| 1:54 am on Feb 13, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Yes, the same thing has happened to me, only it's been going on the last few years.
| 2:55 pm on Feb 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
But it went from being a mildly irritating trickle of junk traffic to Holy #*$! They’re taking the piss!
Seems to have gone back to normal now though.
| 3:23 pm on Feb 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
does anyone know how it actually gets from their site to yours? because i get spam sites in my logs too. but when you visit the page there is nothing there to suggest how they could end up at your site.
| 9:21 am on Feb 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
First, this has really been a trend for the past couple years. There is usually a thread about this every few weeks. I am as confused as others as to why Yahoo! would not clean this up or at least give the option to advertisers to opt out.
|does anyone know how it actually gets from their site to yours? because i get spam sites in my logs too. but when you visit the page there is nothing there to suggest how they could end up at your site. |
It is being redirected through the main search partner. Essentially Yahoo! provides a feed to Site A. Site A gives out their feed to a ton of other people for a cut of the proceeds. The other sites all redirect their links through Site A.
While blocking Site A in the blocked domains tool removes your ad from that particular site, it doesn't remove it from being redirected from other domains that are redirecting through Site A. You would have to block each individual domain your ad appears on that redirects through Site A. Since the links are being redirected, it's virtually impossible to tell which sites your ads are appearing on. So in your logs it looks like the traffic is coming from Site A, but in effect is coming from thousands of other sites redirecting through it.
In fact, upon mentioning this a few times to Yahoo!, they contacted me and asked for more information. The people I spoke to seemed honestly interested in how it was being done and seemed to indicate it would be an issue that they were going to be dealing with. Unfortunately, it's been a year or so since those conversations and it's still going on.
| 1:38 am on Feb 19, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Thank god bears. Finally someone that knows what's up with them besides me.
They have these sites that they allow to scrub the real referrer from your logs. Basically site A shows your ad, user clicks, redirects through site B and site B is the site you see in your log. If you add that to your block list, the traffic will continue to show up in your referrer logs from site B because you can NEVER block site A.
It's absolutely ridiculous and Yahoo knows about it. As of know they are running a report that takes like 2 months for them to see how much money they have to refund me.
Then they are like "It's okay now we refunded you for traffic from 11-08 to 12-08." But the traffic is STILL COMING IN. So now they have to run a new report from 12-08 to 2-09 and that takes another 2 months to run to get that refund. Then after I get that they have to run another report for 2 months again and over and over and over. Absolutely ridiculous.
LMAO YSM is such a joke it's insane. They even told me that the person/company running the ads was banned from the partner network back in like September. But now they let them scrub their referrer and get back in.
[edited by: JoeT321 at 1:39 am (utc) on Feb. 19, 2009]
| 2:27 am on Feb 19, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|The people I spoke to seemed honestly interested in how it was being done and seemed to indicate it would be an issue that they were going to be dealing with. Unfortunately, it's been a year or so since those conversations and it's still going on. |
I heard that many times. I think the reps are told to play being interested and write down your complain and tell you they will froward your feedback. (to a not working email...lol)
Actually i was contact by Yahoo few weeks ago asked if i need help with my account and if they can get me to spend more. I said i will if i can advertise on Yahoo only. I was told initially it is possible then i had conversation with the "i will forward your feedback" rep but the option is not available right now.
After another conversation i was told the ability to advertise on Yahoo only will be available sometime next month. so they say....we will see
| 3:08 am on Feb 19, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Damn I really hope so powerstar that will be awesome. I'm gonna double spend if it's true.
| 4:08 pm on Feb 19, 2009 (gmt 0)|
The other thing I have seen is that site B will have your ads on it, but they will not even include anything about site A or the overture feed. They use a low level of encryption to mask the urls on the page. (make a=b, and b=c, z=a - like a one character shift).
We have worked with account reps numerous times who promise results/refunds and get us nothing. Over the years our spend went from thousands a month to hundreds, to completely off in certain industries.
In some industries it is 5:1 garbage to legit traffic ratio.
I would love if they allowed pure Yahoo! traffic and would gladly scale things back up if we could get clean traffic.
I would even take 10-15% pure garbage traffic if I needed.
It would be nice to not burn money anymore with them, and also nice to diversify from the big G.
| 11:13 pm on Feb 20, 2009 (gmt 0)|
No kidding. Pure Yahoo.com traffic is great. Unfortunately, it gets stamped down with the garbage distribution network traffic to the point the ROI isn't worth the trouble (if you're not already in the negative from it).
Can you imagine how fast those bids would go up if people could get straight Yahoo.com traffic?
| 2:05 am on Feb 21, 2009 (gmt 0)|
The problem is that such a big % of YSM's overall traffic is from these cr@ppy distribution partners of partners that if they were to allow advertisers to buy Yahoo.com-only they would lose 20-40% of their search revenues overnight. While those revenues might eventually be replaced by higher CPCs for the Yahoo.com traffic, that process could take several quarters - time Yahoo does not have in this market.
| 6:43 pm on Feb 21, 2009 (gmt 0)|
"time Yahoo does not have in this market"
short term, i get what you're saying. but this situation has lasted a long time now. the disparity between cost and outcome, aka value, will determine their (and everyones) success over the long run. waiting, makes the eventual likelihood of successfully turning the corner decrease, as market share erodes from both disgruntled advertisers and consumers also getting less than optimum value.
the time to bite the bullet has passed, the long term course has been charted. the decision to deliver less value, to favor short term over long, has been so ingrained into their persona, that they have become it.
| 7:05 pm on Feb 23, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|After another conversation i was told the ability to advertise on Yahoo only will be available sometime next month. so they say....we will see |
YahooPete - could you provide an 'official' Yahoo response on this?
| 12:36 am on Feb 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|lose 20-40% of their search revenues overnight |
but they are losing more by having all of us waiting on the sideline and not spending. They are losing more and more customers every day by forcing that "traffic"
Just like Google give us the ability to bid separately if we want and if not we could just take the yahoo only traffic.
I now spend as much money on Google Adsense as on Google search. I bid much lower and the numbers work. I was all against Adsense when they start but now i like it.
| 2:13 am on Feb 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I don't know if that would really hurt them by allowing Yahoo only. I believe if you are currently profitable with the garbage domains, there would be little reason to get rid of them from your account.
Just taking a look at some of the terms I used to buy, a lot of competitors are leaving. I can remember 3 years ago seeing 20+ ads competing. Now there are 4-5 on the biggest keyword. I know I've consistently lowered bids to make up for the lowering ROI.
I personally believe there is a tipping point between some negligible traffic and becoming a bottom tier PPC service. Yahoo! crossed that line and people jumped ship. It's honestly just easier to use Google and not have to worry about that nonsense. If you're a company with a set budget every month, why not put it all toward the company that is giving you the best ROI?
They can shake up management all they want, but advertisers are not going to buy poor traffic during these economic times. Google has offered a "Google only" option for years and doesn't seem to be hurting.
| 2:41 pm on Feb 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
It's like a large bank trying to ween themselves off of selling derivites and subprime loans - you get addicted to the short term revenue to keep us with the Jones's (Google), but have no viable long term strategy or competitive advantage.
| 3:58 pm on Feb 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
it's more like a grocery store that believes that pricing apples and oranges the same and that selling randomly distributed bags of each, are optimizing their aggregate sales and profits.
imagine how much less you'd pay at a grocery store that charged a flat fee per cart (where they get to decide what's inside the cart)... there's some crap in there you won't eat...
Yahoo, make some rows and shelves please. It's not just in our interest, but in yours too!