Just heard that OB is now mandating that any/every mailer currently on their network remove private WhoIs registration or cease mailing their offers. How many of you are getting the same message from them? And more importantly - who thinks it's total bullshit for a network to dictate how a mailer mails? This is clearly their reaction to the latest shit coming out of California, but it doesn't make it right IMO. layingball:
Well - they might be if you're only looking for CPC networks with a 48 hour delay in reporting... :15:
Would you rather make .50 on a CPC and know it right away, or get $1.50 and wait 48 hours? roud: I mean I hear ya, the waiting does suck, and does get in the way of making decisions... the real truth is that, most of their offers are so damn good, you hardly ever take a loss. CPCs dont just dive down to .02 a click like on <cough> some other platforms.
Anyway.. with regard to the domain WHO/IS thing, I don't see the big deal. You have your address in your email body (I hope!) - whats the difference if it's tied to the domain? Anybody who receives your email gets the address anyway..
Bro - I know the deal with OB and I agree - I was poking fun much as nickphx was (I think) but the point is I do not agree with any network telling me how I have to do my job. If I'm compliant on all fronts (and as far as I know there's no WhoIs private/not private clause as to which is compliant and which isn't) then who the fuck are they to tell me anything about my domains? Again - this is CLEARLY a knee jerk reaction to the shit wafting out of California and that cock sucker Balsam.
They're probably in Cali and don't want to get sued, because they're part of the chain. BTW when you're mailing search feeds you kind of have to have that delay in reporting. I'm probably the only person on this forum that's actually wrote something commercially to monetize a search feed. Let me tell you getting an accurate CPC is a pain in the dick.
$0.50 first click can often easily beat $1.50 second click. Including second clicks in any comparison is highly misleading.
I disagree.. your solution is short lived. That's why OB is so special. "First click CPCs" are the ones, where you will have the advertiser lower the rates on you overnight. Where the network will tell you the advertiser said your traffic isnt backing out. The "Second click CPC" shows a certain determination to follow through with the offer, IMO. It's really six and one-half dozen the other, I mean, there is a logic that says "Make twice as much on .50 per click" and I see that, but we're talking longevity here. If your data is backing out on every offer, I guess you got nothing to worry. Oh, and make sure you tell me that data source too ;-)
OB is based out of Texas I believe as I and others have pointed out, there's now a legal precedent set and it wont' take long for that to spread to other states. Plus, it encompasses traffic sent to California email addresses so unless you want to not send to California users, then you don't have a choice. ADK, for now, just has this as a warning. I turned off my Whois protect on my projects as I'd rather be safe than sorry.
"Second click CPC" is meaningless... You still have to figure out your real EPC (or "effective first click CPC") by factoring in the LP click through rates which are not that great. Your $1.50 second click CPC could easily mean $0.20 CPC if the landing page sucks and most of these LPs suck so bad it is not even funny. As far as the networks that would drop first click CPC down to $0.01 the only thing this means is they cannot properly filter out bots and/or use bad creatives that generate accidental human clicks. They start with good payouts, quickly figure out they cannot sustain paying for bots and then declare the traffic trash and quality-score to zero. All this means they cannot manage it properly. Nothing wrong if you are happy with OB, compared to first click networks, but this merely means they all suck, just in a slightly different way.
i have no idea why people set their domains to private as there's been multiple court cases where the domain privacy was considered non-compliant, and it just makes you look shady as it's always been considered a gray-area. as stated above, you already put the address in the email by law... i don't understand the difference? what is anyone gaining through domain privacy in the first place?
I do use privacy. I know that we pass details in both the header and our links within the emails. I honestly don't see the big deal with using whois guard. I think it should be our option to use or not to use the option. I do, however have to agree that a network should not tell us how to do my job. The problem is that most of the decision makers in the networks know nothing about email or any other marketing, for a fact.
They are just trying to cover their ass, as networks / advertisers are the most likely targets for lawsuits. The real problem though if a significant number of networks adopts this kind of policy it could create unofficial "industry standard" and anyone who does not adopt it would get hammered for that in future lawsuits. A plaintiff would always be able to tell the court: "others are complying this way, why are they not doing the same, they must have an intent to disregard the law", even though we all know this is complete bullshit. Hopefully we won't see too many networks pushing this...
As far as 'whois' . It will open the flood gates to more guys like Balsam. And as far as OB - they have a handful of good offers - but thier 'average' payout backs out just like any other network. Id rather not wait for reporting imo. Plus OB's landers are the worst, that hurts conversion, no matter how good the data is.
one would almost suspect the incredibly pathetic landing pages are part of their business model, if someone clicks through they must want it reaallllllly bad
The shitty landing pages go back to mailers not understanding search feeds if that's what you're referring too.
