--000000000000c911640617e28396 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It's the Montreal English site. Thank you, On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 12:49=E2=80=AFPM Steve Koyanagi wrote: > Approved > > On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 12:44=E2=80=AFPM Phil Chanda > wrote: > >> Alexa, is the uptick that you are observing to the Montreal English site >> or the Montreal French site? >> >> Steve/Terrence, we are unable to zero in by channel on the server logs. >> If Legal approves this Marketing request, then we will need to provide >> *all* IP addresses to whichever Montreal site that Alexa is requesting >> regardless of whether they clicked on an ad for the last two months. >> >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 3:39=E2=80=AFPM Alexa Graziani >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Steve, >>> >>> I have a specific action item for discussion on our call tomorrow >>> regarding this Google Ads concern. Google Support has requested weblogs= of >>> IP addresses to investigate our claims further. I'd like to obtain lega= l >>> approval for IT to pull these logs from March 1st - April 30th (the mon= ths >>> we're asking Google Support to investigate). >>> >>> The business purpose is to launch an investigation of invalid >>> interaction activity per Google's support article >>> , which >>> says "There are many common reasons for increased traffic that don't >>> involve invalid interactions. However, if you suspect that your account= is >>> indeed affected by invalid interaction activity, we'll investigate your >>> account." Ideally, we will get "credited for any invalid interaction th= at >>> escaped our automated detection in the past 2 months" since Google stat= es >>> this is possible in their support article as well. >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 3:36=E2=80=AFPM Alexa Graziani >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Steve and Tim, >>>> >>>> Heads up I'm adding Reyna, who we're working with for PPC efforts, to >>>> the call as well. >>>> >>>> The context is that we seem to be getting a lot of traffic from masked >>>> IP addresses that all submit forms or make calls saying they are looki= ng >>>> for work and heard about us on Facebook (even though they came through= the >>>> paid ads). Because they have masked IP addresses, our current >>>> targeting/exclusion settings are not excluding them. >>>> >>>> I just spoke to my Google rep and she recommends putting in a support >>>> ticket to have them launch an investigation to see if we can get this >>>> traffic labeled as invalid. She said it is unlikely Google will be abl= e to >>>> refund us but at least they may be able to help us mitigate the effect= s in >>>> the future. I will connect with our agency to kick this off. Then we c= an >>>> connect on Monday to see if there's anything else we can pursue around= this. >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 12:54=E2=80=AFPM Steve Koyanagi >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Alexa, can you schedule a call so I can get all the background