Re: No CPA on FrankelBiz?

From: John Gaskill <jg_at_info-central-usa.com>
Date: Mon 19 Nov 2001 21:32:49 -0500

ANDY BOURLAND <andybourland_at_yahoo.com> WROTE:

>JOHN GASKILL <gm_at_info-central-usa.com> WROTE:
>
>> As a practical matter, Rob does not need the hassel or
>> headaches involved with CPA or CPM advertising.
>>
>> With his site and audience (tightly niched), an advertiser
>> can see what s/he gets beforehand. It's then up to the
>> advertiser to decide if s/he likes the buy at the rate
>> offered or wants to try somewhere else.
>
>I'm with you, John. How does that differ from what I was
>saying? I love Rob's advertising practices on FrankelBiz.

Excuse me Andy, but the tone of your post struck me as
derisive of Rob's option, as Publisher, to choose a pricing
structure as he saw fit.

Why does a publisher choose CPM?

Why does a chicken cross the road?

Because they feel it is in their best interest.

While the chicken may only be interested in "getting
on the other side," the publisher chooses CPM
because s/he feels that such a practice is likely
to maximize revenue (assuming a strong market).

On the other hand, CPA is generally requested by
the advertiser or offered by the publisher if the
publication's brand/demographics are not strong
enough to command CPM or Flat Rates.

>> >So why is the philosophy you espouse for other publishers
>> >so at variance with your actual business practice as a
>> >publisher?
>>
>> Nothing in Rob's espoused philosophy is at odds with
>> his actual practices. He has long espoused strong brand
>> identity and knows the result of a strong brand identity
>> is that people want to do deals with you when you have it
>> and don't want to do deals if you don't.
>
>Perhaps you haven't noticed, but Rob on this forum has been
>the primary cheerleader for the CPA/CPC marketers who are
>destroying the industry. He basically questions the guts or
>manhood <womanhood?> of any publisher who won't absorb the
>entire risk of advertising. But in practice on his FrankelBiz
>site, he uses flat rate advertising at no risk to himself.
>He DOES have another site which is exclusively CPA, but it's
>not a content site and would not lend itself to that kind of
>practice.

Nothing that I have read in any of Rob's post leads me to
conclude that he is "cheer leading" on behalf of CPA/CPC
marketers. He is cheer leading on behalf of "staying in
business" because, to paraphrase, "the bottom line is the
bottom line." He, like me, and other participants to this
list have often observed that web publishers need revenue
to stay in business and the only two ways to get it are from
advertisers or subscribers (and that's a whole different set
of threads). The people who are ruining the industry are
publishers producing substandard products and taking any
deal that is out there and aggregators who put advertisers
into lousy products.

Publishers have to understand that whining to this list does
nothing to generate revenue or sympathy.

So the bottom line is: If you can't get a Flat Rate, go for
CPM. If you can't get CPM, go for CPA or CPC but keep
money coming in the door if you want to stay afloat. Times
change. They always do. And if worse comes to worse,
consider the paid subscription model or a hybrid between
advertising and subscriptions.

>> Besides, no advertiser has to do business with FrankelBiz
>> more than once if they fond the results they got not worth
>> the price.
>
>We agree. Though I would say that they aren't going to get
>much results from his crowd by popping a single ad in his
>pub once. Better to establish a longer term relationship
>with his audience.

This is a common fallacy. A well designed, well written ad
tells you right away that it works. People respond.
Conversely a poor ad doesn't work right away. If your ad
pulls no responses the first time you run it you either have
a stinko ad or the wrong medium If you run a tested ad
in a new medium and it doesn't draw, etc., etc., etc.
 
>> It's about being able to say, "No thanks." when the rate
>> offered is not acceptable. That is what a strong brand
>> helps you do.
>
>And I would say that most, if not all content publishers
>should just say no.

And if THEY ALL do, they might get a break. But WE ALL
know that is unrealistic. Most content publishers need
to pay more attention to business and what makes the
world go round (besides Love), and stop worrying about
CPA vs. CPC vs. CPM and do what it takes to stay in
business. Make some deals that work and reject the
ones that don't.

Sorry folks, I got a little carried away this time.

Regards all,

John Gaskill
jg_at_Info-Central-USA.com
http://Info-Central-USA.com





Received on Mon Nov 19 2001 - 20:32:49 CST