Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Google aint paying ya a dime
Shak
Google, pay some kind of revenue share and I bet the number of publishers skyrockets.
Mister X invites you to AS. From now on, he gets some % of every click. You don't earn less by now, of course... same percentage applies whether you were invited or not. But Google has less money from $1 click. So it needs to put the price on slightly higher level. AdWords gets a bit more expensive. Advertisers spend less (because it's more expensive) --> you are getting paid less.
It's simple and logically very straight. You earn less because someone has an 'affiliate hobby' site. And that's why it sucks.
It's simple and logically very straight. You earn less because someone has an 'affiliate hobby' site.
That is simply not true.
Affiliate programs don't make the cost of running business or make proudcts more expensive.
I'm not sure where you got that idea from.
Almost all businesses have an advertising budget for their product or service. An affiliate program usually fits right into that budget because it is more effective than many forms of advertising.
I'm not so sure I would like the idea of an Adsense affiliate program, but the idea that it would take money away from publishers is absurd.
It's a great program but if you pay I will play.
Yup, spot on Shak. Google is just another middleman who wants a share of your dollar. Keep it away from him and you will make so much more!
multiple payment options and at least 2nd tier referral tracking ... options that most other (even smaller) affiliate programs offer.
Second-tier AdSense competitors might find it useful to pay referral fees, but Google doesn't need to.
Why would Google pay a bounty for new publishers when the "Ads by Google" link is displayed all over the Web?
That's kind of like asking why would Amazon.com need to pay a bounty when their commercials are on TV, and they are one of the most well known companies.
Because it brings in new customers that might not have previously been customers and rewards (and gives incentive to) folks that spread the word about their product.
FastClick offers a bounty if you refer new publisher OR advertisers to their banner network. Many other large names do too.
All that said, I'm not sure Google has to or should do something similar.
--
Rodney
There are some sites who won't put the Google code up there because they have other alternatives and don't want to offer google free advertising.
It's an incentive. Do they have to? No. Of course not. And they aren't. But it would bring in some goodwill and might turn out to be a plus. Heck, they could even tweak the algo so it looks like they're paying a bounty and wind up taking out the other side over time.
Because it brings in new customers
Advertisers (not publishers) are Google's customers. And at this stage of the game, it's unlikely that Google feels a compelling urge to recruit publishers who aren't aware of AdSense. That's something it may have wanted to do a year and a half ago, when it was out to achieve a dominant market share, but the days of "sign up anyone and everyone" may be over.
Advertisers (not publishers) are Google's customers
Actually, *both* are google's customers.
Both use google's products and both bring google more money.
Either way, the point still remains. Whether you call it "bringing more *customers*" or "bringing more *business*", that's what affiliate programs provide. The rest is just semantics.
As I mentioned, even FastClick pays you if you refer a new advertiser (by your definition a customer) to their company. Fastclick has been around a lot longer than Adsense.
Let's put it this way, if you could get a small cut of the ad space in 50% of the physical newspapers currently publishing worldwide, would you turn it down? Would you think it's a small business? Would you play with semantics and not call them "customers". OK, technically you're right.
No, they aren't customers and spinning it isn't going to change that. They are private contractors who supply ad space to Google.
Private contractors are one type of customer segment.
There are different types of customer segments.
There are "Primary" customers "Secondary" customers and "Tertiary" customers.
Googles Advertisers, Search Engine Users, Publishers, and even Employees are all various types of customers for Google.
That's not spin, that's just basic Business.
I'm speaking of the attitude that persists from many publishers that they are the people who Google should be answering to and not vice versa.
Who's spinning now :) Just kiddin'
But in all seriousness...if you mean "answer to" as in "listen to", then I don't see anything wrong with that attitude.
Since publishers are one type of customer for Google, there's no reason why Google shouldn't "listen to" or "answer to" them as well.
Employees, advertisers, publishers, searchers, researchers, independent contractors all make Google money.
It would be in their best interest to listen to their various customer segments to get feedback on how they can grow and improve.
They don't have to follow either segment's suggestions to the letter, but I think all successful businesses grow from the feedback of their customers.
Bringing it back on topic...the idea of an affiliate program for google is not so far fetched. They used to have an affiliate program that paid for every search that was made through a searchbox that you could add to your site.
Affiliate programs aren't too far off the map for Google, however, there are probably a lot of factors (like their current growth *without* an affiliate program) that they have to take into account.
Just because it was suggested by a publisher doesn't make the idea rubbish though.
It's just snobbery from the part of advertisers that want to diminish the impact publishers have had on Google's bottom line.
Nonsense. No one's questioning the fact that publishers have made money for Google, but no matter how you slice it, publishers aren't Google's customers, and there's no evidence that Google needs an affiliate program or a multilevel marketing scheme to maintain the growth of its content network. (If Google wanted to introduce bounties, it would be better off offering bounties for new gmail subscribers once that program is out of beta.)
As publishers, G needs to work hard to continue to please us to make sure that we continue to offer our space to them, and not jumpship to competitors. And they have.
Nonsense.
Let's agree to disagree on this one. I usually do agree with you so a disagreement once in a while doesn't hurt ;)
and there's no evidence that Google needs an affiliate program or a multilevel marketing scheme to maintain the growth of its content network.
No one's questioning the fact that Google doesn't NEED an affiliate program or MLM to maintain the growth of its content network. We're just idly speculating that they might do even BETTER with one.
No one's questioning the fact that Google doesn't NEED an affiliate program or MLM to maintain the growth of its content network. We're just idly speculating that they might do even BETTER with one.
Maybe, but just think of all the "My affiliate account has been disabled" posts we'd have to read on this board. :-)
