139 New Posts Today

[Gary-AvantLink]

Thanks Uncle.. I totally understand what you mean. It's your job to be critical and call it as you see it. Please know we are pushing merchant's away from the dual/or more network set-up. For one, we don't want to be considered a sub-network b/c the tools really are advanced and powerful and we only want them in the Affiliates hands who know what they're doing. I would really like to see you apply to the network so you could reserve judgement until after you've seen the tools and experienced the level of support. Thanks for all your comments.. I really do enjoy ABW!! OK NOW I am goin skiin'.. I hope haha..

[SSanf]

I don't think allowed in is even a consideration. I don't do unique content. I don't want to do unique content and have absolutely no intention of doing unique content.

So, since that is what you want why would I apply?

Enjoy your day.

[Gary-AvantLink]

well because there are other ways of driving legitimate traffic. we're not only looking for unique content sites (that's discussed early in this thread), however; this is an important element (unique, vast content) for successful use of all our deep linking tools.. we just want good, honest, professional Affiliates that's really all.



I will say we've had a huge influx of applications come in since this thread started and that's a good thing. If you applied please give me a little time to go through these!!

[SSanf]

Originally Posted by Gary-AvantLink

we just want good, honest, professional Affiliates that's really all.

Well, that is a different story.

This whole part of the discussion hinged on a statement that you wrote that appeared as if all you want is unique content sites.

That just isn't what a lot of us want to do with our time and efforts.

We feel that content distracts from the entire purpose of the sites which is to sell stuff. We think the best method is to get customers to our sites and hand them off to the merchant site with the as little to distract them from going there as possible. They buy when they go to the merchant site, not when they are wasting time on the affiliate site where they can buy nothing. We feel that anything that slows customers down from going to the merchant site where the sales happen is counterproductive.

It is a choice we make about the methods we want to use in our presentations to our customers.

It has been a raging controversy here for a long time and it certainly appeared as if you had chosen sides.

[Gary-AvantLink]

sorry if I confused.. like i said I just think/type/submit many times and i may not be as clear as i should be ..i'll get better

Enjoy your day, too.. now- I really have to go ski my wife is givin' me the stink eye because i have been on so long this morning..it's damn nice and sunny here in the Wasatch .i'll check in later

[SSanf]

I added to the post above.

[Leader]

(Edit) I started writing this before the last 4 or 5 posts came in, and didn't see them until I hit Post. So, the below doesn't take those posts into account. (/edit)

We're just trying to follow the lead of the search engines..

WHY?!?
Are you a network or an SE?! It's not a network's business to help SEs, a network is supposed to help affiliates and merchants--and when that's at cross-purposes with the SE, you should put your CUSTOMERS' best interests (both affiliates and merchants) over those of the SE! It's your fiduciary duty to do so.

Many times these folks have no clue how to monetize and I will help them one-to-one.

It's a bad sign when any place goes specifically looking for newbs.

meaning we'd prefer they not just publish 100 sites using 100 diff merchant datafeeds.

?? But on your page about things you look for, it says that you look for "purpose-built" niche sites (which of course I think is a mistake). But now, you directly contradict that~!

To use a recent buzzword we're looking for 'value add' sites.. where the datafeed actually becomes the value add.
(Snip)
And no we're not providing content for free, that's not unique...

Another contradiction.

And no we're not providing content for free, that's not unique... and it's not my job it's the Affiliates.

No, it's NOT our job. Serious affiliates are in the Sales business. Content providers are in the writing business.

Like I said many have that already. They have very valuable web properties that are everywhere on the SEs, links from others, etc. Many times these folks have no clue how to monetize

Proving that they are in the WRITING business, not the Affiliate business. Affiliates DO know how to monetize. Again--providing content is NOT the job of affiliates. It's the job of writers!

I am looking at their site, their pagerank, their serp placement, their 'neighborhood' of other sites, their content,

When you become an SE, that'll be relevant. Until then, it's ridiculous and irrelevant--especially since you also said you accept PPCers. People usually become PPCers because they have no (or not enough) rank--there's no point in paying for what's coming free.

And, once someone does go on to PPC, they're NOT going to be bothered to care about their "neighborhood" anymore. With PPC, it's irrelevant, and so is everything else to do with SEO. That's the ENTIRE POINT of PPC...

In fact, Travis, told me he just finished clearing out 1900+ Affiliates out of 2000 in that other network!!

Oh great, another merchant who's just p*ssed off his old affiliate base, probably causing himself a bunch of bad PR so that the other 100 affs are now hedging their bets with competing merchants--and is now jumping ship. Just what "The Industry" needed (as much as a hole in the head).

and their willingness to communicate to help me understand their level of experience/understanding on where this industry needs to go.

Groan. When I want to talk shop, that's what ABW is for. And it's pretty obvious already that I think you're driving the wrong way down the freeway!

they call, we chat, talk shop, and learn from one-another.. I want to keep that level of interaction intact.

And, I want to deal with merchants/networks who already *have* clues!

if 'exclusive' is a scary word to you than I am sorry..

Your merchants will be sorrier. Brands don't get well-known from hardly anyone showing their ads. Coca-Cola used to advertise on BARNS! They sure don't seem to have been hurt by having their "link-equivalent" up everywhere they could get it!

As a long-time ABWer and Affiliate I'm sure you would appreciate the integrated aspect of the network, our level of support and our exclusive nature..

Actually, my appreciation for CJ and SAS has jumped about 100x since I saw this thread.

No attitude, no holier-than-thou stuff, and no needless hash. Why on Earth would I switch that for some newbie "Ar-teeste boutique" place that just started in SEPTEMBER yet thinks it's oh-so-special?

With requirements so high, you'll have to do a heck of a job convincing affiliates that you're better than SAS, and getting merchants to whack all their old affiliates isn't it.

Have fun with your Famous Footwear-like network.

[SSanf]

You jumped right into the middle of the raging Leader vs Snib controversy and in doing so put off some of the people you may have been wanting to reach the most.

Too bad. Not good. Do you read what is going on in the rest of the board?

If not, it is probably not such a bad thing to do. There are some pretty great insights on what affiliates are thinking in other threads.

[ecomcity]

Gary I applaud your entire network approach to setting entry gate/boundaries, and leveling the playing field for both your Avantlink merchants and affiliates. There are a ton of clean competitive merchants out there who have no affiliate enabled programs. Why should I take time and effort to throw them into the normal "anything goes" cookie cannon network with no respect, or protection, for those affiliates willing to actually add real filtering and focusing of a shopper ...before the click. They'd be easier to migrate to an affiliate enabled network if they were assured the affiliates actually did something to improve the chances of generating a sale on every click. The norm with the Adwhore networks is to find a converting merchant and inject a bunch of sleazebag affiliates and cookie cannons & hijackers between the SERP and the checkout page. It's as if the mantra is WTF do I need a customer facing web site to become a commission shark and Point of Sale attack dog.

Affiliates fitting your requirements for the first time get protection on their return day cookie from the 90% of "tricks for clicks" affiliates and unethical merchants using BHO's to hawk sales from their competitors. SAS does a great job, in this regard, and even they could use some serious ethical competition. Believe it or not. Once you have a proven legit base of value-add affiliates/publishers you can easily and safely tag them for auto approval into any new vetted merchant program you add to your network.

Building an extension on an existing PR4+ site for any of your merchants would be simple long term rewarding task. When some sales actually show up I'll bet you'll take no crap from Avantlink merchants that reveal purchases over 500.00 get whacked for the reason "other". I've run into those pushing the "good stuff cheap" where exchanges for just one item, or one DOA item replacement request" automatically CANCELS THE AFFILIATES commission. I sure know my targeted physical click traffic for the last few months earns me baredly enough to pay for hosting fees. I'd look for AvantLink to attract more higher end niche product merchants not wanting to question the quality of referral traffic.

[SSanf]

Now, I am totally confused are you looking for newbs who have content sites with potential that you can play at being guru with and who would probably be totally flatered that you even noticed them or do you want professional established affiliate maketers who would probably be insulted at the idea of you being guru and annoyed at this cosy interaction which would be a waste of their time since being established professionals, they have already figured it out?

I think you should consider any site that is honest and making a good faith effort. It is from that pool that tomorrows super sellers will come. Reject them now and they will reject you later.

For the most part, once you reject an affiliate, they neither forget nor forgive later. When they make it big and don't need you, you will be the last that ever goes on their site.

That is what I think for what ever it is worth.

This concept lacks focus to me.

[Leader]

Originally Posted by SSanf

You jumped right into the middle of the raging Leader vs Snib controversy and in doing so put off some of the people you may have been wanting to reach the most.

Too bad. Not good. Do you read what is going on in the rest of the board?

If not, it is probably not such a bad thing to do. There are some pretty great insights on what affiliates are thinking in other threads.

I'll ditto that.

But, you didn't jump "in the middle." You jumped squarely on the Other Side.

[Trust]

"Also, as far as determining an Affiliate site's value, I am not looking for their sales reports.. I am looking at their site, their pagerank, their serp placement, their 'neighborhood' of other sites, their content, and their willingness to communicate to help me understand their level of experience/understanding on where this industry needs to go. After all we are partners, aren't we?? "

I think what's bothering me and it could very well just be me is just some of the words being used or how much the 3rd wants to be in the mix. For me the main relationship in affiliate marketing is the 1-2 party, merchant and affiliate. It just seems too much 3rd party and I'm not partners with a network, so we wouldn't be partners, my partners are the merchants. I just don't like it when 3rd parties get too much in the mix. Run a clean network, great. Enforce your own rules, great. Pay on time, good tools, all great. But for a 3rd party to make those kind of judgements, I'm not for. It's between me and the merchant on if we'll partner together. SERP placement, the PR of my site and my willingness to communicate with someone not in the main relationship, has what to do with getting sales?

[Billy Kay]

They just accepted me, so Mike should get approved

I think rather then weeding out the problem sites and non-performing sites after the fact, they are trying to pre-screen everyone beforehand.

And since lots of bad things have happened to us affiliates, we're going to ask for clarification on any and every definition Gary provides.

My gut says that as long as you're professional (meaning not a parasite) and show potential (even if you just registered a new domain 10 minutes ago, as long as you've made some kind of income with CJ and LS in the past), you're fine.

But, that's just my opinion.

[SSanf]

But, that isn't at all what he said, Billy Kay.

[Haiko de Poel, Jr.]

The problem is .... that is exactly what he means (meant)!

[Trust]

What Billy Kay just said is kind of different from what Gary is saying?

"as long as you've made some kind of income with CJ and LS in the past), you're fine."

What if they're brand spankin' new. What if there site doesn't look so great. Everybody has to start from somewhere. We all started off with 0. If you get denied because of that, you might be denying merchants in that network of some potentially great affiliates.

[UncleScooter]

I'll be the first to admit that I have a few ugly sites. But I will also tell you that they make money.
So what is really important here?

[SSanf]

LOL! Well, I guess we did put poor Gary right on the spot from the git go.

And, I bet it is because of "some horsehockey marketing material" that was pretty ill conceived from an affiliates point of view.

I think Gary needs to re-evaluate what he states he wants and what is an acceptable standard to join the network.

Sure it is nice to get content sites. Sure it is nice to find and mentor start up sites. But, those should not be presented as the criteria for acceptance in the network because that is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[SSanf]

My suggestion to maintain quality would be something along the lines of,

"Only honest (define honest) sites will be accepted. All sites will be given a one year probationary period to start producing (state minimum). Should a site be unable to produce that minimum after one year, all commissions due will be paid and they will be dropped from the network. They may re-apply with a new site or pre-approved upgrades to the old site after six months. At that time, they will be on probation for an additional one year. If an affiliate is dropped twice, they may not re-join without prior approval from me."

Granted that will take time. But, I do not believe there is a magic bullet or short cut to building a network full of quality high producing affiliates.

Saying we will only accept these kinds of sites and not those kinds of sites is simply not going to achieve the desired results.

[Trust]

Just keep the parasites out, that's all you have to do. Track it, pay it, keep it simple, have some nice tools, all that good stuff. And then let the affiliates and merchants do their thing. As far as who to let in, if they're clean that should be good enough.

[ecomcity]

Originally Posted by SSanf

LOL! Well, I guess we did put poor Gary right on the spot from the git go.

And, I bet it is because of "some horsehockey marketing material" that was pretty ill conceived from an affiliates point of view.

I think Gary needs to re-evaluate what he states he wants and what is an acceptable standard to join the network.

Sure it is nice to get content sites. Sure it is nice to find and mentor start up sites. But, those should not be presented as the criteria for acceptance in the network because that is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The whole issue over pre-qualification requirements would become moot if Gary decided to publish the Avantlink networkwide conversion ratios monthly. Anyone then could drool over getting to those merchants and grade their own pre-sell targeting performance.

[Chuck Hamrick]

Looks like Gary's first draft of his marketing term paper got taken to task here. Seems like he is asking for your input and is willing to consider your arguements. So do you want the network to just be a check cutter or do you want them to be a partner working in the best interest of the affiliate AND the merchant. Seems like Gary is offering you what you have been asking for over the years. Don't kill the messenger!!

[SSanf]

I think we cross posted. I went on the assumption that he is indeed seeking input. So, I offered what, to me, seems like a good idea of a good idea.

[Trust]

That alone would be a good topic for it's own thread. What affiliates want out of a network. I have to disagree with you on you thinking affiliates want networks as partners to be in the mix. One of the things I hate about Performics is having to go thru them to get to the merchant when I have a question or something. They've been responsive but I still like dealing directly with the merchant. Tracking and cutting a check is in the best interest. I don't need a network telling me I'm ok so then i can go partner with merchants. That's what the merchants should be doing. If an affiliate is clean, that should good enought. Affiliates and merchants = partners. As far as Google and PR of a page and page saturation. They have enough power. Keep them out of this.

"Seems like Gary is offering you what you have been asking for over the years."

The only thing I've ever wanted from a network is one that works and listens to its customers (affiliates/merchants). A good example is check out the Best Network threads, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005. Linkshare won it 2002, 2003, SAS one year only had 5% of the vote. Now check 2004 and 2005. What happened? You had Brian that actually listened and implemented and now are the favorite network. Linkshare, doesn't listen to a word. And companies that don't listen to their customers usually don't last.

[Chuck Hamrick]

TrustNo1, the one thing I hate about CJ is going through them to communicate with the affiliate. But they give the benefit of being able to work with other networks. The thing I like about LS is the ability to work directly with the affiliate but they are exclusive.

AvantLink (in my opinion) is trying to benefit the merchant by bringing quality players to them. To do that they are being a bit exclusive. They are protecting the affiliates in the network by trying to keep parasites out. Give Gary and Scott your opinions and they will listen.

The whole issue over pre-qualification requirements would become moot if Gary decided to publish the Avantlink networkwide conversion ratios monthly. Anyone then could drool over getting to those merchants and grade their own pre-sell targeting performance.

I have seen this asked before by affiliates and know they do it on SAS. Gary, you listening?