homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 174.129.80.166
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe to WebmasterWorld
Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld Feedback Forums / WebmasterWorld Feedback Days
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: brett tabke

WebmasterWorld Feedback Days Forum

This 119 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 119 ( 1 [2] 3 4 > >   posting off  
What if we add Advertising to the site?
Brett_Tabke




msg:4138387
 2:21 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

What if we would add advertising to the site?

What type?
Where?
Banners?
Text?
Flash?
Animated?
Within posts?
Inbetween posts?
Left side - right side - top or bottom?
Sell them ourselves or use a network?
Which network?
Does it hurt our quality?
Do you trust sites with advertising?

 

peterdaly




msg:4138641
 4:29 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Monetize like crazy for non-logged in users. Big ugly things are fine.

For logged in users, minimize annoyance, and don't interrupt the message flow (don't insert anything between messages.)

I'd be fine with a skyscraper on the right. My preference would be a self serve system, as the multi-site solutions usually lead to non-targeted crap your audience is really not going to care about. Put another way, if you can get ads I want to see...I want to see them, but not be interrupted by them. Ads by contributors, for contributors, would be ideal. Let people buy/target topics (like search engines, webmaster business issues, etc.) Have a minimum click through rate where the ad will be auto canceled if not met within X,000 displays.

pageoneresults




msg:4138656
 4:35 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Logged In vs. Not Logged In

I like the idea there. It would be interesting to know if the numbers of non logged in users are high enough to support that type of advertising only option?

If that is the case, focus on the advertising at that level and leave the rest of it alone. Well, take some of the other feedback and implement but don't pollute the real estate after logging in. You can keep the top right, bottom right banner thingies but I wouldn't extend it much further than that.

For example, that Feedback Days Banner is a bit much right now. It occupies a bit of vertical real estate on my display which is 1366 x 768 not to mention all the wasted white space on left and right.

peterdaly




msg:4138677
 4:46 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

pageoneresults,

I think there are ads that I actually would like to see.

That means they need to be "in my face" enough where I will notice them, but not be annoyed by them...that's where auto canceling comes in. Maybe if an ad does not get a 1% click through in the first 1k views, it's auto canceled.

To me, right skyscraper does not disrupt my reading experience, but is still visible. If done on a fixed width layout, I can resize the window to not show the ad if I want.

Maybe members of higher authority could be given an option to view ads based on click through rate (or not at all).

weeks




msg:4138683
 4:52 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

As a poster, I mostly agree with pageoneresults' first post, but I think you could be a touch more aggressive and it would be fine. But, between posts and in posts? Noooo...

But, his point about an adnetwork is also worthwhile. (I've posted on this several times before, this is the first time I've gotten to make this point using a real world example.)

I would look into having some conversations with industry leaders about sponsoring entire sections. Make it clear they will be seen as sponsors only, but they will have these pages to themselves. Then price it aggressively.

WW is populated with opinion leaders in industry. If you are, say, Bing and you're really, really trying to get market share from G, then an investment in ads on WW would be wise to keep the buzz on. An advertiser who has a service that delivers video to websites should be here they really trying to break into this brave new world everywhere. Afterall, you want the people on WW to have at least HEARD of you. Duh.

If the adnetwork were to focus on webbiz-related sites, well, OK, I guess. But, that's problematic.

All of this assumes that WW has a good numbers. They don't have to be GREAT numbers, because WW has a high-quality, very desirable audience that spends money and also influences others on what they do, on this site and in the real world, both. I feel fairly certain that WW does well, however.

But, on Foo, maybe, I'd run Adsense down the right side. Just to see, ya know. (Pageoneresults: "nooooooo!")

(Obvious point and a tip: 1. Selling and maintaining ads like I described is a full-time job for someone, maybe two someones. 2. For an ad server, Openx "Community Download" rocks because it's on your server.

thecoalman




msg:4138687
 4:54 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Advertising is fine. You could make it ad-free for the paid members.


Personally I never liked the idea of being able to buy your way out of ads. Non paying contributors who answer questions are vastly more important than someone who paid a fee that is seeking advice.

[edited by: thecoalman at 4:56 pm (utc) on May 25, 2010]

Copeland




msg:4138689
 4:55 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Advertise all you want. Just dont sell my name or email market to me. Respect us.

weeks




msg:4138700
 4:59 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Logged-in vs not logged-in:

The advertisers I am talking about, paying top dollar, want to be in front of the logged-in users especially. But, the others as well.

And, speaking as a poster, the ads have got to be from legit, worthwhile firms. The owner of these site should expect that he is going to have to say "no" to some people with more money than sense.

peterdaly




msg:4138726
 5:12 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

If you are, say, Bing and you're really, really trying to get market share from G, then an investment in ads on WW would be wise to keep the buzz on.

Here's the problem I see with that. Win For WW, win for Bing, we get shown ads that collectively we may have no interest in seeing.

It does not have to be that way.

I really feel it's key that the system is designed in a way that self selects ads that we want to see. Less than X% click through rate on the bing ad? I don't care how much they are willing to pay, it's not providing value to the users and should be gone.

Properly selected ads should be win-win-win for all three parties.

Alcoholico




msg:4138735
 5:13 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I wouldn't mind ads especially if they follow the guidelines stated by pageoneresults. WebmasterWorld Ad Network seems to me like a good, feasible and profitable idea.

lammert




msg:4138736
 5:13 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

No advertising, at least not for paying members and moderators. Advertisements increase load time and while hopping between threads as I often do it will create a noticeable slow down.

If there has to be advertising, then one small static banner in the top as is now already used to promote Pubcon. No ads in between posts, and certainly no context sensitive adds which create automatic links for high-value keywords in user messages.

C7Mike




msg:4138754
 5:19 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Employment advertising would be pretty profitable and relevant to the users of this site. Why not also start a paid directory?

Dominic_X




msg:4138755
 5:19 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Yes to advertising, WebmasterWorld deserves to gain any income it wants for the brilliant service provided.

rocknbil




msg:4138767
 5:23 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Says "no" to ads. "Reality of the internet" is only a reality because site owners have made it "a reality" out of greed. This is one of the few places where the content is the focus, not monetization. Your small widget upper right should suffice, if you're not making enough from that, charge more. They will pay more. :-)

tangor




msg:4138772
 5:24 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Left, right, top, bottom... okay. Please not IN or BETWEEN posts.

WolfLover




msg:4138811
 5:36 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

My two cents worth is if you do add advertising, then make the members section free for all of us. That would make it worth it.

ken_b




msg:4138823
 5:42 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Put a 468x60 ad in that ugly space between the first and second posts in front page articles.

weeks




msg:4138855
 6:09 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Here's the problem I see with that. Win For WW, win for Bing, we get shown ads that collectively we may have no interest in seeing.


I believe many webmasters would be interested in hearing what Bing has to say to webmasters.

Peter, I think we agree: The ads on WW need to be highly relevant. This means the ad space needs to be "sold" or "packaged" carefully and thoughtfully.

Adobe would be another potential for WW, for example. They work hard to be on the leading edge of web technology. Sometimes they are, sometimes they are not. And, yes, Google should be interested, just for the record.

stuntdubl




msg:4138865
 6:13 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Yes. It's about time to add advertising - and don't listen to the complaints. The customers (who don't pay) are not always right. The supporter's forum should be left without ads. Everything else is open game.

Leaderboard and 300x250 are the best bet. Stay clearly labeled and these standards sizes. If you want to do CPM ads - then include a footer leaderboard as well.

martinibuster




msg:4138877
 6:22 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Pro:
Non-intrusive
Loads fast

Con:
An open market PPC system may result in ads that may not be in the best interest of site visitors. I'm thinking of ads that lead to squeeze pages that promote dubious schemes and e-books of questionable authority or usefulness.

Allowing the targeting of specific forums may result in ads that members may find objectionable. For example, members frequenting the content forum may find ads for content generation software objectionable.

Frank_Rizzo




msg:4138880
 6:24 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Ads are fine but they would have to be blockable if an individual wishes to do so.

peterdaly




msg:4138886
 6:29 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I believe many webmasters would be interested in hearing what Bing has to say to webmasters.


That may very well be true...but let our collective reaction decide. Under the minimum click through model they, and everyone else, would need to prove that are relevant. Each ad must earn the right to be there...I don't care who they are...bing, google, you, me, or anyone else.

Robert Charlton




msg:4138888
 6:31 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I'm all for Brett's making some money from the site. The question is how to do it without messing up the site as we know it, while not restricting advertising so much that it's ineffective.

One aspect of the site that some of us would like to preserve is its neutral look and clean layout [webmasterworld.com]. To the degree that advertising becomes intrusive, we do risk messing up that layout and making the site harder to use.

I'm generally in agreement with pageoneresults about where small banners should be... and where all kinds of advertising shouldn't be. Nothing between posts, no animation, etc... with banners unobtrusive and small.

Re additional ad spots...

I keep coming around to the thought of relevant AdWords style links... essentially monochromatic, in the right column, screened to be of interest and value to WebmasterWorld members. Pretty much along the lines of that steve40 has already suggested.

We'd look at them to the degree that they're useful and don't waste our time and attention... and not because they're fighting for our visual attention and are a distraction from the central purpose of the forums.

maximillianos




msg:4138897
 6:35 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

We do the switch between ads and no ads for folks logged in versus non-logged in traffic. We found that regular visitors (logged in) didn't really care to click ads much, since they saw them all the time. But new traffic (non-logged in) would perform very well with ads.

Works on our site pretty well with this setup.

weeks




msg:4138898
 6:35 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Each ad must earn the right to be there.


Yes, it can't be just $$$$$. But, $$$$$ would be good start, no? Ha.

This is an issue that every high-quality publication has that does not get talked about in public because the publisher doesn't want to be rude talking about rejected products, ads or firms and those rejected certainly don't talk about it. I'm confident WW has the ability and style to handle it. And, in the longer-term, quality attracts quality and that brings more money.

In terms of ads, WW wants to be more like NYT, not the NY Post.

fearlessrick




msg:4138908
 6:40 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Advertising is the lifeblood of the media business, so I have absolutely no problem with whatever you implement. Valueclick Media has been very good to me in terms of banners. Naturally, Adsense is the best for text ads. I recommend them both.

beachlover




msg:4138910
 6:41 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

What type?
Text links are just fine (e.g. Adsense).

Where?
Left, right, top or bottom.

Banners?
No.

Text?
Yes.

Flash?
No.

Animated?
No.

Within posts?
Definitely not.

Inbetween posts?
Definitely not.

Left side - right side - top or bottom?
All is fine.

Sell them ourselves or use a network? Which network?
Use OpenX and sell them and fill empty spaces using Adsense.

---

I wouldn't mind ads and would appreciate if the members section would become "free for all" in exchange.

cabowabo




msg:4138926
 6:46 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I welcome ads as additional revenue streams will only strengthen the product Brett and team deliver. I agree with pageoneresults that no flash or in-post ads, but this is Brett and I doubt that was even considered.

As a paid subscriber, I would welcome ads as well. I would rather see a WebmasterWorld ad network than using another. I'd be an advertiser, most definitely.

chicagohh




msg:4138939
 6:51 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)


Where?

On the top of the page or the right/left side of the thread.


Banners?

Sure, at the top.


Flash?
Animated?

I would be cautious with flash. It can often choke a page - technically and visually. Think blackhatworld or warriorsforum. Nothing wrong with them, but WW has a different culture.


Within posts?
Inbetween posts?

No. I think the blurs the message and lessens the quality feel that WW has right now. It seems that so many "get rich quick or die trying" sites have ads squeezed between the content. I would want to be associated with that mindset.

Sell them ourselves or use a network? Which network?

Sell it yourself. Why give up a large percentage of sales, add bureaucracy and reduce the speed with which you can respond to issues?

tibiritabara




msg:4138972
 7:05 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

hmm quality advertising....

BillyS




msg:4139020
 7:36 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

What if we would add advertising to the site?

Good idea

What type?
CPM, stay away from PPC for obvious reasons

Where?

Leaderboard

Banners?
Yes

Text?
Yes

Flash?
Maybe

Animated?
No thanks

Within posts?
No

Inbetween posts?
Yes

Left side - right side - top or bottom?
Leaderboard, footer, sparingly used between posts.

Sell them ourselves or use a network? Which network?
Adsense as well as direct.

Lovejoy




msg:4139026
 7:42 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Advertising on the main page where ever you want, none after you login.

This 119 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 119 ( 1 [2] 3 4 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld Feedback Forums / WebmasterWorld Feedback Days
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved