Forum Moderators: open
Overture has signed an agreement to become the Pay-For-Performance™ search
provider
to Yahoo!'s millions of users. As a result of this deal and the holiday
season,
Overture's Premium Listings™ advertisers can anticipate a significant
increase
in high quality traffic. To get the benefit of additional targeted leads for
your business, you must be listed in Premium Listings™ (the top three
positions),
and you should increase the charge amount for your payment plan.
What was originally sheduled for a 2 week load MAY be done in 2 days.
If Google EVER does a deal with Overture, it's over for for us!
This is great for Overture, but sucks for the web users!
Yahoo will suffer for this..Count on it!
-Spinner
Which makes it a greater abuse, because we paid for a product which is not now being delivered.
I feel ripped off with the most recent set of sites I paid for. I bought one product and have been handed an inferior product instead. Surely they should offer the $299 back to those of us who want it... but then again, that would be ethical.
>> Yahoo will suffer for this..Count on it! <<
They will indeed. It is now not cost effective for me to submit most of my stuff. And raw users learn quickly about quality of SERPs... Google hasn't grown for nothing.
The demise of Yahoo! can't come too quickly. It's no more than they deserve.
First page top 1,2,3 bottom 4,5
Second Page top 6,7,8 bottom 9,10
For example, if you go click on your competitor's listing - they lose $1 with no gain. Of course, you can't do this more than once, b/c goto has systems to protect against it (namely cookie/ip checking - there aren't really many other possible options). But what you did something like use an img tag with set 1x1 pixel size (so its invisible) and then set the url of the image to be the overture click thru url of your competitors. Each of those people to your site will cost your competitor $1 or $3 or whatever. As you increase your traffic, you also increase your competitor's costs. Ok, so this isn't entirely moral, but is it illegal? I dont exactly see any reason why it would be.
If you tried to use the goto URL as the image source (ie- <img src='gotoURL'> ), you'd probably get some kind of error for calling a non-image file in an <img> tag... at the very least, nothing would show up/work properly, since I doubt the goto URL in question ends in .gif, .jpg, etc...
And if anyone found out, you'd definitely be setting yourself up for a major legal beating.
In summary, probably woudn't work properly and would definitely be a bad idea anyhow, morality aside.
