Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Good to have that point cleared up.
Hmm, true. But what about ethics?
Oh, right: It's about business, isn't it?
But the main question still remains: Does it hurt advertisers or not?
Ken_b, just because David_UK's site might be susceptible to MFA ads doesn't mean that there is something wrong with his content. As I've posted in another current thread, it could simply be because the ads aren't optimised in the right way. I have a quality site (something people tell me, not just my opinion) and MFAs have appeared on it in the past; dealing with them is matter of ad optimisation, not dodgy content.
The thing is that I'm NOT plagued by MFA's. Yes, in the past I've blocked them but as I've said in several threads I haven't really found any to block in recent times. Not until I started looking for MFA's on adlinks pages, and by and large that's cleared them out quite quickly. I've not experienced the "Hydra head" syndrome with blocking, nor is my list anywhere near full, yet I don't see MFA's these days. I've been looking for possible reasons as to why not, because one of the supposed high paying phrases might stray across to my niche as it's directly related.
I think you may have got something with an earlier post that postulated on using minimum ad blocks and blocking in combination to price MFA's out. It's difficult to say "Eureka! that's it!" because there are just two many unknowns, but it certainly seems to parallel what's happened in my case. I think that smart pricing has decided (eventually) that my site is worth more per click than MFA's can pay, so they are rarely seen.
David_uk, ken_b is right that MFAs can pay more than real ads, as martinibuster explained in that other current thread. A low bid x high CTR can sometimes earn more than a high bid x low CTR. To get an overall better return, therefore, one has to make sure that the CTR for high-paying ads is improved (by cutting down on the number of ads, placing them above the fold, etc.).
Yes, I understand the theory behind this, but as well as this headline figure of *possibly* having a higher earnings potential you have to consider the long term effects of smart pricing on continuously allowing MFA's to have low value clicks on your site. Therefore it's just not that simple, and in any case I've never seen this happen.
[edited by: david_uk at 9:11 pm (utc) on April 14, 2006]
Good to have that point cleared up.
I'm not at all sure we do.
...ethics...
ahha! Another handy excuse for a little blame shifting!
As for ethics - then you may as well start to denounce the whole capitalist system.
ken_b - then tell me how MFAs and arbitrage may be fraudulent.
Ian; I don't think they are fraudulent. But I don't think you have to look beyond this forum, maybe not even beyond this thread to find folks who do think that.
then tell me how MFAs and arbitrage may be fraudulent.
If its simply abitrage, it isn't. It can be fraud masquerading as arbitrage, here how:
Firstly you need a supply of clean referers to to keep your MFA off the radar, traffic doesn't just happen, so you do your .05 buys on "widgets in N.Dakota to make your widget attorney make your widget bigger" long long tails, presto a nickel gets you a clean referer, search and click through on your nickel listing, click again on that juicy "Widget Attorney" waiting for you on MFA.
rinse, repeat.
Not saying all arb is fraud but much of it could be, its still arb I guess but fraudulent when its designed to only give a clean referer.
Of course, its a little more complex than what was posted, but just a little, not a lot.
But the main question still remains: Does it hurt advertisers or not?
They are the ones paying, so ultimately, yes.
But as has been pointed out here already, advertisers in all media expect a percentage of their budget to be inneffective - maybe even most of it. Adsense is no different. If the percentage of fraud / MFA's rises too high for advertisers to bear, then they will find better advertising solutions.
The one difference with online advertising you don't get in other media is fraud. Click fraud is a big problem for Google. I know people are saying that "It's OK - the advertisers can stand it" in this thread, but the reality of the situation is that whilst advertisers accept that there will be click fraud to an extent, it's got completely out of hand. That dents advertiser confidence and does affect us all.
OK - MFA's aren't as bad as click fraud, and I for one don't claim that they, or arbitrage are fraudulent, they are an additional expense that advertisers have to bear. Maybe not that many are aware of the MFA problem right now, but it is growing and at some point Google will have to deal with it in order to maintain adsense's position at the top.
Recently I conducted an experiment in not blocking MFA's to test improvements in Google's algo's. As a result, my regular ads were replaced with MFA's. One of my regulars emailed me asking why I'd blocked his ad. I explained the test, and the feedback he gave me on Adsense was enlightening. Basically, he felt that Adsense was expensive, and didn't deliver. He's fed up with seeing large bills and very small returns. He doesn't have the time to spend hours on the adwords forum and hours optimising his campaign - he's in business and expects Google to do that for him, but feels let down due to their inability to deliver customers that employ his service. Yes, he gets plenty of clicks, but few sales and feels that for what he gets, Goole is too pricey to advertise on.
He told me that he did try to advertise directly on my site, but I have that turned off. Result of this is that I was asked to carry his banner ad in the UK. I agreed. He's still advertising with Google for the moment, but the feedback I've had so far is that he's now getting the traffic he *thought* Google were going to deliver.
Ok - just a small story of a small advertiser, but one I feel is far from an isolated one, and that's a worrying trend.
As for ethics - then you may as well start to denounce the whole capitalist system.
As a matter of fact I do, but that is beyond this thread. :)
Note that I am mostly neutral here, in lack of proper data.
If it could be proven that MFA sites bring acceptable return to advertisers, I would see no problem here.
As for the ethics; one should bear in mind that the whole Adwords/Adsense content network was imagined around legitimate sites providing more or less valuable content to users. Using advertising space on such sites should benefit both advertisers and publishers.
The sites could serve it's purpose without adsense on them.
Now we have a lot of MFA's who's only purpose is benefitting from the program itself and as such could be seen as parasitic by many.
Mostly they don't provide anything to users except ads, so without adsense they would not have any sense for its existence.
But as I already said, if they are proven to be valuable to advertisers, then nice, enough sense for me.
As for the ethics; one should bear in mind that the whole Adwords/Adsense content network was imagined around legitimate sites providing more or less valuable content to users. Using advertising space on such sites should benefit both advertisers and publishers.
The sites could serve it's purpose without adsense on them.
Hmmm, interesting perspective. I don't share it, but it does make a quaint bedtime story.
If Google believed that they would manually approve every site running Adsense.
Of course not doing so gives them cover to disclaim responsibilty for those unapproved sites that somehow happen to violate their TOS while at the same time ringing the cash register fairly regularly. Hey, who took my tinfoil hat?
psst....Wanna sell ads (be our PARTNER)? come on in, no wait, no line!
clearly some double standards here.
This is so not true. Kids hired to deliver newspapers throw them in the nearest ditch and go home. Radio stations doctor their logs to show they ran spots that they didn't. TV stations inflate their ratings through muckraking during sweeps week. Magazines play games with their demographics. Daily newspapers hype their circulation figures through creative book-cooking. Outdoor advertising companies mistate traffic exposed to their billboards. Etc., etc.
The rule is the same as in every area of endeavor: Let the buyer beware.
Advertisers' poor copy is one contributory reason. And bona fide advertisers could certainly learn some lessons from MFAers (many of whom are highly intelligent and capable, methinks) in copywriting.
If I have a page full of widget ads, I have nothing to lose by putting up an ad with text like "These 4 sites have the best prices on widgets." So what if the visitor is frustrated by not finding my list of the best 4 sites after clicking? The visitor doesn't even know who I am and very likely will click on one of the links on my site in his ongoing search for widgets - which is exactly what I want him to do.
But if I own Wally's Widget Sales and seek to have a good reputation, get referrals, establish credibility, etc., I can't play word tricks like that.
Certainly there is always room for improvement and testing of advertisement wording, but saying other advertisers could learn lessons from MFA's is a bit like saying a respectable lady who wants more dates should learn a thing or two from a hooker. It may be true to some extent, but what does she sacrifice to get those additional dates?
...buying ad space at one price and selling it at higher price has been going on for most of this century - there are companies who make their whole livelihood out of block buying ad space in magazines and newspapers.
A newspaper sells a 2 column by 3" ad to Joe's Auto Sales.
A "middleman" buys a 2 column by 3" ad from the newspaper and then sells the space to Joe's Auto Sales for a profit.
Either way, the reader of the newspaper sees an ad for Joe's Auto Sales in the space.
However...
AdWords sells an ad to Joe's Auto Sales. The visitor to a site where the ad is displayed sees the ad for Joe's Auto Sales.
AdWords sells an ad to an MFA. The visitor doesn't see an ad for Joe's Auto Sales but rather often an ad promising something that doesn't exist.
It reminds me of the old bait and switch advertising (ironically formerly practiced by some auto dealers) where a Chevy is advertised for $15,000. When the customer shows up to see the $15,000 Chevy, he is informed they are sold out, but they have a nice selection of $20,000 models.
maxgoldie: Domain parkers don't advertise. The whole principle behind domain parking is that they rely on type-in traffic and/or obsolete inbound links.
jomaxx:
You're right about the "whole principle" behind domain parking ... however, me, I've seen lots of parked pages advertising on adwords.
Yes, repeating, adwords ads leading to parked pages on Sedo, Fabulous, etc.
This is not new, I found it strange you have not noticed this.
The Federal Trade Commission Act allows the FTC to act in the interest of all consumers to prevent deceptive and unfair acts or practices. In interpreting Section 5 of the Act, the Commission has determined that a representation, omission or practice is deceptive if it is likely to:mislead consumers and
affect consumers' behavior or decisions about the product or service.
Sec. 238.0 Bait advertising defined.1Bait advertising is an alluring but insincere offer to sell a product or service which the advertiser in truth does not intend or want to sell. Its purpose is to switch consumers from buying the advertised merchandise, in order to sell something else, usually at a higher price or on a basis more advantageous to the advertiser. The primary aim of a bait advertisement is to obtain leads as to persons interested in buying merchandise of the type so advertised.
Sec. 238.1 Bait advertisement.
No advertisement containing an offer to sell a product should be published when the offer is not a bona fide effort to sell the advertised product. [Guide 1]
I guess whether some of these MFA ads fit the description is open for debate.
If this situation ever happen to you, would you be as mad with them as with a MFA site? Yes?, no? why?
saying other advertisers could learn lessons from MFA's is a bit like saying a respectable lady who wants more dates should learn a thing or two from a hooker
farmboy, if a 'respectable lady' is finding it difficult to attract a male companion because her appearance is so dowdy then perhaps laying asîde some of her frumpiness and looking at what other women do might be a good thing. This isn't suggesting bona fide advertisers adopt lower morals, nor holding up MFAs as a paragon of virtue.
Most (bona-fide) ads I see are product oriented, listing their services or features - a real no-no in marketing - and so have little appeal. Ironically, what often makes MFA ads better is the fact that they don't have a product or service to sell. They don't talk about feature/benefits because they can't - their 'copy' is written solely to attract clicks, simply to get attention, which is the first step in the age-old AIDA sales model.
Because Adwords can be a 'cheap' form of marketing, I suspect many advertisers produce the copy using DIY rather than getting professional assistance. Hence they make the marketing mistake of talking about their product and features.
What they can learn from MFAs is that they need to lay aside their own frumpiness - a resut of their weddedness to their own product - and think about the ad being the first step in the AIDA process. That is, they need to get attention (appropriately and ethically), not promote their product.
