400 clicks to an auto insurance zip submit... 16 conversions!

cardine said:
You didn't understand what I'm saying (or you're intentionally putting words in my mouth). If the leads suck of course the advertiser will lose money at the beginning, and that's ok. But are they required to keep running an offer with a publisher they know is losing them money? At that point (as I said before) the only 2 things advertisers do is scrub or cut the affiliate. So which would you rather have happen?

I'm running a campaign that that gives me huge margins but the traffic quality sucks. After getting kicked from a bunch of offers I finally found an advertiser that scrubs. Now we're both happy. I'm not getting cut from offers, I'm still making money because my margins are awesome and the campaign can run profitably even with scrubbing, and he's making money because he's scrubbing to make up for the shitty quality I'm sending him. How is this setup bad for either side?

Scrubbing is what is allowing both of us to make money. Without scrubbing I wouldn't have an offer to run my profitable campaign, and he'd be getting screwed over because my lead quality sucks. I'd understand if you'd want advertisers to be more transparent about lead quality and scrubbing (maybe by making dynamic payouts or something like that), but the system itself makes complete sense. I don't think scrubbing is the issue, I just wish people would be more transparent about it.
Click to expand...

Good point right there. I'd never seen it like that before...
 


cardine said:
You didn't understand what I'm saying (or you're intentionally putting words in my mouth). If the leads suck of course the advertiser will lose money at the beginning, and that's ok. But are they required to keep running an offer with a publisher they know is losing them money? At that point (as I said before) the only 2 things advertisers do is scrub or cut the affiliate. So which would you rather have happen?

I'm running a campaign that that gives me huge margins but the traffic quality sucks. After getting kicked from a bunch of offers I finally found an advertiser that scrubs. Now we're both happy. I'm not getting cut from offers, I'm still making money because my margins are awesome and the campaign can run profitably even with scrubbing, and he's making money because he's scrubbing to make up for the shitty quality I'm sending him. How is this setup bad for either side?

Scrubbing is what is allowing both of us to make money. Without scrubbing I wouldn't have an offer to run my profitable campaign, and he'd be getting screwed over because my lead quality sucks. I'd understand if you'd want advertisers to be more transparent about lead quality and scrubbing (maybe by making dynamic payouts or something like that), but the system itself makes complete sense. I don't think scrubbing is the issue, I just wish people would be more transparent about it.
Click to expand...

Scrubbing is Shaving, and that's STEALING.


If they are going to scrub/shave me so it's profitable, I might as well write my own scripts to add 20% more fake leads to them right?

If my traffic does not back out, then they should be talking to the network and working with me on why. If it flat out doesn't work, then its up to the network to pay me, or not based on how I promote and my relationship with said network.
 
EasyRider said:
They pay $8 if you have a high quality score... I have one account that pays $9 per click and one that pays $1.50 per click.

This is why the zip submit people are not paying you for every zip submit, they see what they are making and adjust accordingly.
Click to expand...

Funny. I asked someone about this who was selling a site getting around $10.50 per submit, and they dodged the question with a shady answer. So it's true, they adjust according to performance like I thought.. *sigh* I'm glad I didn't buy the site. I hate it when people are shady, just answer the damn question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom