Suck a Dick Vivera/Opes/Mike/Mitch/DEE
- Thread starter mysticls
- Start date
I've always thought you were kind of an ass, which I appreciate as a fellow ass. Now I'm realizing you just tell it like it is .... respect.
LOL you all acting like there is anohter big advertiser out there. WHy dont you phaggots just suck it up and let Dee and Larby get their merchant accounts straight so they can get offers up quickly. Or go out become an advertiser cause there aren't exactly a lot of acai and cleanse offers
If thats the case, then fuck larby and opes.
There are several acai and colon cleanse offers that are still running that have nothing to do with larby.
While i can appreciate your comments i do have to disagree with a lot of your points. We have always paid pubs when we werent paid, i can rattle off tons of offers we werent paid on that pubs were paid 100% on. This issue is more about leads being charged back which is actually listed in our extra terms on the offer. I think someone quoted it above. If something is in the offers extra terms it will be enforced.
The problem is that publishers think that the networks and the advertisers are making as much money as they do. They arent. In the end its either the publishers or sites like adsonar/pulse who are raking in the big money. If you knew the metrics of a continuity offer you might see the situation differently. Most offers rebill at $80, only half of the free trials turn in to a rebill. This makes each lead sent worth $40. If the advertiser pays $40 for the lead they break even on just marketing on the first charge, they still have the cost of product, shipping, customer service, bank fees, chargebacks, refunds, etc..
After the first rebill the advertiser is still down about $10-$12 on each customer sent by a publisher. Month 2 rebills drop to under 20%, and month 3 less than 10%. Factor in lawsuits the advertisers are fighting from Oprah, etc.. and paying $35-40 for all gross sales does not make sense.
Like everyone has said about this space its changing. Some people wont like it, some people will understand its needed to balance things out and protect the spaces longevity. Others who dont even run the offers will spend all day on WF bitching about something that probably doesnt even impact them. Everyone has opinions.
Also on relying on one advertiser comment, i think if you look at our history, we have never been the one hit wonder network that can only survive with one offer or client. From email submits to ringtones, to dating to even debt leads we have dominated lots of other niches and will continue to innovate and grow the next big niche.
This sounds like the boy that cried wolf story. I've been seeing advertisers whine about how it's tough to make money on there end and publishers have it easy since I got into this business. Now everyone has a better idea in hindsight how much money was being made by the advertisers and realize they often had a much higher margin then pubs did.
So although it might very well be the case that advertisers are really being pushed to the point of barely making any profit at all now. Publishers are simply not inclined to believe it because we've heard this before and it was all bullshit back then. Advertisers were making way more money then they were letting on.
bro you can't correct someone on spelling without using proper punctuation and capitalization!!!!
Anyone used Vivera to sell their product? Dee = Deepak? Partnered with Clay from LocalBilling to do all those County Durham supplement/consumable rebills. That's an operation to copy... own international processing partnerships to ensure sales. How do I get dat?
The facts are its a different time in which I think everyone still wants to make money from this model. If this is true, lets all move forward under that assumption and leave the rest on the sideline.
The margins are getting thinner so it's progressively more important everyone understands each other's businesses. Speaking to Mike K's points:
Lets establish some conservative guesses on the "givens" for the offer in question.
S&H: $5
1st Rebill: $80
2nd Rebill: $99
Bank Fees/Reserves: Approx 20% these days
CPA: $40
Product + Shipping: $6
% of people who make it to 1st rebill: 50%
% of people who make it to 2nd rebill: 25%
Day 1: -$48
Day 15: -$16
Day 45: -$4.20
Now lets say you refund 10% of customers and are holding a 2% chargeback ratio.
Adjusted Day 45: -$11.70
The next rebill in this cycle isnt til day 105 so I don't think there is much more there. So we're talking about a loss of -$11.70 using those numbers and I haven't included any operations expenses, legal costs, etc. into those figures.
If anyone actually is sending fraud (which I'm sure there is some) it makes it even worse :1zhelp:
I'm sure there are other ways they are monetizing otherwise it wouldn't make sense. Or, perhaps a better guess: they're still trying to make it work?
The point being, everyone needs to have a better understanding of each other's numbers. Dumping it on affiliates without warning doesn't help the situation. But neither do posts like these.
In the end it will be a small group of advertisers left standing. And a small group of publishers. Its time for those involved to decide if they're in or out :food-smiley-010:
The margins are getting thinner so it's progressively more important everyone understands each other's businesses. Speaking to Mike K's points:
Lets establish some conservative guesses on the "givens" for the offer in question.
S&H: $5
1st Rebill: $80
2nd Rebill: $99
Bank Fees/Reserves: Approx 20% these days
CPA: $40
Product + Shipping: $6
% of people who make it to 1st rebill: 50%
% of people who make it to 2nd rebill: 25%
Day 1: -$48
Day 15: -$16
Day 45: -$4.20
Now lets say you refund 10% of customers and are holding a 2% chargeback ratio.
Adjusted Day 45: -$11.70
The next rebill in this cycle isnt til day 105 so I don't think there is much more there. So we're talking about a loss of -$11.70 using those numbers and I haven't included any operations expenses, legal costs, etc. into those figures.
If anyone actually is sending fraud (which I'm sure there is some) it makes it even worse :1zhelp:
I'm sure there are other ways they are monetizing otherwise it wouldn't make sense. Or, perhaps a better guess: they're still trying to make it work?
The point being, everyone needs to have a better understanding of each other's numbers. Dumping it on affiliates without warning doesn't help the situation. But neither do posts like these.
In the end it will be a small group of advertisers left standing. And a small group of publishers. Its time for those involved to decide if they're in or out :food-smiley-010:
Just looked at LocalBilling's website. I am getting the impression they are a Dutch company, or have strong Dutch presence in any case, despite their 'All over the Place' image. It appears NL really is a breeding ground for Merchant incorporation. I've always known how relatively straightforward one can become an actual Merchant [not just Account] in that place. WF folks never believed me. If LocalBilling is indeed tied to NL in some form, it would not surprise me one cent. Puts a lot of puzzles into place, actually. I wonder if they are also befriended with Mr. J. D. from Curacao? in that case.... hahhahaa 
the world is so small.
the world is so small.
per the example above, let's add in some other points - and note I'm not speaking to specific offers just the model in general. I no longer have any skin in the game and really don't give a shit.
1) value of the data on a rev share for both emailers and direct mailers. $2-4?
2) value of up/cross sells - because yes they're still happening. $10-15?
3) percentage throttling of the network (and thus consequently also the affiliate) pixel by the advertiser: XX%?
4) percentage of customers who actually experience success with the product, enjoy it, and KNOWINGLY stay on? Has to be some and even a small percentage there are printing money at $90 pure profit monthly since the up front marketing costs are already sunk. 5%? I have no idea.
5) value from exit pop/live operator chat which some offers never fired a pixel on back when I actually tested things like this. (I'm currently running a campaign where the exit pop accounts for about 5% of the conversions- so let's just pencil in 5%).
But the more important question to ask is simply this:
Who on earth takes on SIGNIFICANT risk and up-front costs for what's being made out to be peanuts?
Would anyone here? I sure wouldn't.
This alone should answer the 'woe is us' question. Now - per Mike's post I think this pertains to networks a hell of a lot more than it does advertisers.
1) value of the data on a rev share for both emailers and direct mailers. $2-4?
2) value of up/cross sells - because yes they're still happening. $10-15?
3) percentage throttling of the network (and thus consequently also the affiliate) pixel by the advertiser: XX%?
4) percentage of customers who actually experience success with the product, enjoy it, and KNOWINGLY stay on? Has to be some and even a small percentage there are printing money at $90 pure profit monthly since the up front marketing costs are already sunk. 5%? I have no idea.
5) value from exit pop/live operator chat which some offers never fired a pixel on back when I actually tested things like this. (I'm currently running a campaign where the exit pop accounts for about 5% of the conversions- so let's just pencil in 5%).
But the more important question to ask is simply this:
Who on earth takes on SIGNIFICANT risk and up-front costs for what's being made out to be peanuts?
Would anyone here? I sure wouldn't.
This alone should answer the 'woe is us' question. Now - per Mike's post I think this pertains to networks a hell of a lot more than it does advertisers.
I'm looking specifically at this offer since its the one in question and driving the heavy majority of volume. Making assumptions from 2009 is pointless.
Points #2 and #5 aren't applicable to this offer from what I see. Point #4 is always already going to be factored in.
Your most valid point is #1 - How that data is monetized is make or break these days.
The point is: advertisers are recognizing the need to control their numbers more now than ever - its a necessity for survival. In the past there were assumptions that slipped through the cracks because everyone was making a lot of money.
This leaves 3 options:
1) Advertiser adjusts CPA for a "one size fits all" that fits the average true value of publisher traffic
2) Advertiser is transparent and pays on the true value of a publisher's traffic on an individual basis
3) No more pubs =(
In this case it was #2. I'm not sure which is the correct stance .
What boggles my mind is why Copeac would partner with Dee and Larby when they stiffed Eadvertising for millions as well as CXdigital and other networks.
How Mike didn't see this mess coming is beyond me. My only guess is the money blinded him but how did he ever think it would be any different this time around?
I don't believe much of what Mike has written above, its made up to protect his ass as well as Copeac. At the end of the day someone other than Dee and Larby is gonna be out millions and not a chance in getting paid, time will tell.
How Mike didn't see this mess coming is beyond me. My only guess is the money blinded him but how did he ever think it would be any different this time around?
I don't believe much of what Mike has written above, its made up to protect his ass as well as Copeac. At the end of the day someone other than Dee and Larby is gonna be out millions and not a chance in getting paid, time will tell.
