Results 1 to 3 of 3
December 10th, 2002, 10:39 AM #1
"a Publisher or Technology Provider may not use methods or technology to automatically replace a Service Provider's tracking identifier of another Publisher with its own Service Provider's tracking identifier or otherwise intercept or redirect an End-User from being referred by another Publisher." - from Publisher's Code of Conduct.
If this is enforced properly then most of the problems are gone.
In the second paraghraph, however, it allows anybody to show a "pop up" and try to convince the visitors use their links.
Then, the next phase in parasite game begins.
So, we start to
> offer our own "shopping software" and pop up to shopper's face like them
> open advertiser's site in a frame so that it's not easily interfered
> pressure merchants not to give "exclusive deals" thus creting a anti-competetive environment
At the end, all we want is, whoever managed to get the visitor to the advertiser's site, should get the credit for it, not someone to later tricked them to use their link.
Even this has enforced properly, the battle will continue on other fronts, because as someone here said before " too many people are profiting from it to make it go away anytime soon".
One important thing we should do is, continue to punish advertiser's who're currently partnered with parasites.
December 10th, 2002, 01:44 PM #2
- Join Date
- January 17th, 2005
Haven't been around much since my father in law got ill , died, the funeral, busy with my mother in law and all , but I have been waiting for answers on this too and stopping in once in a while .
I think the real key here is to get an accurate definition of what is "tricking" a visitor to click on another affiliate link .
If the "trick" used is to incent the visitor to save money with a pop-up window coupon code discount, WHY in the world would a merchant prefer to pay the same commission on the same potential sale - LESS the amount of the discount when they could have had the sale WITHOUT issuing a further discount to the consumer ?
They way I see it, this has got to be costing merchants much MORE money in the long run. While all the sales "seem" to be coming in from the same affiliate , why the heck don't merchants realize that they are being screwed in the same manner as affiliates .
For example, my 12 year old son downloaded Kazza a few days ago , with it came WhenU (of course).
After deleting Kazza, whenU is still on my system (of course). I figured I'd leave it for a while , and see what it does , then get some help and find out how the heck to get rid of it !
Went to KbToys.com , DIRECTLY typing the URL in my address bar . No affiliate commission for anyone right ?
WRONG ! WhenU pops up with the "STOP" window to save me some money - who wouldn't respond to the pop-up ?
If I HAD placed an order, KBToys now has to pay commission on an otherwise direct sale, less the coupon I would have used . I just can not understand why merchants are so "tricked" them selves .
There is definately value to the consumer with WhenU, I would have to agree . But ,as far as the merchants that partner with them , it is foolish for them to allow ANY USE WHATSOEVER of coupon codes. Do they NOT realize that this is the real "trick" being used ?
Same thing happened by the way when I visited Spiegel.com DIRECTLY . What do you know ? Coupon pop-up window from WhenU appears - "SAVE INSTANTLY on this ORDER" or something like that .
The merchants just don't get it yet .. but Oh, are they are getting it from WhenU - up the @ss !
December 10th, 2002, 02:04 PM #3
- Join Date
- January 17th, 2005
- Sacramento, CA