NONE: Re: ONLINE-ADS> Value of Test Banners?
Re: ONLINE-ADS> Value of Test Banners?
Herman Tumurcuoglu (hermant_at_microtec.net)
Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:05:46 -0400
I am afraid that I am being quoted out of context because of my personal
experience with LE. So I wanted to clarify.
Scott writes:
>I appreciate Herman's concern about reporting standards and brand
>protection. I fear, however, that most readers will not have the
>familiarity with LinkExchange to place Herman's comments in their
>proper context.
I'm sure people on THIS list are familiar with LinkExchange and I think my
comments properly set the context. In no way did I imply that LE activates
undesirable material and I am sure people know it's a matter of logistics.
One only need to glance at my comments to see that my concern is about the
possibility of changing content or banner positioning or something of that
nature in a network that counts over 100k sites versus a branded network
(in particular DoubleClick) that offers more standardization and hence the
ability to give more accurate reporting, that's all. I did not imply
anything else.
>First, the "improper" reporting from LinkExchange Herman mentions so
>casually refers to undercounting of earned advertising credits
>resulting from specific software testing on our system.
Unfortunately, the aforementioned is wrong. Again, just look at my
comments. I was just referring to being able to show advertisers (and
members) where the distributed banners went (specific URLS or sites) and
what type of branded content and demographic is found there at THIS TIME
(this was mentioned with respect to test runs and my question to a DC
representative which has been answered). I did not mention anything about
undercounting on LinkExchange.
Like I told LE representatives over two weeks ago, undercounting is no
longer an issue for MSI and as an officer of that company I have put the
issue to rest. Since then I only sent an FYI on our closing day stats.
Despite the fact that you may have made a mistake in thinking I was
casually referring to the undercounting issue (it's only natural), I
consider the association of the undercounting incident to my name a form of
nuisance. I am sure you know that I can no longer contest what you have
written about that incident even if it was wrong (to begin with the site
does not even belong to me it belongs to MSI and while we stop displaying
LE banners on our site and ask to return our accumulated banners on hold we
have the account active, we were never credited etc...). I never brought
out the topic on this list and did not want to be implicated since I have
no personal endorsements to give. I would kindly ask that you refer to the
company name if you insist on talking about that particular incident.
Thank you.
Herman Tumurcuoglu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsors:
NO RISK TRIAL OFFER: Buy 100,000 impressions on Hotmail targeted to
your demographic. If you aren't throughly impressed after 2 weeks, we'll
credit your next buy. Details at http://www.hotmail.com/offer.html
--------
The Internet Advertising Report provides daily columns on every aspect
of Web advertising and marketing. It is updated daily and available in
a weekly newsletter. Subscribe at: http://www.internetnews.com/IAR
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Online Advertising Discussion List To Unsubscribe send UNSUBSCRIBE
http://www.o-a.com/ to online-ads-request_at_o-a.com
