ReallyJustGray
Newbie
- Oct 4, 2016
- 2
- 0
Need help. Bad form for my first post, I know. But you guys would know the inner workings of G00gle's P0licy T3am better than most...
My campaign for a particular supplement had run five years, making a few million. And then they pulled the plug; suspended my site for "unrealistic promotions." It'd happened once or twice before with various products, but this time something was different. Usually they just want some disclaimers and we're back up. This time, it was serious.
Hadn't been doing anything too dodgy. But I'm in the supplement space and the policy guys are getting more and more touchy about structure/function claims.
Long story short, they made me take my main keyword out of the copy of the product website. The whole product was built around this keyword, so you can imagine how problematic this is. Worse still, the keyword itself is not technically a "disease term" (the competition hasn't been touched). The p0licy team I got this time just decided it was and that was that. I was, however, making some strong claims, so that was my fault. But then they went way overboard with what they required me to change; more than I'd seen in any previous review. The page still converts profitably with the same kind of traffic. But without the match between keywords, ads and page copy, my quality score is shot all to hell and the campaign just isn't serving like it was.
So what I'm looking for from you guys is a gauge of how likely I'd be to get an account ban by trying any of the following:
It would help to know what kinds of tools G00gle's p0licy t3am typically use to review a site. Or how often sites go under manual review once they have a suspension history. Do they mostly scan the page and do some control+f searches? Do they have detailed analysis tools?
Any suggestions or information would be a help. Thanks!
My campaign for a particular supplement had run five years, making a few million. And then they pulled the plug; suspended my site for "unrealistic promotions." It'd happened once or twice before with various products, but this time something was different. Usually they just want some disclaimers and we're back up. This time, it was serious.
Hadn't been doing anything too dodgy. But I'm in the supplement space and the policy guys are getting more and more touchy about structure/function claims.
Long story short, they made me take my main keyword out of the copy of the product website. The whole product was built around this keyword, so you can imagine how problematic this is. Worse still, the keyword itself is not technically a "disease term" (the competition hasn't been touched). The p0licy team I got this time just decided it was and that was that. I was, however, making some strong claims, so that was my fault. But then they went way overboard with what they required me to change; more than I'd seen in any previous review. The page still converts profitably with the same kind of traffic. But without the match between keywords, ads and page copy, my quality score is shot all to hell and the campaign just isn't serving like it was.
So what I'm looking for from you guys is a gauge of how likely I'd be to get an account ban by trying any of the following:
- create a mirror landing page with a keyword-rich "SEO document" and bury it in a collapsable accordion window where nobody visiting the landing page would visually see it. Make no mention of the product or any kind of claims. This would likely improve quality score. But it has the keyword they didn't want me marketing my product with. RISK: uses the keyword they don't want me using. Though I feel like most reviewers wouldn't have found the same issues with it (five years it lasted!)
- Create copy of the adw0rds campaign inside another branch of my MCC with a mirror site that doesn't have a recent suspension on its record. Do as described above. RISKS: Mirror sites are against policy. Wouldn't have online pharmacy certificate, which would limit on-page language.
- Go full ghost. Set up a new site and campaign. Be more careful with how the keyword is used, just enough to get my quality score up. Only log in from a VPS. RISKS: A blackhat approach. Wouldn't have the online pharmacy cert for new site. More difficult to manage behind VPS. Still could get shut down for all the effort.
It would help to know what kinds of tools G00gle's p0licy t3am typically use to review a site. Or how often sites go under manual review once they have a suspension history. Do they mostly scan the page and do some control+f searches? Do they have detailed analysis tools?
Any suggestions or information would be a help. Thanks!
