Posts Tagged ‘Stealing Traffic’

Feeling the Pain: Top Ten Frustrations for Advertisers in Affiliate Marketing

Wednesday, December 16th, 2009

By Adam Ward

Man clenching teeth

Even for veteran online merchants (the advertisers), marketing products in the affiliate space (also referred to as performance-based marketing) is no walk in the park. Here are the top ten headaches nearly all online advertisers deal with.

Running ad campaigns (or programs) on multiple ad networks (also called affiliate networks)

Online merchants expose their products to more consumers by running ad campaigns on other websites. Ostensibly, the more publisher websites the ads run on, the more traffic they push to the merchant’s site, which increases sales. Since ad networks provide an easy way for merchants to find publishers, it makes sense that a merchant would want to join as many ad networks as possible.

However, running on multiple networks creates new problems. First, there is the extra cost of getting set up and funding an account balance on each network. Second, the merchant needs to have a way of determining which network to attribute the sale to, if traffic came from multiple networks. Third, the chance of fraud increases dramatically, especially if the merchant isn’t actively managing the campaign.

Having to use different tracking software for each network on which they run ads

Every network has its own software for tracking ad campaigns. The networks expect merchants and publishers to use the tracking numbers from its own software to determine who should receive commissions on sales. So even if a merchant has its own tracking software, it still has to log into a tracking system for every network it belongs to and pull campaign statistics from it.

Having to develop proprietary tracking software (or buy third-party software) to manage in-house campaigns

Although a merchant can use the tracking software of whatever network it joins, that only works if the merchant doesn’t run ad campaigns in-house or on multiple networks. For example, if the merchant has the same campaign running on two networks, it is possible for a single publisher to grab that ad from both networks. If the publisher refers a consumer who ends up buying on the merchant’s site, each network will attribute that single publisher with a sale. So if the merchant doesn’t have its own tracking software to police that situation, it will end up paying a double commission for a single referral.

Also, because merchants contract directly with publishers (off network) to run a campaign, those merchants will need to have their own software to track the campaign results.

Dealing with publisher and network disputes over tracking numbers

Because everyone uses the tracking statistics to know what commissions to pay, this inevitably leads to squabbling over “which” statistics to use. Publishers would prefer to use their own tracking numbers. Networks would prefer to use their own tracking numbers. And advertisers would prefer to use their own tracking numbers. Since all these numbers are rarely the same, you get a lot of back-and-forth between advertisers and publishers over how much the advertiser really owes.

Recruiting new publishers and maintaining relationships with current publishers

Having an ad campaign does an advertiser no good if the ad isn’t running anywhere. So advertisers need to constantly prospect for publishers. And just like any other sales environment, taking care of your existing business relationships is far cheaper and more productive than prospecting new relationships. So advertisers need to stay in touch with publishers that are running the ad campaigns. However, knowing that this needs to be done is not as easy as actually doing it. With all the other demands on an advertiser’s time, prospecting and relationship management often take a back seat, especially if the advertiser doesn’t have tools, such as customer relationship management (CRM) software, in place to help focus those efforts.

Dealing with parasiteware and unethical networks and publishers

Parasiteware is too complicated to delve into here (but you can go to this forum to learn all about it). Basically, there are some networks and publishers out there that use various technologies to divert search traffic that would have come directly to an advertiser’s site (so the networks and publishers get commissions they didn’t earn), that would prevent other publishers from receiving their legitimate commissions (which can create tension with the advertiser and those publishers), that would overwrite the tracking code, or would inflate tracking numbers so advertisers end up paying more than they should.

Not knowing how effective a campaign will be before it starts, and then not knowing the optimum time to discontinue a campaign that is no longer effective

Although advertisers can get a good sense of what campaigns work, they don’t have crystal balls. Since the look and content of an ad’s creative play a big role in attracting customers, a poor campaign can really hurt an advertiser. Advertisers can use analytics and persuasion consultants to help them optimize their campaigns, but that adds an extra cost to a campaign.

Having publishers refuse to join a particular ad network, or refuse to run an in-house campaign directly

Ideally, an advertiser should be able to work with any publisher it wants. Unfortunately, some publishers refuse to work with advertisers that don’t run campaigns on a specific network. If an advertiser wants to work with that publisher, but decides the benefits don’t outweigh the extra headaches of joining another network, it will have to not work with that publisher.

Having to continuously, actively manage an ad campaign

Running an ad campaign is not as simple as writing copy for the ad, designing the creative, giving it to a publisher to run, then forgetting about it. A campaign needs to be actively managed. Campaign managers need to monitor statistics to make sure the commissions they pay out are for valid leads. They need to monitor the effectiveness of the ad. They need to make changes to the campaign or creative if they aren’t getting the results they’d like.

Having to manage an ad campaign in-house as well as on affiliate networks

As a continuation of the previous point, an advertiser needs to multiply the effort of managing each campaign by the number of networks on which they run the campaigns.

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

Ways Online Publishers Can Steal Your Organic Traffic

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

By Adam Ward

Thief Stealing Wallet from Womans Purse

You’ve got a product and a website. You’d like to drive more traffic to your site, so you sign up with an online ad network (called an affiliate network). As long as the publishers on that network send you traffic that turn into sales, you’re happy to pay commissions to those publishers, right? Well, yes, unless you end up paying commissions on traffic that would have come your way organically.

The point of advertising on a publisher’s site is to have consumers already on the publisher’s site see your ad, be interested enough to click through to your site, then buy something. Although they may already have known about your products, the key was they didn’t come to your publisher’s site specifically looking for your product or company.

When consumers are looking for your site or product, they will either type in your site’s URL directly or come in through a search engine. If your site is listed high enough on search pages, you may not be buying search words through the search engines. Or, you may be buying search terms so your site will show up higher in the sponsored-search section of the results page. Either way, you are responsible for managing the results of those searches.

What you may not realize, though, is your publishers may be engaging in affiliate arbitrage. This is where they buy search terms applicable to your site or product, hoping they’ll make money on the spread between the commission you’ll pay them and the click costs they have to pay the search company.

In a general sense, you probably won’t mind publishers paying to generate traffic that eventually turns into a sale for you. And since making money through affiliate arbitrage is quite tricky, chances are you may not encounter this.

But if a publisher is unscrupulous enough to buy search terms that are clearly competing with your traffic, you can’t afford to be in a relationship with that publisher. For example, if your company is called Widget House and you are the only makers of the Super Widget product, you would expect people searching the Internet for Widget House or Super Widget to click through the organic search results, or sponsored results that you pay for, directly to your site. Now let’s suppose you’ve got a publisher that you’re paying commissions to through an affiliate network. If that publisher wants to bid on the search words “Super Widget” and “Widget House” through Google’s AdWords, Google will not prohibit them from doing so. If a consumer then searches for “Super Widget” and sees your publisher’s link at the very top of the page, the consumer may click through that link rather than clicking your own link. Although the consumer may then click the ad on your publisher’s page and ultimately buy from you, you’re on the hook for paying a commission that you never should have paid. You’ve just paid an unethical publisher a commission for stealing your traffic and rerouting it to you.

To avoid this pitfall, make sure your attitude toward affiliate arbitrage is spelled out in your terms and conditions with the network and publisher. Also, periodically search for your business and products to see whether any of your publishers show up in the paid searches.

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)