Is $150 a month from Infolinks on a site worth it?

The links can can possibly lead to user displeasure

[Automotive site]

I have only 5 links per page as opposed to the full 12 allowed. My pages are pretty long so the links do not seem crowded. However, I still think it is not the best having words underlined unless its to another article on your site or an external link for content purposes. But the $150 a month is a nice little bonus from this site (Could possibly near doubled earnings if I had the full 12, but it makes the page look ugly). And as my page views go up, I should be able to push that to $200 and beyond. Also, I put the Infolinks code up in the last 10 days and been told by the Infolinks team it can take around 2 weeks before their algorithm starts showing the highest paying ads.

However, I still think it may cause some user displeasure having a bunch of words doubled underlined. What do you guys think?

please note: If this is in the wrong section, then can a mod please move it to an appropriate sub-forum. I was going to put in the cpc forum, but Infolinks is no longer cpc so I thought 'webmaster general' was the right choice,

[nomis5]

For the writers and owners of websites those underlines appear ugly and unattractive,

To Jo Public, as far as my research has gone, they are almost invisible. I really don't think that the average reader gives one jot if some of the words are underlined.

[Automotive site]

"For the writers and owners of websites those underlines appear ugly and unattractive,

To Jo Public, as far as my research has gone, they are almost invisible. I really don't think that the average reader gives one jot if some of the words are underlined."

That's very interesting to hear. I am always fretting about how these underlined links (doubled underlined at that) might cause some people to just leave the site without reading. Infolinks now pays by views as opposed to just clicks which is quite appealing. They also have the dotted single underline option. I may test that. It makes the site look less crammed but may reduce ad views.

[Robert Charlton]

I don't know about Joe Public, but I've learned that these intrusive ads pop up if I accidentally mouse over them, and they are hard to shake off. I simply bail from the site... and I try to avoid pages where I see the tell-tale double-underlines.

I am always fretting about how these underlined links (doubled underlined at that) might cause some people to just leave the site without reading.

If I've seen that there are alternative pages in the serp, I do leave without reading. I hate these things almost more than pop-unders. I can't believe that any user-sensitive site owner would use them.

[Leosghost]

^^^what Robert said..hate 'em..instant back button if I see them.

[phranque]

If this is in the wrong section, then can a mod please move it

it depends on which question you are asking.
i would suggest you post another thread in the Advertising Sales and Affiliate Programs forum [webmasterworld.com] if you are interested in how to optimize you advertising income.

i think you are really asking the user experience question.

i'm with Leosghost, Robert Charlton and nomis5 on this.

i can see selling space on your site but when you are actually selling your words - low quality/low trust.

[mslina2002]

i'm with Leosghost, Robert Charlton and nomis5 on this.

Count me in. Whenever I see that, the credibility of the site in my eyes goes down -500%.

On my site if I provide a link it should help in a way -- related article, related product, or even a site where I can actually purchase an item.

Oftentimes these infolinks link to unrelated, useless, generalized links that it is such a turn off.

edit: regarding OP question and keeping on topic, have you researched other ways of revenue, e.g. affiliate links to actual products and compare the two revenue models?

[buckworks]

FWIW, I just saw a linked word of that sort on MSNBC - it didn't hurt credibility with me.

I only spotted one on the page, though, so they weren't overdoing it.

[Leosghost]

I just saw a linked word of that sort on MSNBC - it didn't hurt credibility with me.

Depends if one considers they have any to be harmed :)

IMO "News" sites running ads via links in editorial content, deserve neither "credibility" nor the title "News"..you can't report the "news" objectively..if there is an ad slipped surreptitiously into the "news" item..Too tempting to only report on "news items" featuring protagonists who drive certain cars, wear certain brands, and drink certain drinks..which can just "happen" to get mentioned..

Ah..I just went for a look at MSNBC..totally irrelevant ( to either the site or me ) ads for "penny stocks", "testosterone supplements" and "cruise ships" ( the same ones ) "advertorials" on every page..including front page, above the fold each time..and on article pages the same irrelevant "advertorials" for the same things..in multiple places on the pages..

[Automotive site]

This particular site is a general health site so am not sure affiliate links will work well. My understanding is that they work well on sites that are very niche i.e. around one topic or sub-topic.

I am trying out a cpm banner ad at the top of the site which is only targeted at US traffic. Does anyone know how you can find out how US visitors see would see a site (bearing in mind I am in the UK) other than getting someone to take a screenshot and send them over. I really want to see how the banner looks.

Back to Infolinks, the credibility of my site far outweighs the $150 revenue. If I feel Infolinks would put users off, I am taking the ads down.

[Tropical Island]

I hate them.

I also hate ads that expand without clicking on them, ads that pop up from the bottom of the screen, ads that have audio or video that plays without clicking & sites that force an ad before you can read the content. It's like we are getting back to pop overs & pop unders again.

Hate them all & won't use sites that use them!

[Automotive site]

What I will do is run it till the end of this month (another 3 or 4 days) and then remove the Infoloinks. I have to admit that even though I have three ad blocks on the site, they are all somewhat out of the way and do not really impede the user from the way I see it anyway (a nicely structured theme helps here). But these Infolinks have really been playing on my mind. Even though they are not too crammed, they don't look good.

[Leosghost]

@Automotive site
See your sticky for a USA proxy that lets you see sites as if you are on a USA IP..

I have no connection with it..

I also hate ads that expand without clicking on them, ads that pop up from the bottom of the screen, ads that have audio or video that plays without clicking & sites that force an ad before you can read the content. It's like we are getting back to pop overs & pop unders again.

Agree ..even the BBC now use the "expand when your mouse crosses them ads" sometimes ..hate them..no way will I ever click on an "in your face ad" or an "unavoidable ad"..

[edited by: Leosghost at 5:16 pm (utc) on Oct 28, 2012]

[Robert Charlton]

I also hate ads that expand without clicking on them, ads that pop up from the bottom of the screen, ads that have audio or video that plays without clicking & sites that force an ad before you can read the content. It's like we are getting back to pop overs & pop unders again.

Great list, Tropical_Island, of other things to avoid. I'd add to that rich media ads that take forever to load, and ad networks that carry malware.

If I feel Infolinks would put users off, I am taking the ads down.

Conceivably, if Infolinks take users to an irrelevant destination, and I've never seen one yet that is relevant, they may also put Google off. You don't want users returning to the search box and repeating their search again after visiting your site. That could well hurt you algorithmically.

[Leosghost]

Re ad networks that carry malware..bear in mind also that Google tend to report ( flag in SERPs ) the site as carrying malware..even if it was the ad network that the site was using, and even if it was served via iframe..

[PamelaJ]

Hi Automotive Site, this is Pamela from Infolinks. You've asked a great question and I wanted to chime in with some exciting news. You can now integrate any of the Infolinks products that you'd like to have, without any of the products you don't want. We have a few new products as well so you can add InSearch and remove InText if that seems to run better for your site. Go ahead and mix and match the combinations and see what works best. As always, with any questions, feel free to contact our Support team. Happy blogging :)

[phranque]

welcome to WebmasterWorld, PamelaJ!

did you get a chance to read any of the responses in this thread?
Automotive site's question was about the poor user experience of a page containing Infolinks and i don't see how your answer addressed that question other than to promote your products...

[PamelaJ]

Hi phranque, thanks for your response. I'm happy to explain my answer if it wasn't clear to you. I answered Automotive Site's question by letting him know that he does not have to use InText ads on his site to use the other Infolinks products. Previously, InText ads were our main product and our other products could be only be added in addition. Since our rebranding, any of our products can be used on their own or mixed and matched in any combination that suits the publisher. So if InText ads aren't the right fit for his readers, there are plenty of other options. Although, InText ads are considered to be "the quiet solution" to online advertising.

[net_rambler]

to Automotive site: You could try to do A/B testing and see how adds affect visitors behavior - people here are webmasters and know much about the subject, but ordinary visitors can think another way...