Google is not saying outright that pay-per-action is in direct response to the specter of click fraud, but its likely that this beta effort could serve as evidence against charges that the company does little about the problem. Said one Google product manager, 'we didnt think of it in the scope of click fraud at all. This was purely in response to what advertisers told us.' Thats a smart line for the company to take, speaking to the needs of its advertisers and not the complaints of critics.

GET RESULTS FROM PPC ADS, NOT JUST CLICKS!: KEYWORD ELITE SEE THE REVIEW

Now Google takes on some inherent risk in possibly alienating publishers who choose to run CPA. If a publisher within Googles AdSense network is having trouble generating 'action' from web visitors, then payments will not be forthcoming. Why would a site happy with PPC take this risk on?

There are other 'X-factors' in Googles pay-per-action endeavor. The PPA concept is not new. Traditionally it is the turf of specialized affiliate networks, but Googles heft has no precedent in this space. Note that Googles advertising and affiliate networks are two different animals. Affiliates exist largely to sell product and existing affiliate methodology serves as efficient means to do this; meanwhile pay-per-click advertising, the sort which Google excels at, has been a passive and seamless application to websites that focus on content. Googles AdSense has been a treasured resource for webmasters who only wish to create great content and not worry about advertising. Being an affiliate will not appeal to these folks and Google will have a heck of a time trying to successfully pitch the idea. Publishers are used to Google being a largely non-intrusive source of revenue. The problem is that Google cant remain that way while being an effective affiliate facilitator. In other words, this might not work - but thats why its 'beta'.

ConnectThru.com