Google Sniper is now Live and available to the masses. The G Sniper system basically shows you how to make a comfortable “autopilot” income from simple websites that take roughly two hours to create and generate income for months or years to come.

TheGsniper.Com

This is the real thing. I was able to recoup the cost of this Google Sniper course within a few HOURS of purchasing G Sniper. I was not expecting immediate results. After implementing just ONE concept I learned from the book to my website Gorillionaire.Com, I was able to offset the purchase price. It will be interesting to see how my “autopilot” results with Google Sniper grow as I continue to put this system to use.

The GSniper system was created by an 18 year old ex-furniture mover named George Brown. Probably the most highly anticipated affiliate marketing course on the internet, the Google Sniper system is finally released to the rest of the internet marketing community. This is the system that brings George on average $15,000/month… and again… on autopilot. If you are NOT averaging $15,000/month, I’m sure there is plenty you can learn from Google Sniper.

Want to be on the 1 st page Google , Yahoo, Bing.
We can help.
More on
http:www.smartadtoronto.com

What more can you want then to be on the first page of a Google search in field. Affordable, reliable, Guaranteed!

Der Herr Google gibt Fingerzeige!

Als Kind hab ich ab und zu an Gott geglaubt, vorsichtshalber. In prekären oder kritischen Zeiten sandte er mir nämlich manchmal so geheimnisvolle Zeichen!  Da fiel im letzten Moment die gefürchtete Mathe-Arbeit aus, und ich bekam noch mal die Chance, zu üben; da hatte mir die schöne Heidrun aus der vierten Klasse zugelächelt, obwohl ich es gewesen war, der an ihren Zöpfen gezogen hatte, oder es gelang mir fehlerlos, den ganzen Schulweg lang nur auf jede zweite Gehwegplatte zu treten, was ich gern als gutes Omen für irgendwas nahm. Ich meine, das waren doch Hinweise! Eine höhere Intelligenz kümmerte sich um mich und gab mir Tipps für den weiteren Lebensweg! –

Heute bin ich eigentlich nicht mehr so gläubig. Vor allem auf höhere Intelligenz setze ich nicht mehr, da hab ich die Hoffnung aufgegeben, schon bevor ich anfing, mich bei Qype zu tummeln. Hier bekomme ich „von oben“ bloß barsche, für mich ärgerliche Botschaften und Löschforderungen vom HQ, und ich glaube eigentlich nicht, daß es sich bei dem um eine sog. höhere Intelligenz handelt.

Gleichviel. Eine höhere Macht vermute ich seit ein paar Tagen aber bei Google. Google ist endlich wieder so freundlich, meinen Artikelchen seitlich kleine Werbebotschaften hinzuzufügen (zu adden, wie die Fachkraft sagt). Seit einer Weile beobachte ich aus den Augenwinkeln, wie man mir, ganz gleichgültig, worüber ich schreibe, hartnäckig und sogar dringlich insistierend nahe legt, ich möge mich a) jetzt aber mal dalli um die Verminderung meines überschüssigen Bauchfetts kümmern, vor allem, indem ich fünf Fehler vermeide, die man mir indessen aber nur gegen Entrichtung einer Gebühr verraten will. (Ich schätze mal, die fünf Fehler sind: Zu gerne essen, zuviel Alkohol trinken, zuwenig Bewegung, zu hohes Alter und daß ich den Bauch-weg-Trainer irgendwann in den Keller verbannt habe. Was denn sonst?) – sowie b) umgehend 15 Kg abnehmen, und zwar, wer hat schon Zeit für Faxen, „über Nacht“, „durch Fettkiller“. Kennen die mich denn? Kann man bei Google Earth womöglich jetzt schon, von oben oder von der anderen Straßenseite, meinen Bauchumfang erkennen? „Ey guck ma, da unten geht grad der dicke Kraska, Mensch, ist der uffjedunsen!“ Schlimme Vorstellung, irgendwie, oder?  Es heißt ja auch immer, US-Spionage-Satelliten können aus der Umlaufbahn jetzt sogar schon entdecken, ob du ein Bauchnabelpiercing trägst oder rote Ohren (infrarot!) aufweist.

Google hat leider Recht, das ist ja das Beunruhigende! Es stimmt ja! Meine Silhouette gefällt mir selber auch nicht. Wenn es nur so leicht wäre, meine fünf Fehler abzulegen! Könnte ich dies, gelänge mir eventuell, was ein weiteres Goggle-ad-on mir ratgeberisch andient, nämlich mir das Geheimnis zu verraten, wie ich „einen Mann in mich verliebt“ mache! Ich weiß gar nicht, ob ich das überhaupt möchte. Obwohl, vielleicht ist das auch ein Zeichen?  Wenn es jetzt so ein Milliardär wäre, und ich gestände ihm, nach Eroberung seines Herzens, daß ich leider ein Mann bin und im Grunde auch gar nicht besonders schwul, und er würde dann aber, wie dieser eine Typ am Ende von „Manche mögen’s heiß“ zu Jack Lemon („Daphne“), zu mir sagen: „So what? Nobody is perfect!“, dann wäre das natürlich schon eine interessante Lebenswegänderungsanbahnung. Plötzlich vom Schicksal verfügten Lebensbahnkehren soll man sich ja nicht harthörig verweigern, sie sind, heißt es immer, die Würze des Daseins. Zwar kommt mir meine Biographie manchmal überwürzt vor wie schlechtes Gyros, aber höhere Intelligenzen sind dazu da, für mich das Denken zu übernehmen. Die könnten das erklären.

Sie raten mir im weiteren noch, mich rasch und unverzagt in einen Internet-Single-Flirt-Chatroom zu begeben, vermutlich, nehm ich mal an, um dort diesen einen Mann verliebt in mich zu machen. Nur wieso ich vor dem Chatten „zuverlässig und nachhaltig“ meinen „Mundgeruch“ (?) bekämpfen soll, ist mir unerfindlich, erstens, weil der im Netz doch nicht stören würde, und in der Realität hat sich noch nie einer bei mir in diesem Sinne beschwert. Ich frag mich nur, mit welchen Tags und Schlüsselwörtern ausgerüstet man mir diese Werbebotschaften zuteilt. Verwendet man höheren Orts ein “intelligentes Design”? Schwer zu glauben…

As always, of course, Net Natives would always recommend advertising broadly across the major UK job boards. But we’re an online recruitment company, NOT a job board reseller – we want our clients to engage with the best talent, directly. We always challenge our clients to do more. We say, ”Why not compete against the job boards directly…!” If over 75% of job seekers turn to Google at the start of their job search and “Jobs” is consistently one of their top search terms, it should be pretty obvious why you would want to back up a job board advertising campaign with an effective Search Engine Marketing Campaign using Google. Coupled with effective online recruitment advertising, it is perfect for specific or ongoing recruitment campaigns. And here’s why…

• It’s a completely targeted approach – the correct advertising will only appeal to those who have searched for your requirements
• Geo-targeting –only showing ads to candidates in your geographic location. But…you could show your ads to those in one town or the whole of the UK (worth considering for contract roles or if you think people would relocate).
• Drive direct traffic to your own site – Cut out all middle men (especially the recruiters). You have control of the look and feel of your careers site and candidates can quickly find out what you’re all about.
• Promote your company as well as the recruitment – Candidates may also be your customers so even if you don’t employ them they may buy your products, or just talk about you to their mates. Win win!
• You set the budget – You never have to worry about overspend when you have established an effective budget and bidding level.
• Only pay for relevant clicks – You only pay for those who have actually clicked on your ads. Your ads could be seen millions of time but you only pay for those who look on your site, ones who want to apply.
• It’s cost effective – By only paying for relevant clicks and being very targeted with your advertising, if done effectively, Google could become your lowest cost per hire model.
• Turn it off when you want – Adwords can be stopped with a click. You can also edit your ads and keywords during a campaign and Adwords won’t charge you a penny extra.
• Be completely specific – You can keep your Adwords costs down by bidding on very specific terms. For example “C# developer job Brighton” would only cost you 4p per click as it’s so specific.
• Be creative and have fun with the adverts – As Adwords ads can be edited in real time and the costs are so low, you can experiment with lots of different Ad copy. Why not try emotive and factual copy to see how each performs. You can then use the feedback to improve your other marketing.
• Target “passive” job seekers - don’t just focus on jobs or recruitment. Think about how your ideal person would engage with searches and terms and bid for those terms as well.
• Target your competitors – Not everyone agrees with this, but it is within the “rules” to bid on your competitors keywords. This way if candidates are searching for jobs with your competitors you can make sure your company appears above them in the paid search results. Cheeky, I know, but it works.

All well and good. But be warned – ALWAYS make sure that your advert relates to the landing page you are driving traffic to and make it easy for candidates to apply when they are there. Right, here endeth the lesson. If anyone wants to talk to me about recruitment PPC campaigns in more detail or has more comments to add feel free.

ACME-PEOPLE-SEARCH, created by Tissa Godavitarne, an Affiliate Marketing entrepreneur, takes advantage of a big Google search category, people search. People search, at over 20 billion searches monthly, accounts for one-third of all Internet search results.

Tissa generated a niche people search engine that affords you the opportunity to earn big money from visitors conducting free people searches. As an affiliate of ACME-PEOPLE-SEARCH, you are provided a complete copy of Tissa’s search engine which includes a pre-packaged website providing visitors to conduct people searches, reverse phone look ups, background checks, E-mail and Social Security Number searches.

Tissa’s proven approach removes the guesswork. Looking back, I could say it is so easy, a cave man can do it; no doubt though, you can have your version of the search engine running on the net without any understanding of Internet marketing and website development.

Check out more at ACMESUCCESS.COM

There’s a debate going on in the online advertising world. It’s getting tougher and tougher to grab the attention of viewers with so-called banner ads. Yet, some sites are charging more than ever for space.

Online Broadcasts vs. Television
James Kewageshig tipped me off to a piece from PC World that states advertisers are paying more for a slot online than on primetime.

“If a company wants to run ads alongside an episode of The Simpsons on Hulu or TV.com, it will cost the advertiser about $60 per thousand viewers, according to Bloomberg. On prime-time TV that same ad will cost somewhere between $20 and $40 per thousand viewers.”

Could it be that they don’t have to worry about fast-forward? Hulu claims their space is “clutter-free” — unlike many sites. So they’re banking on the viewer’s full attention. Plus, the ads are usually a lot shorter than the 30-second-minium television ads. As I viewer myself, the ads can still be annoying. But at least they’re not as frequently annoying as being interrupted every seven minutes during a 30-minute primetime show.

Websites vs. Magazines
So how does this all compare to print? A short FastCompany article that surmises that the reason print is dying is because of online ads being crud. Advertisers are still prepared to pay higher for ad placement in a well curated magazine than your website.

How about simply adding interactivity to your banner? According to spongecell.com, the addition of interactive doodads to banner ads increases click through up to 70%!

Their parting shot:

“If Web advertising’s formats were half as clever as all the internet content out there, wouldn’t everyone be better off, and making a lot more money?“

It’s All About Relevancy
True. The key is knowing your target and providing them with interesting, informative information. It’s our job to provide the exceptional experience, not the space we buy.

Stephen Murray takes this a step further:
There was a quote this morning in the newspaper that struck me. The author was discussing the Obama administrations recent efforts to overhaul how professionals are paid (Teachers, Doctors, Executives). Essentially, the goal is something that’s closer to a Pay-For-Performance model:

“In executive suites, he says, we rewarded reckless risk-taking and got the worst recession in half a century. In doctors’ offices and hospitals, we pay for more care instead of better care and get a wastefully expensive health-care system. In K-12 classrooms, we pay teachers, good and bad, for showing up instead of successful teaching and perpetuate schools that fail.”

Attempts at progress increase the risk of failure….

“The risks of unintended consequences are large, and there’s a chance we’ll get more of what can be measured — not what we truly want or need.”

These same goals and risks apply to our business as well. We must not fall into the trap of focusing on what can be measured easily. In our role, as Intelligent Marketers, the most important skill we possess is the ability to listen closely and be sure we’re answering the right question. We could all design misleading ads that had tremendously high click rates. But that doesn’t mean we’re doing our job of delivering an exceptional user experience.

I received the following notice this afternoon pertaining to Google’s pending settlement of a class action lawsuit regarding their daily budget billing practices within Google Adwords accounts.

I found the last sentence of the following paragraph summed up the merits of this particular lawsuit against Google:

Google has denied, and continues to deny, each and all claims of wrongdoing against it and continues to assert defenses thereto, and has expressly denied any wrongdoing or legal liability out of any of the conduct alleged in the Action.  Google denies that Representative Plaintiffs or the Class have suffered any damages or are entitled to any restitution.  Representative Plaintiffs considered that there was a substantial risk that they and the Class might not have prevailed on their claims and that there were risks that they and the Class could have recovered substantially less than the settlement amount, if the case had been litigated to judgment.

Google Class Action Settlement

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED
SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION AND SETTLEMENT HEARING

TO:
ALL PERSONS OR ENTITIES RESIDING IN THE UNITED STATES WHO HAVE PAID GOOGLE FOR ADVERTISING PURSUANT TO GOOGLE’S ADWORDS PROGRAM WHO (A) BECAME ADWORDS ADVERTISERS BETWEEN JUNE 1, 2005 AND FEBRUARY 28, 2009, INCLUSIVE, AND WHO WERE CHARGED MORE THAN THEIR PER DAY DAILY BUDGET ON ANY DAY DURING THAT TIME PERIOD; OR (B) PAUSED THEIR ADWORDS ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS ON ANY DAY DURING THE PERIOD FROM JANUARY 1, 2002 TO FEBRUARY 28, 2009, INCLUSIVE, AND DURING THE SAME BILLING PERIOD WHEN THEIR ADWORDS ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS WERE PAUSED, WERE CHARGED MORE THAN THE PRODUCT OF THEIR PER DAY DAILY BUDGET TIMES THE NUMBER OF DAYS THAT SUCH CLASS MEMBERS’ ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS WERE NOT PAUSED DURING THAT BILLING PERIOD

PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS ENTIRETY.  YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY PROCEEDINGS IN THIS LITIGATION.  IF YOU ARE A CLASS MEMBER, YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT DESCRIBED HEREIN.

EXCLUSION DEADLINE:  REQUESTS FOR EXCLUSION FROM THE CLASS MUST CONTAIN THE INFORMATION SET FORTH BELOW AND BE ACTUALLY RECEIVED BY THE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR ON OR BEFORE JULY 14, 2009.

I.  SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT AND RELATED MATTERS

A.    Purpose of this Notice
This Notice is given pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and an Order of the Court, dated May 12, 2009.  The purpose of this Notice is to inform you that the above-entitled action (“the Action”) has been certified as a class action and of the terms of a proposed settlement of the Action.  This Notice describes rights you may have under the proposed settlement and what steps you may take in relation to this litigation.  This Notice is not an expression of any opinion by the Court as to the merits of any claims or any defenses asserted by any party in this litigation, or the fairness or adequacy of the proposed settlement.

B.
Statement of Recovery to the Class

Pursuant to the settlement described herein, $20,000,000, in a combination of cash and AdWords Credits, have been created for the benefit of the Class.  These funds have been placed in an interest-bearing escrow account.

A Class member’s distribution from the net Settlement Fund will be determined by a Plan of Allocation to be
approved by the Court.  An explanation of how each Class member’s distribution will be calculated for purposes of the settlement is set forth in the proposed Plan of Allocation which is summarized in Part VI of this Notice below.

C.    Statement of Potential Outcome of the Case
Google has denied, and continues to deny, each and all claims of wrongdoing against it and continues to assert defenses thereto, and has expressly denied any wrongdoing or legal liability out of any of the conduct alleged in the Action.  Google denies that Representative Plaintiffs or the Class have suffered any damages or are entitled to any restitution.  Representative Plaintiffs considered that there was a substantial risk that they and the Class might not have prevailed on their claims and that there were risks that they and the Class could have recovered substantially less than the settlement amount, if the case had been litigated to judgment.

The settlement was reached only after the parties conducted arduous arm’s-length negotiations over a period of two months.  Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel have determined that the settlement was fair, reasonable and adequate and in the best interest of the Class.

D.    Statement of Attorney’s Fees and Expenses and Representative Plaintiffs’ Incentive Compensation Awards Sought
Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel for the Class intend to apply for: attorneys’ fees of not more than $5,000,000, plus a proportionate share of the interest earned on the Settlement Proceeds, for reimbursement of expenses incurred in connection with the prosecution and settlement of this litigation, not to exceed $250,000; and for an incentive compensation award to the two Representative Plaintiffs, not to exceed $20,000 each.

E.    Further Information
Further information regarding the litigation and this Notice may be obtained by contacting Representative Counsel
for the Class:

LESTER L. LEVY
WOLF POPPER LLP
845 Third Avenue
New York, NY  10022

RACHEL S. BLACK
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800
Seattle, WA  98101

MARC M. SELTZER
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950
Los Angeles, CA  90067-6029

II.  NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT HEARING

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Court”) dated May 12, 2009, that a hearing (“Settlement Hearing”) will be held by the Court on September 14 2009 at 9:00 a.m., at the United States Courthouse, 280 South 1st Street, San Jose, California, 95113.  The purpose of the Settlement Hearing will be, among other things: (1) to determine whether the proposed Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Class and should be approved by the Court and, therefore, whether the Action should be dismissed on the merits and with prejudice, and (2) to consider the reasonableness of an application by Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel for payment of attorney’s fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses incurred in connection with the Action and for incentive compensation award to the Representative Plaintiffs.

The Court has certified a Settlement Class defined as: all persons and entities residing in the United States who have paid Google for advertising pursuant to Google’s AdWords program who (a) became AdWords advertisers between June 1, 2005 and February 28, 2009, inclusive, and who were charged more than their per day Daily Budget on any day during that time period; or (b) paused their AdWords advertising campaigns on any day during the period from January 1, 2002 to February 28, 2009, inclusive, and during the same billing period when their AdWords advertising campaigns were paused, were charged more than the product of their per day Daily Budget times the number of days that such Class Members’ advertising campaigns were not paused during that billing period.  Excluded from the Class are Resellers, defined as persons or entities whose regular business activities include placing ads on Google’s AdWords program on behalf of otherwise unaffiliated persons or entities.

III.  BACKGROUND OF THE ACTION

AdWords is a global advertising program offered by Google.  This Action concerns Google’s billing practice for its AdWords program.

On May 4, 2006, Representative Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Class Action Complaint, which is the operative complaint in the Action, which alleges five causes of action: (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; (3) Violations of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. (“UCL”); (4) Violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500, et seq. (“FAL”); and (5) Unjust Enrichment.  In their Complaint, the Representative Plaintiffs sought damages, restitution, and injunctive relief to remedy Google’s practice of (1) charging its AdWords advertisers up to 120% of their per day daily budget on any given day (Plaintiffs’ “120% claims”); and (2) charging AdWords customers who paused their campaigns more than their per day Daily Budget times the number of days their campaigns were not paused during the billing period (Plaintiffs’ “pausing claims”).

Google filed four separate motions for partial summary judgment.  The Court dismissed the Representative Plaintiffs’ Second and Fifth Causes of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and unjust enrichment.  Google also successfully argued that its practice of charging AdWords Advertisers up to 120% of their daily budget on any given day does not, in and of itself, constitute breach of contract.  The Court held that triable issues of fact existed as to whether Google’s practice of charging up to 120% of an AdWords Advertiser’s per day Daily Budget violates the UCL and FAL and whether Google’s pre-September 2006 pausing practices constitute a breach of contract.

IV.  BACKGROUND OF THE SETTLEMENT

Google has denied all claim of wrongdoing or liability in the Action.  The Settlement Agreement is not and shall not be construed or deemed to be evidence or an admission or a concession on the part of Google of any fault or liability or damages whatsoever, and Google does not concede any infirmity in the defenses which it has asserted in the Action.

Counsel for the parties conducted extensive settlement negotiations to achieve the settlement described herein.  The settlement was reached only after the parties conducted arduous arm’s-length negotiations and after the parties conducted extensive pre-trial discovery.  During the course of this Action, Google produced hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, responded to multiple interrogatories, and Google employees testified at deposition.  In addition, Representative Plaintiffs produced documents to Google, responded to interrogatories, and testified at deposition.

In determining to settle the Action, Representative Plaintiffs and Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel have taken into account the substantial expense and length of time necessary to prosecute the litigation through complete pretrial discovery, trial, post-trial motions and likely appeals, taking into consideration the significant uncertainties in predicting the outcome of this complex litigation.  Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel believes that the settlement described herein provides substantial benefits to the Class.  Based on their consideration of all of these factors, Representative Plaintiffs and Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel have concluded that it is in the best interests of the Class to settle the Action on the terms described herein, subject to the approval of the Court.

Representative Plaintiffs recognized the uncertainty and risk of the outcome of any litigation, especially complex litigation such as this, and the difficulties and risks inherent in the trial of such an action.  Representative Plaintiffs desired to settle the claims of the Class against Google on the terms and conditions described herein which provide substantial and immediate benefits to the Class.  Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel deems such settlement to be fair, reasonable and adequate to, and in the best interests of, the members of the Class.

Google, while continuing to deny all allegations of wrongdoing or liability, desired to settle and terminate all existing or potential claims against it without in any way acknowledging fault or liability.  During the course of the litigation, Google, in addition to denying any liability, disputed that Representative Plaintiffs and the Class were damaged by any wrongful conduct on its part.  The settlement provides immediate and substantial benefits to the Class and avoids the risks that liability or damages might not be proven at trial.

THE COURT HAS NOT FINALLY DETERMINED THE MERITS OF REPRESENTATIVE PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS OR THE DEFENSES THERETO.  THIS NOTICE DOES NOT IMPLY THAT THERE HAS BEEN OR WOULD BE ANY FINDING OF VIOLATIONS OF LAW OR THAT RECOVERY COULD BE OBTAINED IN ANY AMOUNT IF THE ACTION WERE NOT SETTLED.

V.  TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT

In full and complete satisfaction of the claims which have or could have been asserted in this Action, and subject to the terms and conditions of the Stipulation, Google has paid $20,000,000 into escrow on behalf of the Class (the “Settlement Proceeds”), which has been earning interest since on or about March 31, 2009.  The Settlement Proceeds, which are inclusive of any Fee and Expense Award and incentive compensation award to Representative Plaintiffs, shall be distributed by Google (with respect to AdWords Credits) and the Claims Administrator in accordance with the terms of the Plan of Allocation described below.

The settlement will release Representative Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ Released Claims against the Google.  The Released Claims are defined as: any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, rights, offsets, suits, damages, lawsuits, liens, costs, losses, expenses or liabilities of any kind whatsoever, for any relief whatsoever, including monetary, injunctive or declaratory relief, or for reimbursement of attorneys’ fees, costs or expenses, which the Representative Plaintiffs or any Member of the Class which were or could have been asserted based on the allegations set forth in the complaints filed by the Representative Plaintiffs in the Action, specifically including any and all claims based on a Class Member being charged more than his, her, or its Daily Budget.

Upon the Effective Date of the settlement, the Representative Plaintiffs and Class Members on behalf of themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, assigns, employees, officers, directors, attorneys, representatives, affiliates, agents, and any persons or entities they represent, shall be deemed to release and forever discharge Google from all Released Claims, and shall forever be barred and enjoined from prosecuting, commencing, instituting or asserting all or any of the Released Claims in any action or other proceeding in any court of law asserting all or any of the Released Claims in any action or other proceeding in any court of law or equity, arbitrational tribunal, administrative or other forum, whether directly, representatively, derivatively, or in any other capacity against Google.

If the settlement is approved by the Court, all claims which have or could have been asserted in the Action will be dismissed on the merits and with prejudice as to all Class Members and all Class Members shall be forever barred from prosecuting a class action or any other action raising any Released Claims against Google.

The settlement will become effective at such time as Final Judgment entered by the Court approving the settlement shall become final and not subject to appeal (the “Effective Date”).

VI.  PLAN OF ALLOCATION OF SETTLEMENT FUND AMONG CLASS MEMBERS

1. The $20,000,000 settlement and the interest earned thereon are the “Settlement Proceeds.”

2. Upon final approval of the settlement by the Court and the satisfaction of the other conditions to the effectiveness of the Settlement, the Settlement Proceeds will be allocated under the Court’s direction and supervision, as follows:

a. To pay the fees, expenses and costs of Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel as and to the extent allowed by the Court;

b. To pay an incentive compensation award to each Representative Plaintiff to the extent allowed by the Court; and

c. To pay all costs and expenses reasonably incurred in connection with the preparation and filing of tax returns and          the payment of taxes on the interest earned on the Settlement Proceeds, including all taxes and tax expenses.

3. Subject to the approval by the Court of the Plan of Allocation described below, the balance of the Settlement Proceeds remaining after the payment of the foregoing fees, costs, expenses and taxes (the “Net Settlement Proceeds”) shall be distributed in the form of cash or AdWords Credits as set forth below, to Class members who have not requested exclusion from the class in accordance with the instructions contained in this Notice.  The following methodology shall be used to calculate the distribution to each Class member:

(Class Member’s Total Overcharges) x (Net Settlement Proceeds)
sum total of Estimate of all Class Members’ Total Overcharges

a. “Net Settlement Proceeds” means the remaining balance of the Settlement Proceeds, including all interest earned thereon, following payment of any Fee and Expense Award as allowed by the Court.

b. “17200 Overcharge” means the dollar amount that a Class Member, who signed up for AdWords between June 1, 2005 and February 28, 2009, was charged by Google in excess of his, her, or its per day Daily Budget, the first month such overcharge occurred.

c. “Overcharge” means to charge an AdWords Advertiser more than his, her, or its per day Daily Budget on any given day.

d. “Pausing Overcharge” means the dollar amount that Google charged a Class Member, who paused his, her, or its campaign for any amount of time in a billing period, in excess of the product of the Class Member’s per day Daily Budget times the number of days that the campaign was not paused during the same billing period, at any time during the period between January 1, 2002 and February 28, 2009, inclusive.

e. “Total Overcharges” means, for each Class Member, the sum of his, her, or its 17200 Overcharges and Pausing Overcharges, less any Overcharges that are duplicative of the Pausing Overcharges.

f. “Claims Administrator” means Gilardi & Co. LLC.

g. For each Class Member who has a balance due on his, her, or its AdWords account as of the Class Member Distribution Calculation Date that is equal to or greater than that Class Member’s Distribution (defined as “Active AdWords Advertisers”), Google will issue AdWords Credits in the amount of such Class Member’s Distribution within ten business days of the Class Member Distribution Calculation Date. At the time of distribution, Google will notify each Class Member who is an Active AdWords Advertiser who has a balance due on his, her, or its AdWords account as of the Class Member Distribution Calculation Date that is less than such Class Member’s Distribution that they may elect to receive cash in lieu of AdWords Credits by contacting Google via email. To make such an election, the Active AdWords Advertiser must notify the Claims Administrator within forty days of the Class Member Calculation Date via email or in writing, including the following information: (1) name of Class Member; (2) AdWords account(s) number; (3) email address associated with AdWords account; (4) mailing address. The request must be emailed to the Claims Administrator at the following email address: claims@adwordscustomersettlement.com , or sent to the Claims Administrator at the following address:

CLRB Hanson LLC et al. v. Google Class Action Settlement
c/o Gilardi & Co. LLC P.O. Box 808054
Petaluma, CA. 94975-8054

Each Active AdWords Advertiser who makes such an election before the designated deadline shall receive that portion of the Class Member’s Distribution that is in excess of the balance due on his, her, or its AdWords account in cash.

h. The Claims Administrator will issue checks to all Class Members who are not Active AdWords Advertisers, in the amount of each Class Member’s Distribution. To the extent, at the conclusion of efforts to make distributions to Class Members, there remains any undistributed portion of the Net Settlement Proceeds, it shall be disposed of pursuant to the instructions of Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel, with approval of the Court. Under no circumstances shall the Net Settlement Proceeds, or any portion thereof, be paid or otherwise revert to Google following the Effective Date of the Settlement.

i. The computation of each Class Member’s Distribution shall be made by Google or the Claims Administrator, and the data supporting such computation shall be supplied to the Claims Administrator. Payment pursuant to the Plan of Allocation set forth above shall be conclusive against all Class Members. No Person shall have any claim against Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel, the Claims Administrator or other agent designated by Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel, Google, or Google’s Counsel based on the distributions made substantially in accordance with the Settlement Agreement, the Plan of Allocation, or further orders of the Court.

4. If the proposed Settlement is approved by the Court, the Court will enter a final judgment (the “Judgment”) which will:

a. Dismiss the Litigation against Google with prejudice, and without costs;

b. Adjudge that Representative Plaintiffs and each Class Member, except those members of the Class who have previously timely and validly requested exclusion from the Class, shall be deemed conclusively to have released the Released Claims (as described above) against Google. Notwithstanding that Representative Plaintiffs or any Class Member may hereafter discover facts in addition to or different from those which Representative Plaintiffs and Class Members now know or believe to be true with respect to the Litigation and Released Claims or to the subject matter of the release, plaintiffs and each Class Member shall be deemed, upon the Effective Date of the Settlement, to fully, finally and forever settle and release any and all Released Claims as against Google;

c.    Bar and permanently enjoin Representative Plaintiffs and each Class Member, except those members of the Class who have timely and validly requested exclusion from the Class, from prose-cuting any Released Claims against Google; and

d.    Reserve jurisdiction, without affecting the finality of the Judgment entered, over:

(i)    Implementation of the Settlement and any award or distribution of the Settlement Proceeds, including interest thereon;
(ii)    Disposition of the Settlement Proceeds;
(iii)    Hearing and determining Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s appli-cations for attorneys’ fees, costs, interest, and expenses (including fees and costs of experts and consultants) and for an incentive compensation award for Representative Plaintiffs;
(iv)    Enforcing and administering the Settlement, including any releases given in connection therewith; and
(v)    Other matters related to the foregoing.

VII.  RIGHTS OF CLASS MEMBERS

The Court has certified this action to proceed as a class action pursuant to Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. If you are not a Reseller, you are a member of the Class if: you reside in the United States, have paid Google for advertising pursuant to Google’s AdWords program and either (a) became an AdWords advertiser between June 1, 2005 and February 28, 2009, inclusive, and were charged more than your per day Daily Budget on any day during that time period; or (b) paused your AdWords advertising campaign on any day during the period from January 1, 2002 to February 28, 2009, inclusive, and during the same billing period when your AdWords advertising campaign was paused, were charged more than the product of your per day Daily Budget times the number of days that your AdWords advertising campaign was not paused during that billing period. Class members have the following options:

A.    If you wish to remain a member of the Class, you may share in the proceeds of the Settlement.  Class Members will be represented by Representative Plaintiffs and Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel, unless you enter an appearance through counsel of your own choice at your own expense.  You are not required to retain your own counsel, but if you choose to do so, such counsel must file an appearance on your behalf on or before July 14, 2009, and must serve copies of such appearance on the attorneys listed below.

B.    If you do not wish to remain a member of the Class, you may exclude yourself from the Class by following the instructions below.  Persons who exclude themselves from the Class will NOT receive any share of the Settlement Proceeds and will NOT be bound by the Settlement.

C.    If you object to the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, or to Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s application for attorney’s fees and expenses and for an incentive compensation award for Representative Plaintiffs, and if you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you may present your objections by following the instructions below.

VIII.  EXCLUSION FROM THE CLASS AND SETTLEMENT

Each member of the class shall be bound by all determinations and judgments in this Action concerning the Settlement, whether favorable or unfavorable, unless such person files a written request for exclusion by first-class mail so that it is actually received by the Claims Administrator on or before July 14, 2009.  Your rights against Google will be affected by this Settlement.

To be effective, any request for exclusion from the Class must be in writing and must include the name, email address, AdWords account number, and mailing address of the person seeking to opt out, the dates that the person was an AdWords Advertiser, and a statement that the person wishes to be excluded from the Class, and must be signed by or on behalf of the person so requesting exclusion and sent via first-class mail to:

CLRB Hanson LLC et al. v. Google Class Action Settlement
c/o Gilardi & Co., LLC
P.O. Box 808054
Petaluma, CA 94975-8054

IX.  SETTLEMENT HEARING

At the Settlement Hearing, the Court will determine whether to finally approve this Settlement and dismiss the Action and the claims of Representative Plaintiffs and the Class.  The Settlement Hearing may be adjourned from time to time by the Court without further written notice to the Class.

At the Settlement Hearing, any Class member who has not filed a proper request for exclusion from the Class may appear in person or by counsel and be heard to the extent allowed by the Court in opposition to the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of the Settlement, the Plan of Distribution, or the application of Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel for an award of attorney’s fees and expenses and for an incentive compensation award to Representative Plaintiffs, provided, however, that in no event shall any person or entity be heard in opposition to the Settlement, the Plan of Distribution, or Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s application for attorney’s fees and expenses and for an incentive compensation award to Representative Plaintiffs, and in no event shall any paper or brief submitted by any such person be accepted or considered by the Court, unless, the objection is filed with the Court and served on Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel and Google’s Counsel so that it is received no later than July 14, 2009.  Any such objection shall include all briefs or other papers to be considered by the Court, and must include the name and address of the person and the dates that the person was an AdWords Advertiser, and must be
served to Representative Plaintiffs Counsel at the following addresses:                                  and upon counsel for Google:

LESTER L. LEVY
WOLF POPPER LLP
845 Third Avenue
New York, NY  10022

RACHEL S. BLACK
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800
Seattle, WA  98101

Daralyn Durie
Durie Tangri Lemley Roberts & Kent
332 Pine Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104

and said objections, papers and briefs must be filed with the Clerk of the Court, showing due proof of service upon Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel and counsel for Google.

X.  ATTORNEY’S FEES AND EXPENSES

At the Settlement Hearing, or at such other time as the Court may direct, Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel will apply to the Court for an award of attorney’s fees from the Settlement Proceeds in an amount not exceeding $5,000,000, plus a proportionate share of the interest earned on the Settlement Proceeds, and for reimbursement of their costs and expenses, not to exceed $250,000; and for a incentive compensation award to the two Representative Plaintiffs, not to exceed $20,000 each.  Representative Plaintiffs’ Counsel, without further notice to the Class, may subsequently apply to the Court for fees and expenses incurred in connection with administering this Settlement and distributing the Settlement proceeds to the members of the Class.

XI.  FURTHER INFORMATION

For a more detailed statement of the matters involved in this Action, reference is made to the pleadings, to the Settlement Agreement, to the Orders entered by the Court and to the other papers filed in the Action, which may be inspected at the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, United States Courthouse, 280 South 1st Street, San Jose, California, 95113, during regular business hours.

ALL INQUIRIES CONCERNING THIS NOTICE OR THE PROOF OF CLAIM FORM BY CLASS MEMBERS SHOULD BE MADE TO THE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR.  PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT OR THE CLERK’S OFFICE FOR INFORMATION.

Dated:  June 9th, 2009
____________________________________
James W. Ware
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Google has begun promoting their advertising solutions in a more comprehensive manner through a fictional ad campaign for the Google Pet Stick.

Google Stick Campaign

On the Google for Advertisers site Google asks “How Can Google Accelerate Your Business?”

Google for Advertisers

Google answers the question by providing potential advertisers with links to seven informational subcategories: Online, TV, Mobile, The Marketing Cycle, Get Started, Stay in Touch and My Toolkit.

This new Google advertising campaign clearly attempts to position Google as much more than just a search engine and search engine advertising agency.

PPC (Pay-per-click) advertising seems to be very complicated.   Google uses this method to make money on their website from advertisers.  When you search for anything on Google, there are usually three spots at the top in yellow on the search engine with whatever keyword you typed in.

For instance, go to Google right now and type in “free money from the government” and at the top there are three results in yellow.  The reason these results are at the top is because those specific advertisers are paying per click to be at the top.

Now how do you imagine that works?  Surely it must be the more money the person bids per click, the higher up the advertiser should be?  Right?  Wrong.

If you are serious about using PPC and do NOT want to waste your money, then I suggest you take some notes on the video I’m about to reveal to you.
Cheif Economist Hal Varian at GOOGLE explains this in full detail.  So don’t take my word for it, watch this video and hope all you PPC advertisers out there understand how PPC advertsing REALLY works

Hope this all helps you along quite well. This guy is a genius and truly opened my eyes once I saw the video.