Agreeing with Kevin Frazier

From: Gary Cooley <cooley_at_mtnhome.com>
Date: Wed 14 Nov 2001 21:03:20 -0500

Kevin Frazier wrote: "I personally think we could
see a much better return, and far more user
acceptance, if we scaled down the ad arsenal
(delivery options), and better matched advertising
opportunities to the sites they run on. I truly
believe we would begin to see advertisers marry
their brand to specific sites and become long term
customers of sites that best match their audience.
Sure we must continue to explore, but creating
relationships that work well is what it is all
about."

This is exactly what we have been doing for seven
years now Kevin. For us, you are 100 percent right!
And we have kept the same customers for those same
seven years. They pay a flat monthly fee to have a
banner ad on our site(s). No Flash, no rich media,
no rotation, no CPA crap - all from a $10 per month
virtual server. If they do not pay their bill, off
the banner goes - but that has never happened.
Just basic static banners that are always there, on
the same site, every week, every month, every year,
and basic banner, nothing every changes, so its a
cash cow for us. Do they work?

Well, not by the standards this list goes by. But in
terms of business for our customers, yes. Our
customers are happy with the performance. All we do
is supply a traffic report from time to time showing
how many visits referred to the customer's site from
those banners. That is it. That is all our customers
need to keep paying for this program, month after
month, year after year. We make no sales calls, we
have no discussion about whether or not the banners
are working. The traffic report takes care of that.
And we have never had a customer call to say they
wanted to cancel. We are in a very competitive market,
and those banners make the difference.

The banners send traffic because, as Kevin points out,
they are "better matched to the sites they run on". I
have posted this information before, as much as two
years ago. But for most, our program is just too simple
to believe. It sure works, makes money for us. But it
is so unusual, so simple, very few can even comprehend
it. Nobody on this list would believe the success we
have. But we are starting our eighth year, we are still
in business, and we have all the work we can handle. We
are not getting rich, but we are making money, a decent
living. If we duplicated our program I have no doubts
we could triple our sales. But rest assured I would not
try to sell it to the companies the people on this list
have to work with!

My point is this: We are attempting to attract the very
same consumers that all of the hard-working
professionals on this list are also trying to reach.
That may be the only thing we all have in common. And
those consumers holding the dollars all our clients
want to capture could care less if the banner is a
static or a rich media so long as it offers something
they are interested in. If the basic, simple banners are
working for us on those same consumers, why will they
not work for the "big guys"?

All I can say to the list is that as long as you have to
deal with the constraints you now must, it can't be
worth it. I'd go nuts. Success does not have to be that
hard! What we see on our program is that either the
demand is there, or it is not. If the demand is there,
even a simple stupid static banners works. Like Kevin
says, "marry their brand to specific sites and become
long term customers" I know that goes against the world
you all must live in, but in mine it pays a great number
of bills and for an occasional vacation.

Good luck with your ideas Kevin!

Gary Cooley
Ozark Mountains Website









Received on Wed Nov 14 2001 - 20:03:20 CST