gregbo - 8:39 pm on Jun 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

advertiser perspective. in publisher perspective, this is exactly the other way around. in terms of risk: cpa > cpc > cpm. time to broaden your mind that advertisers are not the only players to continue this interactive game.

Advertisers provide the money that pays Google, publishers, and (unfortunately) fraudsters. The less advertisers feel secure in their expenditures, the less money they spend. Thus, it makes sense to argue risk from the advertiser's perspective.

ppa is by no means the be-all and end-all. in fact, it may well be that network overall earnings will decline with this configuration as risk distribution is worsened for search network as well as content network.

I think you should go back and read things I have written on the subject of fraud and risk with regards to cost-per-{discrete operation} advertising. By no means do I think CPA is the solution to all problems; it has quite a few problems. It is, however, less risky than CPC or CPM from an economic and technological standpoint.

as i said: risk is completely transferred to the other side. now you understand concerns from a publisher perspective? not your problem? it could be your problem eventually.

Please go back and read what I wrote above regarding the assessment of risk.