Re: Do publishers and networks want money?

From: Andrew Bourland <andy_at_bourland.com>
Date: Mon 28 Jan 2002 11:17:19 -0500

Scott Brew <Scott_at_Adtegrity.com> wrote
 
>>> $10 for a test? You're joking, right?
>
>>> They're turning down your money because it will take
>>> more time to sign papers and traffic the ad than it
>>> will take to complete the campaign. In addition, the
>>> labor alone in setting up a campaign far exceeds $10.
>
>>> I don't think your expectations are realistic.

On 1/24/02 "Mark Hopkins" <mark.hopkins_at_powerpackedads.com> wrote:

>
> No I wasn't joking, although I certainly meant to be
> provocative. Actually many sites/networks do have a $10
> minimum, it's just they fail on another point. (Several
> get very close to being acceptable, unfortunately not
> close enough).

It's tragic that there is ANY publisher that would accept
this deal. It's insulting. It's not worth the time and the
trouble to execute, and labels you as a client who may not
be worth the trouble.

My experience has been that when a buyer is a pain and a
cheapskate before the deal is done, they'll be even worse
once you're doing business with them. And usually, they're
pretty darned slow at paying bills, too.

> To test out that same site: I have to put in more research
> than the site does, and at a probably higher hourly rate.
> This costs me much more. And then if it "fails" I lose the
> $10 as well.

Let's be honest here: what you are looking for is free
advertising.

I've had many people in the past approach me with the "trial
discount" and "free trial" ploy (I'm looking to make a BIG
buy, but I have to try you out first) and almost without
exception, they either a) want the "trial discount price"
permanently or b) they got their free advertising and head
off looking for other suckers.

Unfortunately, you probably do well with this because there
are plenty of desperate publishers these days and lots of
moonlighters for whom an extra $10 might actually mean
something.

> Do you want me to put down $1,000 on every site that I
> need to test? So, perhaps I should go to CJ and find
> 300K affiliates, and instead hand over
> $300,000,000.00 to run my test?

I love it. Either you're paying $10 or you have to spend
$300 million?

That's a ridiculous argument and you know it.

>
> That won't work, so perhaps sites should offer a free
> advertising trial, and if it works then we agree minimums
> etc based on uniques.
>
> Hang on a minute, that's called CPA.

Right. Get your advertising for free, and somehow I get the
funny feeling that the publishers might have to scramble to
get paid, and that you'll question every last click, every
last sale.

You want something for nothing. Yes?

> PowerPackedAds.com is all about letting almost anyone
> produce much more effective ads. It's not about
> complaining that people don't pay high CPMs,
> it's just trying to do something about it.

I think the topic is really about human decency, fairness and
courtesy among those you do business with. The bottomfeeders
and vultures are on a frenzy right now with the tough times
publishers are facing.

My hope is that online publishers will use this time to sharpen
up their business model, develop their audiences to make them
far more attractive and meaningful, and to develop a number of
revenue streams so they don't HAVE to take desperate actions
like accepting CPA deals and $10 "trials"... And if they DO
accept CPA deals, they are lucrative, fair and mutually
verifiable.

> (Do you see what I'm driving at here? Please don't
> shoot the messenger.)

It's not what you are driving at. It's an attitude toward
publishers that I personally find offensive.

When two parties can sit down together and work out a win-win
solution, one that is worth the time and effort on both sides,
and one based upon mutual respect, it's a good thing. This
"$10 trial" doesn't sound at all that way...

Andy
--
Andrew Bourland
http://www.bourland.com
Monitoring the shift from Free to Fee
Currently on Bourland.com:
* SexBlogs.com and Blogger.com
* Jakob Nielsen, JupiterMMXI, Technology Review
* AmericanGreetings.com, Salon Premium and Northern Light





Received on Mon Jan 28 2002 - 10:17:19 CST