| 4:39 pm on Mar 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|1)My content sites don't generate sales. Visitors are there for the content. They are not ready to buy, they are not even thinking of buying. There is nothing in PPA for me on those sites. |
Depends on the type of content. On an information/content site where users are researching how to spend their money (a travel-planning site, for example) affiliate commissions can generate far higher earnings for publishers--and far more revenue for advertisers--than AdSense CPC ads do.
|2)My affiliate sites have been nerfed by Google for years. Can they continue to sandbox aff sites when the aff networks are their direct competitors? How does Goog justify that? |
I remember GoogleGuy saying a few times that it's all about the "value add." Also, do you remember when a Dutch SEO blogger leaked a Google "Spam Recognition Guide for Raters" a year or two ago? That document referred to "thin affiliate doorways" that provided "little or no value-added content or service to the user." The document went on to say that a site had the right to try to earn income, and that Google was simply trying to identify sites that did "nothing but act as commission-earning middlemen."
On the Google Search side, the message should be clear: Affiliate links are fine, but affiliate sites are regarded with skepticism.
An AdSense CPA program is likely to result in a flood of "AdSense thin affiliate sites," just as the AdSense CPC program led to a flood of worthless keyword-driven made-for-AdSense sites. This could limit the program's appeal for advertisers who aren't in the e-commerce business, since advertisers who are paying for leads (as opposed to trackable online sales) may encounter the same traffic-quality issues that they do with CPC ads.
| 6:24 pm on Mar 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|What happens if the purchase is fraud? What happens if they return the merchandise? what happens if there are chargebacks? |
Publishers won't continue to carry ads that aren't earning them sufficient income, regardless of the reason the ads aren't earning the sufficient income.
| 7:28 pm on Mar 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Surely it's past time for a personal attack on EFV on this thread, with the suggestion that he is a paid stooge for G?
Or did I miss it? B^>
| 3:47 am on Mar 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
So now it's clear that this whole time, they have been clearing out any possible competition, with something they've cleverly called a Quality Score, and they have been tilling up the soil for their new PPA roll out. They've been blocking affiliates from their income, in hopes that they'll come crawling back to Google's new PPA roll-out. I'd say it were pretty ballsy - if it weren't so blatant.
| 7:09 am on Mar 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
You missed those Stooge comments. They are on the adSense threads on the same subject. But a few have been deleted by mods..
| 9:50 am on Mar 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Well, it's good to know that the usual lack of reason and manners is continuing! (EFV, it's a shame that you seem to have been elected whipping boy of WW; some of us think you talk sense...)
Anyway, I'm hoping to try some PPA for users that become 'sticky' and become regular users of my site.
Clearly the problem changes from filtering poor traffic to avoiding my 'conversion' metric being gamed, but a mixture of traffic types should include robustness.
| 3:54 am on Mar 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I am looking forward to experiment one...
| 11:47 am on Mar 28, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Im not sure how Google is gonna pull this one off. Publishers/Webmasters are not stupid and also like to make the most out of their traffic.
If their traffic is going to be paid in CPA model by google, they should/will signup straight with the advertiser for a better payout.
Why let google in between? Unless ofcourse the advertiser gives a same payout as they do via google, but it will end up as higher advertising costs for the advertiser per action.
| 3:49 pm on Mar 28, 2007 (gmt 0)|
What is the pricing structure going to be? I'm confused as to how you are allowed to pick your specific price. If you pay more are your seen more often?
| 11:25 pm on Mar 28, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I was also not sure about how google would handle fraudulent orders.
But they sent me this to address they told me that
Detection and filtering techniques: Each conversion that occurs in an AdWords pay-per-action campaign is examined by our system. Google looks at numerous data points for each conversion, including the IP address, the time of the conversion, any duplicate conversions, and various other click or conversion patterns. Our system then analyzes these factors to try to isolate and filter out potentially invalid conversions before they ever reach your account reports. This detection and filtering occurs over a number of levels including the following:
- Real-time systems filter out activity fitting a profile of invalid behavior (such as excessively repetitive conversions)
- Clicks, impressions, and conversions from known sources of invalid activity are automatically discarded
Advanced monitoring techniques: Various unique and innovative methods are applied at each stage of the filtering process, thereby maximizing proactive detection of invalid activity. Our engineers are also constantly improving our monitoring technology, enhancing filters, and examining a growing set of signals.
The Google Team: In addition to our automated conversion protection techniques, we have a team that uses specialized tools and techniques to examine individual instances of invalid conversions. When our system detects potentially invalid conversions, a member of this team examines the affected account to glean important data about the source of the potentially invalid conversions.
| This 70 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 70 ( 1 2  ) |