/subscriptions offers more direct engagement/compensation over pay-per-click reliance alone.

Alternative Paths Forward For Publishers (continued)

Dynamic Paywalls and Paid Newsletters

Some publishers implement metered/subscription paywalls for high-value content. Others launch paid newsletter products offering an exclusive experience for subscribers. However, converting organic traffic takes testing and buy-in.

Patreon and Subscriber Funding

Crowdfunding platforms enable direct funding from audiences in exchange for perks. Niche creators have found success, though broad scale may be difficult to achieve. Ongoing engagement is still required.

Developing Other Revenue Streams

Publishers can also sell merchandise, host events/webinars, offer consulting/custom content packages, and develop collaborative sponsorship/partnership deals. Diversifying beyond ads reduces reliance on Google and other third parties.

Alternative Ad Platforms

Beyond direct selling and independent networks, other sell-side platforms include Amazon's AD Serving, Verizon's Media Platform and Rubicon Project. Exchanges like Xandr and Smart AdServer also compete for publisher inventory supply. Of course, no one alternative on its own will replace Google's scale. But combined approaches offer a path to supplementing AdSense revenues and gaining more autonomy over business relationships and data sharing. Publishers now have more control over monetization mix versus dependence on monopoly platforms alone.

Conclusion 

While framed as innocuous "updates", Google's changes to AdSense payment structures should be recognized for what they truly are: a strategic move by a monopoly to extract more value from publishers through financial optimization. By downplaying impacts and avoiding input, Google casts these decisions as fait accompli while disadvantaging partners who helped achieve their dominance. Their lack of transparency regarding rates and metrics provides cover for unfavorable moves over time. Publishers would be prudent moving forward to diversify monetization, gain perspective on alternative platforms, and advocate for regulatory protections against leverage imbalance. They must recognize that policy "fixes" by advertising gatekeepers often prioritize maximizing profits extracted over sustainability of the open web and symbiotic partnerships. This situation serves as cautionary example of industry consolidation risks. Monopolies feel empowered to reshape policies and contracts in their favor once competition is diminished - even retroactively changing terms of long-standing relationships. Regulators and partners must remain vigilant against dominance masking self-interest as technical or uniform improvements. Overall, while change is inevitable, Google's approach with AdSense suggests priorities lie more in optimizing financial streams through existing infrastructure versus equitable, collaborative revision. Publishers now know their interests alone do not guide decisions of their largest funding source. Independence and diversification remain the surest paths forward for partners in any similarly concentrated ecosystem. ]

Dari penjelasannya dapat disimpulkan bahwa yang paling mendapat keutungan besar dari sistem ini adalah google adsense sendiri. 

Sumber: 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-googles-new-upcoming-update-adsense-hurt-publishers-sarang-kumar-bmwic?trk=article-ssr-frontend-pulse_more-articles_related-content-card