| This 71 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 71 ( 1 2  ) || |
|Yahoo teams up with overture|
Just got this in my inbox from Overture:
Overture has signed an agreement to become the Pay-For-Performance™ search
to Yahoo!'s millions of users. As a result of this deal and the holiday
Overture's Premium Listings™ advertisers can anticipate a significant
in high quality traffic. To get the benefit of additional targeted leads for
your business, you must be listed in Premium Listings™ (the top three
and you should increase the charge amount for your payment plan.
Overture is "loading" today and pushing to be 100% loaded by the end of the day on Friday.
What was originally sheduled for a 2 week load MAY be done in 2 days.
So now that Overture has damn near total coverage with searching the web..How does this help the end users?
If Google EVER does a deal with Overture, it's over for for us!
This is great for Overture, but sucks for the web users!
Yahoo will suffer for this..Count on it!
WebSpinner, of Goggle is wise they will stay clear of any ppc. Their purity is marketable.
>> Actually the sponsored links are more prominent on yahoo than on any other search engine <<
Which makes it a greater abuse, because we paid for a product which is not now being delivered.
I feel ripped off with the most recent set of sites I paid for. I bought one product and have been handed an inferior product instead. Surely they should offer the $299 back to those of us who want it... but then again, that would be ethical.
>> Yahoo will suffer for this..Count on it! <<
They will indeed. It is now not cost effective for me to submit most of my stuff. And raw users learn quickly about quality of SERPs... Google hasn't grown for nothing.
The demise of Yahoo! can't come too quickly. It's no more than they deserve.
Has anybody noticed that on the second page of the yahoo results overture listings 5-10 are displayed?
Good find :)
First page top 1,2,3 bottom 4,5
Second Page top 6,7,8 bottom 9,10
Just pondering here. Considering that for the little guy, their most threatening competitors are the ones bidding the high dollar amounts on goto. Well, as the prices go up - can't we look at it simply as a great new way to increase our competitor's costs?
For example, if you go click on your competitor's listing - they lose $1 with no gain. Of course, you can't do this more than once, b/c goto has systems to protect against it (namely cookie/ip checking - there aren't really many other possible options). But what you did something like use an img tag with set 1x1 pixel size (so its invisible) and then set the url of the image to be the overture click thru url of your competitors. Each of those people to your site will cost your competitor $1 or $3 or whatever. As you increase your traffic, you also increase your competitor's costs. Ok, so this isn't entirely moral, but is it illegal? I dont exactly see any reason why it would be.
moral or ethical question aside you'd get a cease and desist letter from your competitor in no time at all - extremely easy to trace this stuff. I'd imagine Goto has already thought about these kinds of abuses and has a filter of sorts in place already.
Well, if you made it a 1x1 pixel link to your competitior's goto URL, it wouldn't cost them anything unless a very bored surfer found the invisible link and clicked on it... (ie- <a href='gotoURL'><img src='1px.gif'></a> )
If you tried to use the goto URL as the image source (ie- <img src='gotoURL'> ), you'd probably get some kind of error for calling a non-image file in an <img> tag... at the very least, nothing would show up/work properly, since I doubt the goto URL in question ends in .gif, .jpg, etc...
And if anyone found out, you'd definitely be setting yourself up for a major legal beating.
In summary, probably woudn't work properly and would definitely be a bad idea anyhow, morality aside.
If you set it as the image source, the user's browser requests it from the server, can't understand it (but it was requested nonetheless) and therefore displays nothing. The hit was still made. But the legal battles might be a problem if someone could see where the clicks were coming from. Thats where I wouldn't know the outcome.
Continued in Part Two [webmasterworld.com]
| This 71 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 71 ( 1 2  ) |