Results 1 to 2 of 2
May 25th, 2002, 08:59 AM #1
- Join Date
- January 18th, 2005
- St Clair Shores MI.
My 2 cents on cutting to the core this scurge of Duperaffiliates and hijackers:
ABW members who have "incent" type sites often get turned away from legit merchant programs...Why if all parasite/scumware hijackers ARE INCENT PROGRAMs automated by the networks. The same merchants who support parasites think your incent traffic is crap. The major networks by design and investment cater to the incent super affiliates and enabled them through monitizing their hijacking schemes.
Fact- we affiliates are not in the business of advertising for any of these merchants. That earns us ZIP and is the basis of all our rants. We get paid on sales not impressions. All INCENT offerings are pure ADVERTISING ploys used by the direct mail industry and now online Ad brokers. Since incent deals cost merchants more money than pure sales links ( ala TigerDirect model) they are shooting themselves in the foot and us in the head by pushing these through the affiliate marketing channel.
Fact...If merchants offer ZERO incent deals the parasites and hijackers will dry up and just go away....comments please.
May 27th, 2002, 12:44 AM #2
- Join Date
- January 17th, 2005
There are some very good incentive sites and some very bad ones. Sites that incent CPA and CPC are questionable perhaps, but are going to lead users to believe that merchants don't want to work with incentive sites like Upromise.com or SchoolPop.com? IGive.com or other charity properties that are built on the incentive model?
Do you think users are going to flee sites like eBates? Networks cannot afford to incentive sites go away because they work.
We have had this discussion before but I continue to go against your reasoning that all incentives sites are "parasite/scumware hijackers" to use your own words. It is a given that some properties are using or have used BHO coupled with an incentive structure to generate sales. This does not make incentive sites "bad".
Of course incentive based sites cost merchants more. Their sole purpose is to make a transfer of online shopping loyalty. Some merchants are fine with this, wanting raw numbers, others don't like it at all- many of these are the same merchants who don't want affiliate programs.
Fact: Incentive based marketing gives an affiliate a long-term loyalty mechanism that not even superior content can offer.
Incentive marketing often equalizes the equation for the affiliate who has suffered under operating terms slanted against their favor.
Incentive marketing is a large driver of e-commerce transactions. If you take away that model affiliate marketing will suffer.
Blaming the networks won't work either. Why not blame hyper-text for making it possible for hijacking sites to put up pages? Or the web provider?
Ultimately the decision comes down to the merchant and merchants show little to any sign of slowing down with legitimate incentive sites.
By meadowmufn in forum Blogging, Mobile and Social MediaReplies: 5Last Post: August 24th, 2010, 01:51 PM
By Georgie Peri in forum Virtual Family and Off-TopicReplies: 0Last Post: May 6th, 2010, 08:55 AM
By jaynaud in forum Cusimano.com ScriptsReplies: 4Last Post: March 27th, 2006, 10:51 PM
By SandraR in forum Virtual Family and Off-TopicReplies: 1Last Post: May 26th, 2004, 08:27 AM