Moose on the Loose

As you are probably aware a few of today’s larger search engines have historically used sponsored listings or back fill results from other sources, and simply branded in their own image msn, yahoo & ask jeeves are to name but a few.

A small, non time consuming, un-innovative side project we are embarking on is to reproduce something similar utilising what is currently available out there, to offer user functionality which is fairly similar to any other search engine whereby some search engines look familiar in the way results are displayed, together with similar userability.

However we have a few interesting innovative ideas up our sleeves on how to monetise those results more effectively, something we have trialled with existing sites with some success without too much effort. We are confident this little twist will reap dividends.

We have absolutely no delusions of grandeur, but our initial target is to gain 10k (10,000) UV’s (Unique Visitors) a day by end of Quarter 1 rising to 100k UV’s by year end. We feel this would be easily achievable & reward us with a nice modest income to supplement what we already earn.

Initially we will be starting with the UK market & duplicating the formula to other english speaking nations such as the US. Other territories will be rolled out once we are satisfied with the results, but cross promotion will assist in ski ramping the sites. One of our main focuses will be to ensure that results displayed are demographically clean & relevant to a UV’s country with geo-targeting to assist this both from a users & advertisers perspective.

The Buy.at Beta Management Area (MA V3.0) & Accompanying Toolkit has been launched with the intention of being an easier way for affiliates to access more information about programmes with a much needed improved functionality & reporting.

We are in the process of testing to the limits we require for our own daily purposes, ensuring it delivers the “nuts & bolts” of what is required “together with a few “bells & whistles”. The old system was particularly poor & clunky to say the least, but if Buy.at are to be considered a serious contender for the affiliate network throne in 2007, this is just one necessity for them in order to attract more big named & and / or quality clients.

Judging by the face of it, it is an improvement, but I will have to play around with it properly for some time over the festive season.

Affiliates browsing the Toolkit by sector will be able discover the latest promotions, affiliate incentives, last order dates & hopefully more.

During the prelude until Christmas Buy.at will be daily updating the Toolkit with information regarding the better performing programmes in terms of the hottest selling products, CR’s (conversion rates) & EPC’s in order for affiliates to maximise the most out of available promotions n the few days remaining. I just hope this is regularly maintained & updated.
The Beta launch of their new Management Area (MA V3.0) & Toolkit, can be accessed using your usual login details. Please note, that as this is a Beta application, the existing Management Area will continue to be available, until such time as they move from Beta to a full application launch. This upgrade sees the inclusion of many new features in what they hope will benefit affiliates by providing an excellent platform which they will be adding to throughout 2007 and beyond.

For further information about the launch and the key benefits of MAV3.0, the Introductory Guide can be downloaded from https://users.buy.at/mgt/introduction.pdf

Also, you may want to check out https://users.buy.at/marketingtoolkit

My advice to Buy.at which has been reiterated to them directly on a number of occasions is to go back to their roots. When they first launched, there was a buzz in the industry, they seemed genuinely in touch with how different affiliate marketing was to mainstream business & had their feet firmly on the ground. However during 2006 in my opinion they became a little arrogant & got above their station with the capture of big brands being primarily due to their previous popularity. With the whiff of cartel like pay closed groups in the pay per click market & poorer than acceptable affiliate support. Let us see if they can walk the walk & follow through with their intentions, in their commitment to change all that for the better like they have assured me. Let’s hope they do because their potential is huge .. All we can do is see.

With reference to comments about the new Buy.at platform, postings made by affiliates can be viewed on the following A4U Forum thread.

If you view the right hand side margin, you can see we have a “Mooses Network League Table” of how we rank affiliate networks, who have affiliate programs belonging to merchants we currently deal with. As you can see Commission Junction are firmly & deservedly rooted amongst last place for a multitude of reasons which would be too long a story with multiple instances to enter within one simple blog entry.

This is not a direct reflection of the programs or merchants on their network, whereby there a considerably number we would like to promote more extensively than what we currently do by delivering the volume & quality custom, but sometimes you get a network which is a hindrance to both affiliate (s) & merchant (s) for that relationship to flourish.

Commission Junction have nearly always be the bane of our lives for a multitude of reasons, the aggregate of minor problems we have had with any other network since being an affiliate cannot compare to those we have endured with CJ. Unfortunately we share that discomfort with other fellow colleagues who have been in industry for quite a while pre 2000.

Remember it was a group of us on this side of the pond in the United Kingdom, who pioneered the beating or the massive withdrawal / retreat of spyware / adware & stopping networks for using these companies to a certain degree.

In our opinion CJ were one of the reluctant to change. As we jointly tackled CJ UK from these shores & even brought it up at CJU in Santa Barbara about 3 years when they were perceived to be in denial claiming it wasn’t illegal or unethical. However that is just one minor encounter from history.

Maybe one day I’ll bore you to tears over a jar about the trials & tribulations of Commission Junction. But to get on track, I want to pose the question:

Are Commission Junction the School Playground Bully?

In my personal opinion, YES they are and I will elaborate examples gradually through the history of this blog as it flourishes.

But one thing for sure with these bullies, the only way to tackle them is to square up to them nose to nose & let their clients & fellow affiliates (on forums) know exactly why they are potentially on the wrong network, and that wrong network being Commission Junction.

Just to mention the 2nd part Fraser’s interview with Nicky Iapino from Affili.net) is now live

Click Here for Part Two

Thinking out loud based on the posting I just read on the A4U Forum.

If Affiliate A places a merchant banner on a their site (earning commission via CPA basis only), as we know banners notoriously have low CTR’s. Visitor(s) remember the brand whilst on your site, a later sequence of events ensues, the Visitor(s) remembers the brand in the banner & types name into a search engine. The Visitor(s) either go via natural listings or merchants adverts. Affiliate A receives no remuneration (gets no commission) for displaying ads.

Perhaps there is a call for there to be a default CPM, payment per 1000 impressions, in any merchant’s banners displayed on an affiliates site.

Another scenario, Affiliate A does the pre-sell with a Banner on their site. Again a later sequence of events follows, the Visitor(s) remembers the brand in the banner & types name into a search engine. The Visitor(s) this time goes through an affiliate link belonging to a privileged affiliate who is part of a closed bidding group. Why should Affiliate A bother promoting the merchant in the first place?

Maybe it’s become a time where there shouldn’t be any more free brand exposure for merchants via banners & brand logo’d creatives & affiliates to be fairly remunerated for displaying these.

I will have to ponder on this some more, but we have generally been reluctant or not displayed banners at all for the aforementioned reasons as well as the fact banners generally don’t have any Whoopee Doo factor … btw … have you ever noticed in NMA how they get so excited when a merchant has created a new 120×60 creative & give it a quarter page spread … Whoopee “Bloomin” Doo … anyhow instead networks & merchants should be focusing on more up to date technology, like what we have been requesting for a significant period of time like full API Product Feeds to easily create price comparison / product search sites & Streaming Media Ads like TV Commercials. The industry is just lagging even further behind.

Perhaps the traditional model of CPA should not necessarily be phased out, but evolve into hybrid commission structures comprising of two or more of the following elements … CPA. CPC, CPM & PPL & PPCall, thus fairly remunerating affiliate efforts for displaying banners & certainly applying to poor converting merchants.

P.S. I have just had this link passed to me from Fraser … Cheers Mate … for In Stream Video Advertising Click Here

There needs to be more innovation from Networks, Perhaps more will follow suit, following like Lambs. Rather than in 2007 being left like Lambs to the Slaughter.
Note:

CPA – Cost (Payment) Per Acquisition (Sale)
CPC – Cost (Payment) Per Click
CPM – Cost (Payment) Per 1000 Impressions of a Displayed Banner. M represents the Roman numerical for 1000,
PPL – Paid (Payment) Per Lead (Registering or Application)
PPCall – Paid (Payment) Per Call (Telephone Call)

In the right hand column, you can now view “Mooses Network League Table” which is my personal ratings of affiliate networks we currently deal with. It consists of variable factors & opinions all weighed differently. From Trust to Loyalty, Openness & Honesty, Quality of Programs, Affiliate Support, Active Participation in Affiliate Community, Resolution of Problems & Queries, Tracking & Reporting, Quality of Interface etc …

… Basically those towards the top generally “Get It!”

Get It! – Is usually attributed to an individual person(s) within the Affiliate Marketing Industry … who know What it’s About & What it’s Meant to Be About & Know Where It Should Be Going. They not only “Talk the Talk”, but also “Walk the Walk”. They are active … not inert … & strive for fairer practices & positive improvements within the industry & certainly don’t sit on the fence or allow themselves to be intimated. They are the David’s, in a David versus Goliath industry, who realise it can actually be made a more level playing field than others realise.

They are the Boaz of the affiliate marketing industry. Boaz denotes “In Strength”

Therefore those towards the top of the league table receive preferential listings with regard to … say for example … links for an affiliate program which maybe on more than one network. Between 2nd and 5th there really isn’t anything in it, and contrastly 8th, 9th & last position are a long way behind 7th place.

In due course, we’ll blog a quick opinion of each network, with regard to movers & shakers. Like who we are expecting great things from & those which may not have fulfilled their promised potential. Even down to those we think won’t be around for long … or to be more scandalous, the industry would be a better place without them.

But, on a positive front, like any business, next year I think we can expect some really good things from a couple of networks, irrelevant of where they are in the league table, whilst several might not evolve … yet again .. &missing another opportunity & endure a annus horribilis once more.

If you are one of the very few who has arrived here via our Google Adwords Advert via the search on my name or namesake, then a warm welcome to you.

As of the time of this post it has only received 22 impressions & 4 clicks with a CTR of 18.18% and Avg. CPC of $0.04

For the record, unlike what the Ebay advert suggests on the following link, I am not for sale nor up or auction on Ebay, I cannot be bought .. oh … unless it’s my my favourite curry … and no it doesn’t contain Moose Meat as an ingredient … that would be cannibalism.
For those who are wondering what the heck I am on about, visit the following links which is a search on my name & read the relevant thread in the A4U Forum. It questions Ebay’s or their partners unethical practice on bidding on protected trademarks and/or properties & inappropriate phrases whether it’s deemed as passing off … or .. derogatory words or keywords that clearly contravenes Google so called Quality Standards.

Click Here for A4U Forum
Click Here for Google Adwords Ad

I am a little disappointed nobody has bidded on me, oh well, at least my children love me.

Let’s see how long it takes Google Adwords to disapprove our relevant advert & allow Ebays irrelevant one as seen here at the current time of posting.

Just incase they do, we have taken the liberty of collecting a screen grab for you.

The simple intention of this particular blog is an amusing send up of Googles questionable & irrelevant Quality Score with a suggested bias against affiliates in it’s algorithmic behaviour, in favour of the bigger, deep pocket corporations like Ebay, and the double standards & unfair practices we feel are happening in the industry which will be well documented in due course and should be brought forward to industrial bodies.

I will add to this at a slightly later date but for the time being enjoy the thread on the A4 Forum, but remember the serious undertones in the infringement of your business & trademarks whether you are an affiliate or merchant, and ascertain for yourselves where the faults & reasons lie … Because this blog will eventually attempt to uncover the answers to the question “How Deep Does the Rabbit Hole Go!”

A Message to Ebay & Google: ” Pack It In You Moose Pimps .. This is Moose Abuse & The Moose Cannot Be Bought” … Quote kindly suggested by a friend.

Before you get too excited, we are not talking of exposure in the sense of paparazzi style photos of catching merchants in publicly embarrassing predicaments or any conspiracy theories … well not yet anyhow.

If you have a decent enough website whether it’s one that is aesthetically pleasing to the eye … or … achieves decent volumes of sales … or … has decent quality traffic .. or any combination of the above. Granted some of our websites do need improving to achieve a standard we are fully satisfied with. The kind of benchmark we should be setting would be to simply ask yourself whether you would use your own site as a visitor & absorb as much constructive criticism from experienced colleagues in the industry or friends & family to firstly suggest then yourself make the necessary enhancements whether it be functionality, design (look & feel) and/or content.

Anyway, getting back on track, Considering the number of affiliate programs we have to choose & select from nowadays… Could some affiliates request lump sum payments from merchants for preferential placement or increased exposure on top of any commission level received?

Granted we are in a PBMI (Performance Based Marketing Industry), but has the industry now evolved enough & circumstances changed that we can now be bold enough to offer this option to merchants to take up if they so desire?

One of my permanently bookmarked sites has got to be the Podcasts on Fraser’s Affiliate Marketing Blog www.affiliateblog.co.uk

The latest Podcast is already the 13th, in what we hope will be an ever lasting sequence of broadcasts, is with Nicky Iapino from Affili.net “The Undisputed Queen In Affiliate Marketing” and an interview we have been looking forward to on top of some recognised & respected folk within the affiliate marketing industry.

Click Here for the Podcast Interview with Nicky Iapino

Fraser has really helped bring affiliate marketing forward with a number of interesting, insightful & entertaining Podcasts with the natural sultry tone of his gentle Edinburgh accent to get the female audience swooning.

Past Podcasts include interviews with Clarke Duncan from Paidonresults, Jason Dale from Loquax, Graham Keen from Buyagift, Kieron Donoghue from UK Offer, Jess Luthi, Keith Budden and more.

Fraser “An avid Falkirk supporter” is no doubt the nicest guy i know in the industry & a terrific friend … We are really fortunate to have some fantastic, solid friends in the industry, some of whom stayed with us at our Villa in the Algarve, Portugal … Keep up the excellent work mate!

Some Questions we proposed were:

Q1. Do you feel we have maybe reached a critical supply & demand threshold, whereby there are maybe now too many merchants & not enough “quality” affiliates?

Q2. Having worked at several networks in your impressive career to date, what proportion of revenue would you say is approximately derived from PPC affiliates either driving traffic directly to a merchant to or via an affiliates own landing pages / websites?

Q4. The concept of an Affiliate Association has already lost momentum, why do you think this is & what can be done to bring it back on track?

Q5. With Kelkoo, Pricerunner & Dealtime now making their product feeds available to carefully selected affiliates. Do you think networks have lost the edge in not developing a viable competitive solution when there was an opportunity to a couple of years ago?

Q6. I don’t want a political answer to this one. Judging by what’s currently happening in the marketplace, what do you think is Google’s perception & attitude of/ towards affiliates? And do we now have conclusive evidence that it can now be deemed unfavourable.
Q7. If in the near future affiliates were not permitted to use Google Adwords, what measures should a network, and affiliates for that matter, be taking to counter what will be a massive shortfall?

Q8. With the plethora of wealth & talent in the affiliate marketing industry, why hasn’t it developed it’s own search engine to rival Google, with the full marketing force of affiliates behind it to promote the viable alternative?

Q9. How will the role of a network change in the foreseeable future?

Q10. What’s the secret to looking so good?

We recently conducted this lengthy & tedious task on all networks and noticed a lack of continuity & ambiguity. Where it is ambiguous, we refrain from brand named bidding.

Several points we would like to note & NETWORK XYZ should observe were brought to attention at meetings or discussions with ourselves, was that there are several possible points of reference for a keyword policy, in places these are in confliction with each other. It is the sole responsibility of NETWORK XYZ and/or the account managers to ensure that there is Only a Single Point of Reference for keyword policy for any given merchant. If any changes are made, they MUST all update simultaneously, any changes made, no matter how minute, should automatically send an email to affiliates, notifying them that changes have been made, with the keyword policy contained both within the email and to refer to admin interface. Not all affiliates I am sure refer to the several points to source keyword policy, maybe only one.

What is incredibly infuriating, are when changes are made by account managers whereby affiliates are not suitably notified, this indiscretion is commonplace amongst all networks and happens all too frequently. Even a full stop “.” or a space” ” on restricted or negative keywords can make a significant difference to a campaign. Even more so when blame is deflected to affiliate, when the fault lies with the network who seem just to want to look favourable in the clients eyes. Now, genuine errors can be made by any party, as much as anyone being fallible without intent to circa navigate policies, so there needs to be tolerance & understanding from all those involved. It should never be a “put up & shut up” scenario.

In addition, we know of restricted keyword policies that have not been updated on system, again commonplace across networks.

One of the weakest links, is when there is meant to be restricted keyword policy or it’s inaccurate or incomplete, but more problematic is that the NETWORK XYZ system says refer to merchants FAQ, however a majority of the time this is blank with no details on merchants page to refer to. With regard to some of the points required for a clear & concise keyword policy I will come onto next, but NETWORK XYZ also have to take responsibility too, which we hope will be the outcome of this & the meetings, leaving little room for confusion and harmonious & responsible working relationships.

While no doubt there will be a massive knee jerk reaction and exponential increase in keyword restrictions, networks must be careful they do not become too paranoid that this fragments & decimates the affiliate market industry for the worse, whilst there is too much focus on keyword policy than useful content for the affiliate to use. Another point of paramount important is a single point of reference of a keyword policy, whereby it is imperative the policies are not scattered around various tabs & worse still inconsistent. It is the directive of a network to ensure a “single point of reference” and with any changes however minute that an email notification is both sent out & included within any internal email. However, I am inclined to feel this may not overall happen correctly.

Food for thought, what is the difference between bidding on a brand via SEM or appearing for brand on SEO, why is the former being crucified.

—————————————
Amalgamation of Suggestions
—————————————

Here is a brief summary of what we expect to see as part of concise keyword policies, in conjunction with above

a) Can an affiliate send traffic directly to the merchants website from ppc search engines – Using their url as the display url? Also which PPC Search Engines does this apply to, since only Google has a single URL restriction policy.

b) Can an affiliate bid on the merchants brand name? e.g. Dell

c) Can an affiliate bid on Hybrid Phrase = merchant brand name + generic term (e.g. Dell Computer, etc.)? e.g. “Dell” being the brand & “Computer” being the Generic. When conjoined forms the Hybrid “Dell Computer”

Please note: that other competitor ads will probably appear for those bidding on the generic term aspect of the hybrid phrase in a broadmatch. Does the merchant want to lose out on this potential ad coverage to MULTIPLE competitors, who affiliates can advertise on behalf of too?

d) If the merchant has restrictions – what EXACT TERMS CAN AN AFFILIATE NOT BID ON – if they don’t include this, the affiliate might induce they have a free reign. Blanket terms of misspellings & variations etc., is NOT ACCEPTABLE! With regard to these terms which the merchant should hold trademarks too, if negative keywords are requested, are they exact match, broadmatch or phrase match? This is important. Also full stops & spaces can make a difference. Is there a maximum bid imposed?

Please note: Has the merchant registered these phrases (trademarks) they “actually” own the marks to with Google? Also the merchant should provide the trademark numbers as proof to affiliates. Does the merchant also own the marks to the hybrid phrases (brand + generic). Granted though providing Trademark numbers may not be practical, though perhaps it will prove clarification if presented at network level.

e) Can the affiliate bid on Brand terms and /or Hybrids to send traffic through to their own website or a specific landing page designed by the affiliate & approved by the network and/or merchant? If a check is required?

f) Can an affiliate bid on misspellings & variations? However does the merchant actually own the marks to these? Is the merchant over-stepping their boundaries?

g) Can an affiliate bid on generic & targeted product related terms & send directly to the merchants website using their display url?

h) Does the merchant conduct their own in house ppc campaign or is it run by a ppc agency or possibly even the network (if a network, there is then a conflict of interest)?

i) Who is currently giving the merchant the advice about PPC policy? Has the merchant actually consulted affiliates for a balanced presentation? Or have they simply said what some agency ill advised them to do or maybe a network is too polite & meek to mention (A yellow bellied nodding dog in the case of one or two OTHER networks)? Some agencies may impressively provide the bells & whistles with corporate speak, bumpf & power point presentations with colloquial vocabulary, but realistically an affiliate could demonstrate the nuts & bolts of it all in more layman’s terms.

j) Does the program have a closed group policy for certain affiliates? Did the network or account manager pick via teachers pet syndrome or was this presented / tendered to a number of affiliates whom may be suitable candidates but were overlooked? If there is a closed group this too should be mentioned, and may prevent some affiliates making assumptions …. Like “If he’s doing it, then I’m doing it”
k) Continuing with whether the merchant actually owns the marks to these misspellings or variations? Have they tried registering these with Google (though they never used to accept these they may now well consider misspellings in certain cases)? This may prevent some problems.

l) Also, to all the above questions, if there is an objection by the merchant or their representative, we would need to know their full reasoning pertaining to that decision so that the merchant can be correctly guided or communicated with directly with “certain other parties” not involved on a case by case basis, however there would be considerable overlap. Formulating a “book of rebuttal” or polite “white paper” to educate merchants about search engine marketing, focusing on how some imposed restrictions could stunt the growth of their program & consequently any positive brand awareness or ROI.

m) Where to every question put forward a merchant we have to ask “IF NOT WHY NOT” to ascertain if their reasoning is well thought out or they were incorrectly influenced or simply knee jerk reactions through ignorance. As we suspect, some networks get merchants on board by saying they will restrict affiliates as much as possible in the PPC Arena.
n) Perhaps there should be further discussions to the advantages & disadvantages (pros & cons) to each point.

p) Can I use the brand name in the sub domain or directory url of my own domain name? Though the merchant has no right to prohibit me and shouldn’t even come into the discussion. Though stupidly, one particular network has included this a prerequisite option.

q) Can the affiliate use the brand name in the title of an ad, or advert copy?

r) Keyword policies & NETWORK XYZ intended contract needs to be fair and balanced without being too inhibitive to affiliates, which I am sure is NETWORK XYZ intention – not a “put up & shut up” and consequently being left in the cold.

s) But firstly, let’s set out the minimal information & guidelines or rules we require in order to adhere to and ensure from NETWORK XYZ there is 100% communication from them, on both existing policies & future changes, no matter how minute.

u) Notification of changes to any PPC Policy should come under contract law, where a suitable period of grace is given to implement any changes, as it is changes to the terms & conditions of any agreement … these also communicated effectively to affiliates by several methods, not just one telephone, email and/or internal messaging system.
RELATED POSTS

Networks Changing PPC Policy Without Due Notification

http://www.a4uforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=42750

PPC : Closed Groups for Bidding on Brand

http://www.a4uforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=40705

Networks Advising Incorrectly on Display URL’s

http://www.a4uforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=42734