Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Defender of Truth, Justice and the Affiliate Way
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    The Swamp
    Posts
    7,503
    Todd: A Question/Request/Suggestion
    From this post http://forum.abestweb.com/showpost.p...09&postcount=9 I didn't want to bring that thread off topic.

    I'll preface by saying that I understand that programming changes many times aren't always as easy as they seem on the surface and can involve costs which are more what one might think. But.........

    What is the possibility of CJ implementing a different approach to tracking when a publisher is terminated from CJ? Currently by those on the outside looking in, there is nothing that can be seen to in fact know that a publisher has or has not been terminated from CJ. That point has already been established and you've said before that the tracking is corrected by CJ on the backend.

    This approach however isn't exactly transparent and in fact calls into play the 'trust' factor. That is folks just have to take it on faith that the publisher was indeed terminated. Some probably will. But some will not. And they are probably less likely to when like in the example in that post the publisher was paying for those pops.

    I can understand the arguments for not directing to a dead page on CJ like some others do with terminated publishers. Personally I like that approach, but I appreciate that many Merchants don't. But isn't there something else that could be implemented? Such as flagging those PIDs and redirecting them on to the Merchant's site without going through the normal tracking servers having to click record on CJ and the cookie being overwritten. That just leaves a lot to faith by the original affiliate they will still indeed get the credit when terminated affiliates continue to run their links.

    Some type of different system would also make it obvious to others looking in that the publisher was indeed terminated by CJ and a more objective perception of what CJ is doing along the lines of compliance within their abilities would be known.

    JMO of course.

  2. #2
    Ad Network Rep ToddCrawford's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,162
    Let run through a "what if" scenario. What if you (affiliate B) sent a visitor to Merchant X the day before yesterday at 5 pm. The person looked around but decided they needed to get dinner started and didn't buy anything. The next day, they surfed around some more and remembered they intended to buy something from Merchant X. They happen to be on another affiliate site (affiliate A) and click on the link and begin to make a pruchase. The phone rings and they get distracted - bookmark the product page and leave the house to run some errands. Today they sit down, go to the bookmarked page and make the purchase. In the meantime, affiliate A was deactivated for some reason. Our system sees that the sale was referred by a publisher that no longer has a valid relationship with Merchant X. We then look up the previous referrer (affiliate B) and credit this affiliate.

    This is far simpler than updating our ad servers to redirect and not set a cookie or pass tracking values. I agree it is not transparent but it is in place and does work. The goal of this feature is not to provide information for determining which affiliates have been deactivated, it is to ensure that valid relationships are paid for their referrals.

    As far as the "trust factor", if you do not trust us to track accruately, you shouldn't be using our links in the first place.
    Todd Crawford
    Co-Founder, Impact Radius

    Give me a minute before I post again

  3. #3
    Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,056
    I can understand the arguments for not directing to a dead page on CJ like some others do with terminated publishers. Personally I like that approach, but I appreciate that many Merchants don't.
    And alot of AM's as well. I complained about this to CJ a while ago. When I drop an affiliate for cookie stuffing, parasitic activity, etc... the links still redirect after the affiliate is expired. Also, sometimes one of my clients request that I drop an affiliate for certain reasons. When they check the affiliates links a month later and they are still redirecting it looks like I am not doing my job... even though I expired the affiliate right when the client asks me to.

    There has to be a better solution than continuing to redirect to the merchants site after an affiliate is dropped from a program.

  4. #4
    Ad Network Rep ToddCrawford's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,162
    Chet,

    We have looked at this issue many times. Most advertisers would like to see links that are for their website work. In other words, if the publisher is deactivated, the link will still work for the consumer. They do not want to impede the consumer from getting to their site.
    Todd Crawford
    Co-Founder, Impact Radius

    Give me a minute before I post again

  5. #5
    Internet Cowboy
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,662
    Why reward the parasite or the cookie stuffing activity by allowing it to cause more work and more room for error?


  6. #6
    ABW Veteran Mr. Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    6,795
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddCrawford
    Chet,

    We have looked at this issue many times. Most advertisers would like to see links that are for their website work. In other words, if the publisher is deactivated, the link will still work for the consumer. They do not want to impede the consumer from getting to their site.
    That is not a bad idea and I can see the point there.

    But unfortunately at the same time, that is not a good motivator for honest affiliates to promote those merchants the same way that we would promote those merchants otherwise.

    The merchant may want the consumer to get to their site and make a purchase, but if marketer Smith is the one that refer that consumer to that merchant, marketer Smith want to get paid his commission too, if that consumer make any purchase on that merchant site.

  7. #7
    Ad Network Rep ToddCrawford's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,162
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleScooter
    Why reward the parasite or the cookie stuffing activity by allowing it to cause more work and more room for error?
    They are not being rewarded - that is what I am trying to point out. Once a publisher is deactivated, they usually pull down link since they do not earn them any commissions. If they keep them up, our system still rewards the correct publisher.
    Todd Crawford
    Co-Founder, Impact Radius

    Give me a minute before I post again

  8. #8
    Moderator MichaelColey's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Mansfield, TX
    Posts
    16,232
    This is a tough one. I really don't see a solution that will make everyone happy. I think the current solution might be the best of the simple solutions.

    Consider this situation: Affiliate A gets a click through to the merchant but doesn't generate a sale. The next day, Affiliate B who is deactivated gets a click on the merchant from the same customer. If CJ redirects to an "affiliate deactivated" page, there will likely be no sale at all. If they allow the click to go through (and credit Affiliate A), at least there's a chance for a sale and the right affiliate will get credited.

    About the only workable solution I could see would be to have an "affiliate deactivated" page that includes a link to the merchant.

    In any case, I think you would probably want to let the merchant control what happens. Perhaps an even better solution: Set a system-wide default for it to work the way it does now. Let merchants set a merchant-wide default to redirect to either let the click go through or redirect to the page of their choice. Let merchants override the default action by PID to go to the page of their choice. For instance, if they terminate a publisher for spamming, they could have that affiliate's links redirect to a page explaining the actions taken against the spammer.

    Another helpful tool that CJ could provide would be a page where we could go to have our cookies analyzed. It could show us who would get credit for a sale for each merchant we had clicked through. This would show if an affiliate had been deactivated, if a parasite had stolen a cookie, etc.
    Michael Coley
    Amazing-Bargains.com
     Affiliate Tips | Merchant Best Practices | Affiliate Friendly? | Couponing | CPA Networks? | ABW Tips | Activating Affiliates
    "Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela

  9. #9
    Ad Network Rep ToddCrawford's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,162
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelColey
    Another helpful tool that CJ could provide would be a page where we could go to have our cookies analyzed. It could show us who would get credit for a sale for each merchant we had clicked through. This would show if an affiliate had been deactivated, if a parasite had stolen a cookie, etc.
    Actually, this wouldn't help because some of the necessary data (like previous valid relationship) is stored in a click_ref table, not in the cookie.
    Todd Crawford
    Co-Founder, Impact Radius

    Give me a minute before I post again

  10. #10
    Internet Cowboy
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,662
    I guess it all comes down to a matter of how much we trust CJ's technology to do the right thing.
    In all honesty, based on the fact that CJ claims to use their technology to find parasites stuffing cookies and stealing sales and we all know this happens daily because we see documented, hard, cold proof of it, yet CJ says it does not happen, my faith in CJ technology is shallow at best.
    I think maybe they finally got the tracking and recording of transactions down pretty good, but the activity that happens every hour of every day that they claim does not or their technology would catch it is what bugs me about this solution.


  11. #11
    Moderator MichaelColey's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Mansfield, TX
    Posts
    16,232
    But if it's a page on your site, you would have access to those tables, wouldn't you? Basically, it would just call the same logic that determines who gets credit for a sale and then show it.
    Michael Coley
    Amazing-Bargains.com
     Affiliate Tips | Merchant Best Practices | Affiliate Friendly? | Couponing | CPA Networks? | ABW Tips | Activating Affiliates
    "Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela

  12. #12
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    469
    Wow, spend the afternoon offline and look at all the interesting stuff I miss!

    Todd, maybe I too am missing the point. But I would find the system Michael suggests extraordinarily helpful, for exactly the reasons he sets out. And it does seem like data CJ must have on hand, in one form or another.

    All the talk of test purchases -- it could all go away if there were an easy way to see what one's records at CJ say.

    Recall also our discussion of this very point last month: http://forum.abestweb.com/showpost.p...6&postcount=58 and http://forum.abestweb.com/showpost.p...0&postcount=60 . Basically also a request for this same feature.

    Finally, I want to reiterate how crucial this feature is as CJ's compliance team aspires to build more trust. With this feature, merchants, affiliates, and testers could see how good a job the compliance team is doing -- and give them appropriate credit for the deactivations they have completed. But without it, many folks will surely continue to draw an adverse inference, ultimately to CJ's detriment. In particular: If the team is doing a great job and is on the ball, then there's nothing to hide. Problem is, the current system keeps 'most everything hidden, leading to a predictable and reasonable inference that there's something that CJ wants to hide.

  13. #13
    Lite On The Do, Heavy On The Nuts Donuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Winter Park, FL
    Posts
    6,930
    Or at least stop posting the deactivated guys code in the cookie. Stuff a standard number/code in its place - one we all know means "the last-most referring aff has been deactivated, our system will credit the previous referring aff (if any) - no need to report this cheater, they've been outed and your friendly efficient cj compliance team already thumped them on the head (and meanwhile, the merchants traffic is uninterrupted by stupid warning boxes that might stop a consumer from buying something or cause concern for the merchants brand and url)"...

    this would let us know that uncovered cheats that we find, are already baked

  14. #14
    Full Member apex-auctions's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 23rd, 2005
    Location
    Lost in Space
    Posts
    277
    This is no way is meant to offend anyone but just a few comments from an observer.

    I guess it all comes down to a matter of how much we trust CJ's technology to do the right thing...... my faith in CJ technology is shallow at best.....

    Gosh I think CJ is one of the greatest things since sliced bread, even that isn't perfect unless you like both ends of the loaf.

    I think CJ is doing a super job, I like most of the rest of the readers/posters here own their own website and know what a headache that can be just in it's self.

    Just think of the grand scale in which CJ tracks and tallies the 1000's commissions per second. I tested my links from different locations when I first signed up with CJ just to see if this thing really worked, as far as I could see they are 100% accurate in reporting, There are so many variables that one has to take in account to get a click recorded, for one the users PC, the merchant reporting, the the techy thingy's at CJ and who knows what else.

    As far as the "trust factor", if you do not trust us to track accruately, you shouldn't be using our links in the first place.
    I used to be a major seller on 3 of the major auction sites and basicly the samethings were said there also, but everyone there enjoyed the checks when they came in.

    Keep up the Good Work CJ !!!

  15. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Suggestion / Feature Request
    By Convergence in forum AvantLink -AV
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: July 1st, 2013, 08:47 PM
  2. Make-A-Page: Suggestion / Request
    By Georgie Peri in forum ShareASale - SAS
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: May 29th, 2009, 11:55 PM
  3. Suggestion for Todd and CJ
    By affnewbie in forum Commission Junction - CJ
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: February 25th, 2005, 08:57 PM
  4. Todd: A suggestion wrt lead-based advertisers
    By rex in forum Commission Junction - CJ
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 18th, 2002, 04:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •