| Incorrect impression counts? | FNPdoo | 5/2/12 9:15 AM | I currently have two sponsorship ads running on a single page that are tracking unbelievable impression counts. While both ads are consistent with each other, the counts seem too high. In the month of April we had 2600 page views to that page, and in |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | Ingraye | 5/2/12 9:57 AM | That is very odd. But just to confirm that the timeframe you're looking at in DFP is the same as the page views (versus say all the impressions the Order has served since it's start)? And these are impressions for the Line Item (vs impressions for th |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | Pixels | 5/2/12 10:38 AM | We're having exactly the same issue. We have two ads, both sponsorship spots that are the same page (one below the other). They are not displayed on any other pages. Our impression count is about four times what it should be when compared to the page |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | Ingraye | 5/2/12 10:52 AM | Can I ask either of you how you're viewing the data? If you're viewing it in the Orders/Line Item tab, can you try generating a Report and see if the values correspond? And vice versa. |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | FNPdoo | 5/2/12 10:55 AM | Yes the time frame is the same. We just started. We narrowed the impression count down to April (since this is when we started using DFP) - we only have impression counts from April 17-30. The page count is actually from April 1-30. Yes the impressio |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | FNPdoo | 5/2/12 11:19 AM | I have run reports from the order/line item tab and I get the same values. If I run a report under the report tab for the ad units, I get 435,599 and 487, 796 compared to 512,167 and 563,339 that I see in the order/line item report. |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | Ingraye | 5/2/12 11:44 AM | This is really odd. Can you guys provide a link to your website so we can see? The difference between Reporting tab and Orders tab is pretty standard (Orders tab data gets updated faster than Reporting tab data). What type of tags are you guys runnin |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | FNPdoo | 5/2/12 12:28 PM | Sure our site is the http://www.fredericknewspost.com - the page in question is http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/special_sections/G8/. The general graph seems to generally match the page views...i.e. we always see a dip in weekend traffic, and tha |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | Ingraye | 5/2/12 1:32 PM | Okay. This is a guess but it maybe due to how you tagged your pages. You basically didn't tag them correctly. Can I ask if other Ad Units are having a similar issue? The extra enableServices maybe initializing DFP again and again which could be ca |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | FNPdoo | 5/8/12 6:30 AM | Hi, Ok we changed the code - but we are seeing a new problem emerge. Our site is a pretty old cold fusion based site which maintains a header include file for all our page header html. So we have to define in the DFP header tags the definition for a |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | Ingraye | 5/8/12 7:35 AM | Can you clarify the numbers for me? Homepage total impressions: 40,000 (just the homepage?)Total Site impressions: 155,000 impressions Ad Unit impressions (each?): 144,000 The homepage Ad Unit: ??? You have Single Request mode enabled which does mean |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | FNPdoo | 5/9/12 7:25 AM | Sorry so for the numbers: Site total page views:155,000 Homepage total page views: 40,000 Homepage impressions for 300x250 ad:144,000 Homepage impressions for 468x60 ad:144,000 Yes, it appeared that more or less every page view, and I know they are |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | Ingraye | 5/9/12 7:58 AM | Is it possible to just leave our Single Request mode? If not, you might try doing it via Coldfusion. Eg, <cfset currentURL = "#CGI.SERVER_NAME#" & "#CGI.PATH_INFO#"> <cfif currentURL IS "You homepage URL here"> Homepage Adunit code here </cfif> Or i |
| Re: Incorrect impression counts? | DN.. | 6/25/12 6:36 AM | Hi guys, re > |