Forum Moderators: martinibuster
another comparison is AdSense is worldwide, YPN is USA or North America only.
I'm sure there are lots more comparisons.
Google support answers your questions but Chitika doesn't
[edited by: martinibuster at 6:25 pm (utc) on Nov. 19, 2006]
[edit reason] Fixed URL [/edit]
My experience is that you can't just place YPN on any page. Many times the YPN targeting is so off base you can't use it. But anyway, I've placed YPN on 20% of my pages (pages where the targeting is good). The CTR with YPN is 1/8th as much as with Adsense yet the payout per click is substantially more. The net result is that the YPN pages have a eCPM which is 30% less than Adsense.
Yahoo was very slow in starting out for the first 3 months. Ad targetting was really slow in progressing.
However, things have picked up in the last 3 months and the figure$ are comparable to Adsense. Price per click for Yahoo appears to be better. Just not enough clicks yet. If Yahoo would develop an "Adlinks" unit then YPN would probably exceed Adsense earnings.
Your mileage may vary.
Doesn't seem to make much sense!
Chapman
Yanks-Only Private Nonsense...
:ROFL:
"OptiRexes need not apply"
Hehehe...or You, Personally, No...:-))
Youth, Probably Not?
No thanks.
In a nutshell: It all depends. :-) The best way to compare how the two different networks will perform on your site is to belong to both and do some testing.
Yanks-Only Private Nonsense...
So it would appear. Pretty arrogant... and that's coming from a "Yank"! ;-)
Chapman
So it would appear. Pretty arrogant... and that's coming from a "Yank"! ;-)
Actually, it's smart business until they get setup to support it at an international level.
No, on second thought, that would require a company that would actually set up proper support for their services, which is something Yahoo! has never done.
I retract my "it's smart business" statement. It would be smart business for a company that had a clue.
Actually, it's smart business until they get setup to support it at an international level.
If supporting internationally means dealing with other languages, other timezones etc. Yes: good move to limit that.
But if you deal with foreign companies having an EIN, capable of filling out a W-8 (instead of a W-9) if you need so, capable of giving you all details on how to wire money to them and able to deal with business English in your TZ. Why would you limit yourself to one country? Why would you risk to alienate those partners?
Discrimination, Protectionism, Short-sightedness, ...: Yes;
It's almost as bad as MSN demoting all SERPs of servers not hosted in the US.
Smart? By no means.
[edited by: swa66 at 10:12 pm (utc) on Nov. 19, 2006]
Yeah, it will upset some people, but will it upset enough to hurt them in the long run? Time will tell.
I am surprised that they aren't in the UK yet, at least on a limited basis. That does seem like the most compatible secondary market.
What is smart is learning what you are doing before expanding.
It's bad enough that governments don't get the reality that the Internet is global. It gets really bad if companies like Yahoo miss the point.
Think about e.g. how gmail was launched, did they launch it to just those living in California? Or did they allow anybody to send their friends an invite and slowly increase the number of invitations one could send out?
Similar with Google Analytics, unless you're an adwords player you have a queue to get invited.
