Re: Policing 3rd party ads

From: Wayne Browning <info_at_homepagers.com>
Date: Wed 18 Oct 2000 15:37:27 -0500

MARCY SHIPE <shipe_at_erols.com> WROTE:
> The size limit for ads served on my site is 12k. I can
> reject a banner that doesn't meet my company's specs,
> however, I'm having a hard time policing redirects, or
> ads served by a 3rd party. I currently use
> Doubleclick's DART for publishers to serve ads on my
> site, and they have no way of rejecting a redirected ad
> based on size. Has anyone else run into this problem,
> and if so, how are you handling it?

yes always! we now sell directly, besides for those who
follow the business papers and stocks Doubleclick is
dying a slow death.

Over-inflated infrastructure being the a culprit as
well as "relations" between publishers and advertisers,
account for much. For a network that claims targeting,
isn't it amazing to see the ads they send to your site
as a publisher. I wonder if advertisers are aware of
actually how untargeted these campaigns become. No
mystery, they have limited ability to control things in
the volumes they handle. When will media buyers start
doing their legwork, relying on networks to appease ad
clients is creating the impression that ads do not
work.

On our sites we deliver clients ads , since we are a
small publishing company we handle each client as if it
was our only one. we price our ads according to what we
know, from hands on experience, is fair for our
clients. we have clients with ct rates over 5% an some
in the .8-1.2 % , the cpm is priced according to
response rates.

We also tell a client up front if his offer is or is
not suited, better a happy rejection of an order than a
diminishing of performance overall. I suggest
publishers solicit their own advertisers while
advertisers learn to seek out their own targeted ad
placements.

Wayne Browning
Homepagers





Received on Wed Oct 18 2000 - 15:37:27 CDT