NONE: Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Campaign Auditing vs. Fraud
Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Campaign Auditing vs. Fraud
Mark J. Welch (MarkWelch_at_MarkWelch.com)
Mon, 23 Nov 1998 23:56:21 -0600 (CST)
CLAIRE AMUNDSEN SCHAEFFER <WEBMASTER_at_FREEGRAPHICS.COM> WROTE:
>There's been some discussion of protecting advertiser's from
>fraud, but how does a content publisher protect their
>reputation from paranoid advertisers who assume fraud when
>there is none?
>As a content publisher whose site is supported by
>advertising, I was recently surprised by a note from
>ClickTrade stating that the payout of one of my ClickTrade
>accounts was being reduced from $0.11 to $0.06 per click
>because of a "Continuing pattern of suspicious clicks".
> * * * I contacted the advertiser who sent the
>following response: "Yes, I reduced your payout because a
>significant number of clicks on the ad or link at your site
>were NOT resulting in traffic ever arriving at my site. The
>pattern is not as abusive as some sites (frequently I find
>sites that generate ONLY clicks that never actually get to
>my site, and they are cut to zero and reported as
>fraudulent). Your site is generating a moderate number of
>these unacceptable clicks, so I reduced the payout rate. If
>the problem persists, I will reduce the payout rate to
>zero."
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Claire is writing about me. I carefully monitor my paid
ClickTrade links, and when any site is generating a
substantial percentage of paid clicks which do NOT
result in activity at my site (e.g. ClickTrade records
the clicks, but those visitors never trigger any of the
depth detectors at my site), I terminate my payment
relationship with the site. In Claire's case, I detected
a "mixture" -- some valid clicks but some clicks that
appeared invalid.
Let me be clear: I don't believe Claire was cheating,
nor are some of the other ClickTrade sites I terminate.
There are many valid reasons why traffic might not
"make it" from the original click to the destination site,
or why visitors might even visit my site without being
detected (surfing with graphics off, for example). But I
can only use the tools I have, and when I see that I am
being asked to pay for traffic that appears to have low
value, I must make a business decision.
CLAIRE AMUNDSEN SCHAEFFER <WEBMASTER_at_FREEGRAPHICS.COM> WROTE:
>I * * * requested that the advertiser please send me the
>numbers he was basing this decision on -- I *know* I was not
>abusing the system, I wanted to see the stats. that led him
>to believe I was. No response.
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Claire is correct: I generally do NOT disclose my techniques
to sites that are terminated, because there is a substantial
pool of "fraudmeisters" within ClickTrade who simply re-open
accounts and try new cheating techniques. (Again, I don't
believe Claire is cheating, but my policy is to NOT disclose
my techniques -- a policy I adopted from the industry, where
techniques for detecting cheated are frequently requested
but NEVER disclosed.)
CLAIRE AMUNDSEN SCHAEFFER <WEBMASTER_at_FREEGRAPHICS.COM> WROTE:
> So out of a total of 19 clicks (or better yet, seven clicks
>since I'm guessing I was not under suspicion of fraud when
>my pay rate was *raised*), according to the advertiser, my
>site generated a "moderate number" of clicks which didn't
>make it to the advertiser's site and I was reported to
>ClickTrade for "suspicious pattern of clicks". This is the
>*Internet* for crying out loud -- not every click goes
>through.
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Darn right: the majority of ClickTrade host sites generate
only one (or fewer) clicks per day, but there are many
dozens of them at any time carrying my ads, and at any
given time, at least half of them are cheating. I have learned
that if I retain sites with "poor" performance, they never turn
into sites with "good" performance. I have to make fast
business decisions -- and I'm not going to spend a lot of
time trying to explain myself. (Indeed, that's what ClickTrade
recommends to its advertisers: cut your losses and move on.)
Cheating is epidemic among ALL ADVERTISING NETWORKS:
I have detected cheating when advertising in FlyCast, ValueClick,
and ClickTrade. Remember that my whole entry into this
business came because of the Commonwealth Network, which
was itself plagued by cheaters (indeed, the company quite
credibly stated that during one month, it wrote checks for
$250,000 of which the majority was fraudulently earned --
that doesn't justify the company's later fraudulent actions and
refusals to pay its legitimate member sites, but it was a true
problem of frightening proportions).
I have not done substantial advertising elsewhere, or I am
absolutely confident that I would also be able to report
cheating on other advertising networks also.
In every case, the ad network vendors express great concern
about cheating and are happy to receive information, but in
actual behavior they are all extremely "passive" about dealing
with cheating: they won't admit it is happening unless given
absolute proof, and they don't seem to do much about it
(although admittedly, the competitive advantage that comes
from effective fraud-detection, and the crippling economic
effects of being caught cheating, make it unrealistic to expect
any vendor to honestly respond to queries). My experience
continues to be that only the most abusive cheaters are
detected or caught (unless I complain and present detailed
proof -- which isn't proof that the vendor cares, but only that
they know they can't continue in the face of clear proof from
a vocal consumer-advocate and, perhaps more important, an
attorney).
Given the widespread abuses, I must operate my ad campaigns
in a way that works within that system (or not use the system
at all). In fact, I have actually suspended ALL new ClickTrade
campaigns because the time spent monitoring and cutting off
cheaters far exceeded the value of the campaign.
While a "high-paying" campaign within ClickTrade is a magnet
for cheaters (and 11 cents per click is actually a very high rate
within the ClickTrade system), there are also swarms of sites
that pursue every cheating opportunity, even one-cent-per-click
deals. (Indeed, the ratio of cheaters there is much higher, since
most legitimate sites won't accept such low rates.)
Finally, a caveat: if I were not actively monitoring my ClickTrade
advertising, and quickly terminating sites, I estimate that I would
easily be spending well over $100 per day, of which 95% to 99%
would be for truly fraudulent traffic. (Again, I have never accused
Claire of generating fraudulent traffic, just that her traffic proved to
be of very low value for me.)
-- Mark J. Welch, Web Site Banner Advertising
-- http://www.markwelch.com/bannerad/
-- Ad rates: http://www.markwelch.com/bannerad/baf_spon.htm
-- (925) 462-8483 voice - Pleasanton, California
========================================================================
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsors:
ValueClick, MarketWave and The Mining Co.
ValueClick can guarantee you instant revenue on 100% of your ad space
For non-exclusive, flexible solutions that work w/ existing CPM sales,
contact us today: ValueClick http://www.valueclick.com/members.html
---
Is your advertising RETURN ON INVESTMENT closer to 0%, 50%, or 100%?
Hit List can tell you. Click here to find out how.
http://www.marketwave.com/default.htm?AdName=OA7&AdSource=OA
---
NOBODY DELIVERS ONLINE BUYERS LIKE THE MINING CO. _at_Plan says Mining Co.
users are more likely to buy online than users of the average navigation
site. To reach them, contact Alan Wragg (awragg_at_miningco.com)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
========================================================================
Online Advertising Discussion List To Unsubscribe send UNSUBSCRIBE
http://www.o-a.com/ to online-ads-request_at_o-a.com
