Affiliates Grow Up and Exit

"Remember, the big Web 1.0 affiliates that grew up and commanded hefty exits were DealTime (Shopping.com) at $560mm, BizRate/Shopzilla at $525mm, Lowermybills.com at $380mm and even Nextag at $1.2 billion. Anyone notice, most of these guys sold for more individually than the big 4 affiliate networks combined?"

Good to see affiliates making nice exits, but I am not sure if the examples you've given can be considered as affiliates. For most of these companies affiliate marketing were a small amount of their reveneus that kept slimming down. They became ppc shopping engines, directly dealing with merchants and charging per click instead of commissions. They were also networks themselves, with publishers paid AdSense style.

So, I am not sure if calling them affilates and comparing them to networks is a fair assessment.

Nextag, Bizrate, Lowermybills.com, and Dealtime all started out as affiliates and then started working directly with merchants. I think it's fair to call them affiliates that grew up.

It gives me a piece of mind to be in this industry, knowing I can gain control of my life again after not being able to hold a job for 10 years, because of the "at will" laws. I am new to affiliate marketing and would love to network with a few good ppl. I went to CJU in 2006 and I was blown away by all the big name ppl I met that came from being broke like me to mega paid online in less than 2 years..:-)

Jellyfish locked up Intellectual Property and sold it. I doubt that Microsoft needs to buy such a young company based on a build v. buy decision. Bazaar doesn't impress me as any kind of noteworthy acquisition simply based on Azoogle having sat on all that cash for so long — all while becoming increasingly embattled by Google.

What do Linkshare and Azoogle have in common?

1) They're followers: they're glomming onto the success of the true market leader after being beaten at their own game (as in 'game over'… witness Linkshare calling itself a "Pay Per Action" company ever since GOOG coined it)

2) Total and complete lack of innovation (witness Linkshare believing that paying affiliates remains an important point of differentiation among its customers as a single example)

3) Shedding advertisers — and fast (anyone other than me keeping tabs on how fast Linkshare is signing clients vs. CJ and, lo!, Performics?)

Then again, that's just my opinion.

I think this is a poorly titled article in the sense that "grow up" belittles the industry and affiliates. "Change Monetization Model" would be a more fitting title. I think that a publisher should maximize its earnings through the most appropriate channels, be they CPM, CPC, or CPA.

The companies you mention above started as affiliates and basically later changed to a system that allowed them to earn more money. It is worthwhile to note that they effectively used the affiliate channel before turning their backs on it to form relationships with advertisers.

What's interesting to me is that I never hear executives from the CPA networks bemoan the loss of these affiliates, which I take as a positive sign for the growth of the industry. And, contrary to the sentiments above that Mr. MOlander seems to express, CJ and Performics seem to be doing quite well (along with LinkShare) at signing up clients.

Let the good times roll!

Brook,

I think you have a very narrow view of affiliate marketing. Affiliate marketing is sending leads to merchants or service providers on a pay for performance model. The networks provide tracking and at other times, affiliates can provide their own tracking, and there are other tracking too. If you get paid on a CPC or rev share does it matter? Isn't it still affiliate marketing?

Beth

Beth, I'll bet Brook drives a "pre-owned" car. I think that's the issue here

I'll string this along.

CPC is not affiliate marketing, Beth. With that logic every type of online maketing would affiliate marketing.

Well, Beth, by that argument the companies mentioned above are still affiliates. But that's beside my point – my point is that it's demeaning to cast affiliates as businesses that have yet to "grow up".

As to Jeff's question, I do not drive a "pre-owned" car, I drive a "dirty" car.

"sambay"…
(first of all, I don't believe I still address anonymous comments)

Google calls their AdSense publishers affiliates. Anything distributed in terms of the model can be called "affiliate." Just as local TV stations are "affiliates" so are distributors of ads.

P.S.
Get a spine and put your name on your illogical, un-supported theories.

I'm not sure why you have some much trouble the headline. Companies get going, they grow up, and then they become mature businesses. And in this case, these were all VC funded businesses that whole mission was to get out in the marketplace, build a business and exit. All the companies I mentioned (but one which was self funded) had VC funding.

Cheers,

Beth

Oh the irony! Beth, remember the days when I was the industry meany? Now you get pegged as being "insensitive" to people's business dreams. C'mon, Brook. This is business. Beth didn't say "c'mon, affiliates… grow up." She suggested that some are growing up — maturing. Get over it!

I regard the attitude the headline expresses as negative toward affiliates. My inference is that affiliates are immature entities. My point is that the affiliate model is a good model for the long term and there should be no expecation that affiliates will "grow up" because they are not half pint business entities.

Jeff Molander,

I am afraid to use my real name around the places where you hang out, since you have a tendecy to collect and sell them (The Affiliate List?) Ha! Also those who need to know, know me well, which is enough.

My comments were addressed to Beth, as it's spelled out in the message, unless your middle name is Beth, you needn't break your rule of not addressing anonymous comments.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Affiliate marketing is a revenue-share advertising model based on RESULTS. CPC and CPM are not based on results. You can spend the shirt on your back on CPM and CPC them yet you may still not get one lead or one sale. Local TV station affiliates have got nothing to do internet marketing's affiliates.

Brook,

"My inference is that affiliates are immature entities." Brook that is not what I said at all. This is what I said.

(1) Two affiliates where sold for a lot of money. JellyFish was less than a year old. Bazaar was two or three years old. These are companies that went into the marketplace and then built businesses.

(2) I said some people who started out in affiliate marketing got really big and because mature businesses.

These companies grew up. I know we don't always agree here, but nothing I said was negative. In fact, I thought it was very positive and that is how it was intended. The message is affiliates can enter the marketplace and build businesses and exit for a lot of money.

SamBay, I think we have different definitions of affiliate marketing and that is OK because the definite is a little fuzzy. I tend to think affiliate marketing as pay for performance marketing. In addition, there has been CPC affiliate programs in most of the major networks at one time or another — though I'm not sure how well click fraud protections are in each network. I

This is you say tomato and I say tomato from my perspective.

Nice discussion guys, I have work to do. I'll catch up this evening on the discussions.

Given that title of this entry is "Affiliates Grow Up and Exit", I think my inference is reasonable. It hinges on the sentiment I sense behind the phrase "grow up". While we're talking past each other to some extent, my basic point is that affiliates do not need to grow up: affiliate monetization is nothing one needs to move beyond or graduate from.

But Brook, I never talked about the fact they changed monetization models….did I? It came up in the comments and in fact, I think CPC comparison engines might as well be affiliates. What I did talked about the fact companies started as affiliates and matured into full grown businesses that exited either by selling for a lot of money or IPOing. Bazaar, Jellyfish, and Lowermybills are still CPA or Rev share. Seems to me, you might be a little defensive.

Oh, Brook, now, look at what you made me say. You made me sound like Jeff. :p. I love this channel and you know that.

There is not disagreement here.

Happy Friday!

Beth

All the companies in the entry changed their monetization strategies, which is what "growing up" seems to refer to. You clarified this point in the comments section:

"Nextag, Bizrate, Lowermybills.com, and Dealtime all started out as affiliates and then started working directly with merchants. I think it's fair to call them affiliates that grew up."

My point is that "grew up" in this context is derogatory because it implies that current affiliates (those paid on a commission basis) are not grown up. By this logic, UPromise and FatWallet are not grown up because they still monetize through CPA.

"My point is that "grew up" in this context is derogatory because it implies that current affiliates (those paid on a commission basis) are not grown up. By this logic, UPromise and FatWallet are not grown up because they still monetize through CPA."

Brook, Nextag makes 40 to 50% of their money from EDU and Mortgage which is CPL/CPA and Lowermybills.com is CPA/CPL. Bazaar and JellyFish are both Rev share/CPA.

I used the examples of the other ones Shopping.com and Bizrate because they are now part of publicly traded companies and the point of the article was about exits. Fatwallet is still private and Upromise did actually exit in 2006 and was bought by Sallie Mae but I did not include it because of the price is was not public. If I knew you would get focused on this issue, then I would have included it.

The issue is that affiliates can grow up and exit which was my point. It infact to me shows the health of the industry and it's a good way to start a biz.

Beth

Beth, I don't disagree with any of that but it's all beside my point, which you seem to keep missing. Even in your last paragraph you wrote "The issue is that affiliates can grow up and exit which was my point."

I think there is no need for affiliates to "grow up" in the sense that one moves beyond a junior level or immature status. You seem to be using it synonymously with "grow larger". It's a slightly different thing to say that affiliates as business entities get bigger have an exit strategy than to say they can "grow up".

Brook,

The point of the whole article is a few companies that are affiliates launched a product in the marketplace, built a business to maturity and exited.

I think the issue where you might be stuck is VC funded companies, which is most of the companies I referred to go enter the marketplace, build a business (ie grow up) and exit. You took what I said about a couple affiliates and applied it to everyone and that seems to be where you get stuck. I thought, perhaps, the term exited defined the conversation. The affiliate networks exited, and these affiliates exited, and they were all vc backed companies.

To be honest, can we please agree to love this industry and what it represents and disagree on these finer points we seem to be bickering about.

Beth

Oh, where to begin:

1) Al Qaeda's affiliates do need to grow up and stop killing people.

2) I'm glad my company is a publisher and not an affiliate.

3) Jeff's middle name is Beth and he often confuses his fruits.

4) As far as I know, Jeff doesn't gather names for The List in comments on blogs. If you have a position that is worth stating, stand behind it. I don't get this I-can't-tell-you-my-name affiliate culture. I get that many affiliates have business models they cannot protect and don't want to tell anyone their sites. The most successful of those show their faces, give their names and blog. Oh, and when they comment on blogs, they give their real names.

5) Peter Pan said it best when he talked about is affiliate business:

I won't grow up,

I don't want to go to school.

Just to learn to be a parrot,

And recite a silly rule.

If growing up means

It would be beneath my dignity to climb a tree,

I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up

Not me!

Not I,

Not me!

Not me!

Beth, "stuck" hardly seems to be the right word either. Clearly we are both moving around in a cirlce.

No one commented on the best part of this whole debate….Jeff actually sided with Beth.

Happy Friday All!

Beth

I would agree that affiliate can include PPC… it is pay per performance that typically distinguishes affiliate in my mind…. and while CPA is a better "performance" … sending a click is a better "performance" than just creating an impression.

As for the rest of it – all three of you are arguing different things (Jeff, Beth, Brook) … not sure if you knew that – but hope that helps. It is good to see some good old fashioned arguments though.

Not going to type more until I find out if Revenews is accepting my comments these days or not….

Shawn Collins has been arguing for some time that Ad$ense is affiliate marketing. I disagree.

I think that by definition, publishers who use affiliate links to monetize their sites accept the risk of conversion. In other forms, such as CPC, the merchant / service provider/ Advertiser bears that burden.

The risk for publishers using AdSense is that Google will pay a low CPC. The publisher will get paid on the click. The same is true for the Shopzilla Publisher Program.

I would agree with Beth that the CSEs left affiliate marketing (for the most part… yes, they may still run some CPA links through affiliate networks).

I guess Ann Coulter would say the CSEs perfected themselves.

I go back and forth on whether the CSE are affiliates David. I can make a strong case that they are. I'm starting to think affiliate marketing is pay for performance marketing that is lead gen…be it lead gen for retail or lead gen for services.

That is pretty broad view, but after looking at affiliates for years and then being at LMB and Like, that is where I'm netting out these days. And I've always argued that affiliating is small direct marketing companies, so that fits, it just includes some big ones too with this definition.

It's interesting the definition is a changing target the longer I work in online marketing.

I agree that affiliate marketing is about lead gen.

I also think that it is about who bears the conversion risk on the click. If I take your definition, it could expand to CPM advertising. Hell, why not expand it to include any monetization that a publisher utilizes?

I think that by definition, publishers who use affiliate links to monetize their sites accept the risk of conversion. In other forms, such as CPC, the merchant / service provider/ Advertiser bears that burden. The risk for publishers using AdSense is that Google will pay a low CPC. The publisher will get paid on the click. The same is true for the Shopzilla Publisher Program.

So you've decided that ppc cannot be affiliate marketing, whether or not the people running those programs want to call it such?

While it might wound your ego to be considered a mere affiliate, I consider affiliate and publisher to be synonymous. You cite Shopzilla as an example for your mindset. Well, they seem to think they have affiliates in their "publisher program": http://publisher.shopzilla.com/blog/2007/09/shopz…

Oh yeah, and what is this thing that CNET just launched: http://www.cnet.com/affiliates/ – now they call it an affiliate program, but the commission is $0.30 per click. How can that be?

And please be sure to get into your time machine to go back to correct my usage of "pay-per-click affiliate programs" in the October 7, 1999 Refer-it.com newsletter at http://www.refer-it.com/report/1099.htm (item #7)

David,

CPM is not P4P. Therefore, I have a hard time with CPM falling under affiliate marketing.

Beth

I must chime in again.

CPM, CPC and affiliate marketing are three distinc online marketing channels. When we look at them from an advertiser's perspective, it becomes cleare:

- CPM or Display Advertising: Pay per impression; all the burden is on you make the potential customer click on your ad and take the desired action.

- CPC: Pay per click, potential customer is on your site the burden is on you make him/her take the desired action.

- Affiliate Marketing: The customers has seen your 'ad', have clicked and took the desired action then you a pay a percentage or per lead commission on that.

Term "publisher" covers all three and makes the most sense.

I think sometimes we get too hung up on names. Affiliate, publisher, affiliate marketer, associate etc. In the end you do what you do. But if somebody asks me what I do, I say I'm in affiliate marketing, I'm an affiliate marketer, a marketer, not a publisher. A marketer. That's what I do. Market merchants or their products to my site visitors via different methods. And marketer handles everything talked above this post.

Shawn, I realize that you want as big a tent as you can get. That doesn’t make AdSense (or PPC) affiliate marketing. Of course, you can include Al Qaeda (a potential sponsor and booth purchaser for Affiliate Summit?) or the affiliates that are in Wikipedia’s definition of affiliate: “An affiliate is a commercial entity with a relationship with a peer or a larger entity.” It goes on to include broadcast networks and corporate affiliates.

Shawn, you missed the best CPC program to use against me: GoTo.com (that was the name back in 1999). Yes, we had a program run by Susan Bridgers (now of LinkConnector). It was even called and affiliate program and was run through BeFree. So what? Things change. If not, you should invest in companies that have no hope of revenue and run things exactly as you did 8 years ago. (Oops, many Web 2.0 companies have no hope of revenue and are getting investment… but at a fraction of what their Web 1.0 forefathers took in.) The failure of CPC affiliate programs is enough to rule them out as affiliate programs. (More on this in a bit.)

Sambay, the anonymous: You are on the right track but are mixing the point of risk.

• CPM: Advertiser (using the CJ terminology here) bears all risk, both conversion to click and conversion to sale.
• CPC: Publisher bears risk of click and Advertiser bears risk of conversion.
• CPA / CPL: Publisher bears all risk. This is where affiliate marketing lives.

Affiliate marketing consists of weak relationships where the Advertiser accepts the Publisher into its program and the Publisher choses links to place on its site. That seems like the basic relationship.

Many Advertisers accept Publishers who are anonymous and who send traffic from unknown sources. By this definition alone is AdSense affiliate marketing. Careless advertisers can have their ads placed on sites they would never want to work with.

Of course, there is no relationship between the advertiser and publisher in AdSense. None at all. A piece of Javascript provided by Google that places ads from one website on another website does not create a relationship bewteen those sites. By that definition, if I place ads from Doubleclick on my website, I would be an affiliate of the sites whose banners appear. Or would I be an affiliate of Doubleclick? Can we all agree that CPM banner ads are not affiliate marketing? If so, I think we need to rule out AdSense and its ilk.

The main reason why CPC doesn’t work for most affiliate programs and did work for CSE’s is trust (and I don’t mean Trust… can you trust the anonymous?) The CSE’s were known entities that had proven trackrecords and built fraud protection into their systems. Has there been a CPC affiliate program that could do that? (As for CNET, we’ll see how long that program lasts. Oh, and to your question of a program being called an affiliate program, how can it be that the Soviet Union was a nation in which everyone was equal and everyone owned everything yet most people were subjects of the few? We can discuss the misuse of terms for days, if you like.)

Beth, how is CPC P4P? Performance on the click is not the performance on which affiliate marketing is based. The performance is the sale or lead. If you include CPC in P4P, then you have to include CPM there as well as the site must perform on the impression.

You can cut any of these definitions any way you like. Unfortunately for Shawn and Beth, I’m right ;o)

“I don’t mean Trust… can you trust the anonymous?)”

Can you trust the un-anonymous? And not anonymous to my partners, merchants

And as far as definitions, David. You would be in the extreme minority of wanting to be called a publisher as most marketers don’t like that term. I would hope you think you do more than merely publish?

> David: I realize that you want as big a tent as you can get. That doesn’t make AdSense (or PPC) affiliate marketing.

What’s your point? Whether or not Google is as obsessed with the semantics as you, they’ve been to the past few Affiliate Summits.

> David: Of course, you can include Al Qaeda…

Really, David, that whole thing was lame the first time around. No need to revisit it.

> David: Shawn, you missed the best CPC program to use against me: GoTo.com (that was the name back in 1999). Yes, we had a program run by Susan Bridgers (now of LinkConnector). It was even called and affiliate program and was run through BeFree. So what? Things change.

Thanks for the history less. If you looked at the Refer-it link I posted in my earlier comment, you would have seen that I referenced GoTo.com (that was the name back in 1999).

Anyway, so what? Per click was a very popular model for affiliate programs at that time.

The model practically went extinct in 2000-2001, due to fraud. After anti-fraud measures wee up to speed, the model has gradually returned.

I realize you choose to believe that per click is not affiliate marketing, but I’m curious why you think you have this mythical power to decide that a per click affiliate program, like the new CNET one, is not an affiliate program?

>Shawn: If you looked at the Refer-it link I posted in my earlier comment.

I did and I found the only #7 on the page was 7. One & Only Internet Personals. You should reference your own work better. But I’m happy to give you a history lesson especially when you dive into what is pretty much ancient history to make no point.

>Shawn: No need to revisit it.

Obviously there is. It demonstrates the ridiculousness of the term that some people hold onto so dearly. It’s not that descriptive.

>Shawn: What’s your point? Whether or not Google is as obsessed with the semantics as you, they’ve been to the past few Affiliate Summits.

What’s your point? I’ve been to events that have nothing to do with my industry but where I can meet people who can help me grow my business. VCs go to affiliate summit as well. Are they in your definition of affiliates too now?

Before delving further into CNET, can you tell me how AdSense is affiliate marketing and, if so, why banner networks are not?

["Trust", feel free to wallow in your anonymity. I see no issue with the term publisher. We do many things but none would happen without publishing a site.]

David, reading comprehension:

“And not anonymous to my partners, merchants ”

You can add in networks to that too.

And if you have no problem with the term publisher, even tho you’re wrong, I think even Steve Denton tried to educate you on that, that’s fine with me. If you told someone you were a publisher what do you think would pop into their mind? That you’re actually a marketer? No, they probably would ask you what books have you published. But since CJ calls you a publisher, I would expect you to think you were.

> David: I did and I found the only #7 on the page was 7. One & Only Internet Personals. You should reference your own work better.

I referred to “item #7″ – didn’t mean to make you work too hard there. Item #7 was the 7th item in the TOC: “SUBCONTRACT WITH PAY-PER-CLICK PROGRAMS”

> David: It demonstrates the ridiculousness of the term that some people hold onto so dearly. It’s not that descriptive.

It demonstrates that some words have more than one meaning. You’re so provocative.

> David: What’s your point? I’ve been to events that have nothing to do with my industry but where I can meet people who can help me grow my business.

You claimed that I “want as big a tent as (I) can get.” I was merely illustrating that Google came out to meet with current and recruit new “publishers” among the affiliates in attendance at Affiliate Summit.

> David: Before delving further into CNET, can you tell me how AdSense is affiliate marketing and, if so, why banner networks are not?

Here are a couple of definitions that were put out by a publisher (Que Publishing) in the book, “Successful Affiliate Marketing for Merchants”:

Affiliate: A Web site owner that earns a commission for referring clicks, leads, or sales to a merchant.

Affiliate Program: A merchant pays a commission to an affiliate for generating clicks, leads, or sales from a graphic or text link located on the affiliate’s site.

Those definitions outline how I work with Google both via AdSense and AdWords.

The term banner network is vague – some people might say CJ is a banner network. Please be more specific.

> (S)He-who-likes-to-be-called-Jonathan: David, reading comprehension:

“And not anonymous to my partners, merchants ”

Er, you need the reading comprehension. I didn’t address that point as it is pointless.

The term publisher is incorrect for search marketers who direct link. They do not need to publish a website. They are not publishers.

I do publish a website. There are many facets to that include content creation, revenue generation, traffic generation, site optimization. This is similar to the publishing business. Yeah, I’m sure the NY Times doesn’t do any marketing to increase its ciculation or traffic to its website. It merely publishes a printed newspaper.

7. We seem to be hung up in these comments today on AdSense so I will quote Google: AdSense for search allows website publishers . Google thinks we are a publisher as we publish content on our website.

Yes, we do more. Again (reading comprehension Jonathan): “We do many things but none would happen without publishing a site.”

“Yes, we do more. Again (reading comprehension Jonathan): “We do many things but none would happen without publishing a site.”

You’re having an off night:

“And marketer handles everything talked above this post.”

Publisher, under the umbrella of being a marketer.

“The term publisher is incorrect for search marketers who direct link. They do not need to publish a website. They are not publishers.”

CJ would disagree with you. They call them publishers too. Ad creation, such as a PPC ad, falls under the definition of publishing.

I’m doing fine except for a typo but, hey, feel free to correct all typos, misspellings and grammar mistakes on Revenews. Personally, I would rather have a typo than your faulty logic.

I used CJ terms as we needed one base for discussion. Pick another, if you like.

I do use publisher as I think it is correct for what I referred to above. Why don’t you point out that Advertiser is not correct as many Publishers advertise as well?

So as stated above (reading comprehension, Jonathan) “The term publisher is incorrect for search marketers who direct link. They do not need to publish a website. They are not publishers.”

You know, when I read the OpEd page in the newspaper, I read the background of the author. It adds credibility. Who are you again?

“Who are you again?”

A full time affiliate marketer for the past 6 years. Someone who has experience in marketing prior to this. Someone who has a business degree (with a focus on marketing). Someone who is still right and answered some of your question in an email awhile back and above but pretend that it’s invisible if you think it helps in your argument.

I read what you wrote but you didn’t address my response:

“Ad creation, such as a PPC ad, falls under the definition of publishing.”

You agree or disagree? That’s fine, people can agree to disagree but if you do, you’re now disagreeing with Google too. You notice a trend? I’m sure you can find your way to a dictionary or the Google website and find the word publish, publisher and educate yourself or maybe you can find another Al Al Qaeda Affiliates article and make more silly arguments. That’s on you.

Shawn says:

“Here are a couple of definitions that were put out by a publisher (Que Publishing) in the book, “Successful Affiliate Marketing for Merchants”:

Affiliate: A Web site owner that earns a commission for referring clicks, leads, or sales to a merchant.

Affiliate Program: A merchant pays a commission to an affiliate for generating clicks, leads, or sales from a graphic or text link located on the affiliate’s site.

Those definitions outline how I work with Google both via AdSense and AdWords.”

Bravo, Shawn! You reference your book (your opinion) as a base your point of view?

Regardless, I don’t understand why this interest on most participants to include CPC within affiliate marketing. It’s a different method, on its own, and much more bigger than affiliate marketing.

Google gets paid per click, don’t they? Are they an affiliate? Maybe a thin one?

You misquoted yourself (a tough thing to do) and ignored my answer to you. People who create PPC ads are Publishers (CJ’s definition) but not publishers. I do not think that an ad writer at an ad agency would consider themselves a publisher.

I don’t need to look in a dictionary. I am well-aware of the definition of the term. Why don’t you search Google and find myriad examples of Web publishers. English is a living language and changes every day. Dictionaries even ad words.

The silliness of the Al Qaeda article points to the silliness of your insistence of calling yourself an affiliate. The word means nothing and everything.

I’ll stand by what I write. In fact, I’ll even put my name to it.

“The silliness of the Al Qaeda article points to the silliness of your insistence of calling yourself an affiliate. The word means nothing and everything.”

can be rewritten:

“The silliness of the David Lewis blog post points to the silliness of your insistence of calling yourself a publisher. The word means nothing and everything.”

“People who create PPC ads are Publishers (CJ’s definition) but not publishers.”

? Are publishers but not publishers. Brilliant David.

You posting under your real name doesn’t make any of your arguments any more valid. I would be posting the same stuff no matter the name. I’ve seen that tendency from you over the years when you pick a position you’re not comfortable with, can’t defend or someone questions you on what you write, it’s like a security blanket or something when you take the focus off on what actually is being written.

Other times you just lock threads when you’re in that position:

http://www.revenews.com/davidlewis/archives/2007/06/class_action_la.html

Nothing new.

Luminaries… Luminaries… we can agree on much more than we disagree on. I challenge all of you (well, Jonathan and sambay I cannot actually issue this to you, of course) to stand in a room and talk at each other as you talk to each other here. Need I (of all people — you are without doubt ashamed) remind you?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=x_QRYJOnRwc

Last word from sambay:

- I don't understand the animosity towards people who prefer to use a nickname, (mine is so close almost it's mine, which doesn't matter anyway). I'm simply stating my opinions. Not everyone here is trying to raise their profile. Some people just want to engage into conversation. Those who keep asking for "info-tithing" and complain from lack of participation should note that. It's just a name after all, doesn't matter if it is David Lewis or DavLew, Jeff Molander or JeMola, latter versions even sound better

- It's ok for an affiliate network to run CPC programs or an affiliate conference host CPC companies. After all as online marketing channels they're all interconnected. But, in my opinion, CPC is not part of affiliate marketing.

There were and still are affiliate networks who run CPM programs with all or select affiliates. Does that make display advertising a part affiliate marketing?

To an affiliate, an advertiser's landing page, its ability to convert a visitor into a customer and its conversions rates are the most important metrics as they're directly related to the affiliate's revenues. To a publisher who only sends a click, technically, none of these are important.

> Sambay: Bravo, Shawn! You reference your book (your opinion) as a base your point of view?

I included the citation tongue and cheek, but also to provide something that is lacking in many arguments – an actual published reference.

My “opinion” was edited and scrutinized by a major book publisher, and has be widely used since then.

Plain and simple, in the days when affiliate marketing was starting (in the adult market), the first model used was per click.

> Sambay: Regardless, I don’t understand why this interest on most participants to include CPC within affiliate marketing.

It’s not some sudden change that anybody is trying to make. CPC has been considered one of the models in affiliate marketing since the beginning.

For another established reference, take a look at the form to submit an affiliate program at Allan Gardyne’s associateprograms.com (actively maintained since 1998).

The options: pay per sale, pay per lead, pay per click, and other.

But I suppose that’s just his opinion.

Anyhow, this exercise of debating semantics is going around in circles, so I’ll move on now to more productive pursuits.

In the meantime, companies will continue to launch and run per click affiliate programs and affiliates will promote them.

But you keep fighting the good fight.

"I made the cardinal mistake of Revenews and allowed anonymous commenters to drag us into the least important aspect of a discussion"

You just made the mistake of being yourself again along with Jeff. Your attitude is one of the reasons Revenews pretty much came to a halt not too long ago.

sambay (who knows what he's talking about) comes over and makes a post. Jeff's first response:

"sambay"…
(first of all, I don't believe I still address anonymous comments)"

And then David, like a puppet:

"Sambay, the anonymous: "

And then of course with me. When you should have been focusing on what was actually being posted, you did the usual.

And if you actually took some time to think, you would realize how stupid your request is in the first place. If sambay just posted and made up a name and called himself Sam Bradshaw, then ? I don't ever remember a blog or forum asking for photo ID, SSN, birth certificate to post.

Maybe you like having blog posts where the only responses come from other Revenews bloggers, it's pretty much like that already and your attitude isn't helping Sam or Revenews out any.

My last post on the subject too, I actually have some "marketing" work to do today

Sambay, based on your last comment I will answer the substantive part.

First, on the anonymity, I do have to say… come on, guys. Do you really think that your online identity is just in your name? You don't think your e-mail address and website identify you and give you credibility (or that others can see through the fake ones you will comment that you can create)? Wait, don't answer, there is no point in discussing this.

Back to issues… Sambay, we agree on CPC and CPM. You commented about publishers not caring about conversion. I disagree. If my company am getting paid on CPA, I care about conversion at the store's / service provider's site (and we help them when we can). If we are getting paid CPC, I still care as the store / service provider will evaluate the quality of our traffic based on the conversion and won't chalk it up to its inability to convert. Of course, our traffic may convert better than other sources but the value of the click still is lower than if there were a higher conversion.

I do believe this has broken the new comment record that fell (to a david lewis post I think) during my watch. Sam?

Goodbye Affiliate 1.0 and hello to authenticity, accountability and the death of so many ugly and pathetic affiliate entitlements. Long live Clicks2Customers, Pepperjam et al.

Not everyone here is trying to raise their profile. Some people just want to engage into conversation. Those who keep asking for "info-tithing" and complain from lack of participation should note that. It's just a name after all…

To all the sambays out there: We — the crazy people who insist on knowing who they're engaging in the (assumed) worthwhile discussion with — don't care about your incessant need for conversation. Kindly stop asking us for your pity.

We don't choose to engage in conversation with someone who doesn't want to be known. Consider yourself lucky just as we consider our collective time wasted.

The Web is such a sad place. It's a place where people can suggest they don't want to have a raised profile but are comfortable asking people who do have a raised profile for their time. On the Web, it's somehow different to the sambays of the world for them to walk up to people fully masked and expect discussion. This notion is from the moon.

Grow up and exit, indeed!

Jonathan, while you like to point out typos, you do not seem to have a grasp of grammar and can’t tell what is a proper noun or how it is used.

Shawn, I still am curious as to how AdSense differs from banner networks and, Beth, I am curious about the performance issues you brought up. That will have to wait for another time (say, over a drink in Vegas?) as Shawn and I made the cardinal mistake of Revenews and allowed anonymous commenters to drag us into the least important aspect of a discussion. I don’t know why it is always the anonymous ones who do it. I apologize to all that I bit. I must have been having a bad day yesterday.

Shawn, I agree with you. It is Monday morning and I have a busy week. I, too, will not be checking back here and “I’ll move on now to more productive pursuits”.

To all others, what the hell are you doing reading this far through this? Get a job!

"How many years did you hide behind the name MrMerchant on ABW?"

I too one day want to become a professional like Jeff but kirsched.com is not available.

This is a record-setter in my book — regardless of comment count. I think this is the one millionth time an anonymous poster has actually conducted conversation with him/herself. Still, not as good (crazy?) as quoting yourself in a Powerpoint at a conference. If anyone is going to make light of me they should at least use decent ammo.

Unless someone has something substantial to add, let's just move on from this trainwreck, please. Most of you have either embarrassed yourself enough or made your points by now.

If you have anything to say of a personal nature to each other, I suggest using email.

Act like adults or either take it up in private. Otherwise, you will be banned.

Thanks-

The Management.

I have to say, I missed you guys…glad to be back. And I have 49 comments…what is the ReveNews record, 52 I think. David, I think I have now beat you! :p

This whole thing with railing against anon comments is so funny, Jeff Molander.

How many years did you hide behind the name MrMerchant on ABW?

2 possible suggestions for ReveNews.

1. The “unsubscribe link” in the email notifications should work (Currently, it goes to a 404)… I know this, as I failed in my attempt to get off of this thread.

2. Stop this thread as it is hardly a good representation of what could be considered a quality industry discussion which is what I assume ReveNews is here for. Pretty soon someone is going to use the “Liar liar pants on fire” defense and that will officially be rock bottom.

This one is very excellent and great information of Exit and grow up.I like this excellent post of exit information.It is very helpful and streaming service to introduce exit news.

exit signs

Oakley Sunglasses thinking of there’re
sophisticated in addition to some of them
Oakley
Sunglasses Oakley Sunglasses are
likewise helpful to frighten the opposite people. As soon as the opposite
participants Fake oakley sunglasses are unable
to view the persons term in comparison with they can’t really know what this
future adjust will likely be. Many person’s simply just would prefer to don
Oakley Sunglasses thinking of there’re sophisticated in addition to some of
them usually are comic appearing on. That distracts the opposite participants
from the dining room table Cheap ray ban sunglasses. Most of these colored
specs are typically seeing that a little overwhelming to be a write off look
would be to different texas hold’em people. Not any difficulty accurately in
which you are, you would possibly quite possibly locate huge amounts connected
with person’s practice this progress connected with vogue.

This 3 previously mentioned
plugs try-on approaches are the important forms with on-line outlets in
addition to person’s need to find out the right strategy to function these
individuals. In that way, there’re advancing towards receive Discount ray ban sunglasses of which accommodate
the specific predicaments almost all. Regardless, person’s could possibly
potentially receive nearly this also Oakley Sunglasses however try-on
approaches are different a bit. And so, while finding this supports connected
with Cheap oakley sunglasses oakley flak jacket xlj sunglasses,
person’s simply just have to get this supports on to the looks on the form
pics. That actually is quite precious with encouraging person’s manage to get
their great supports as long as they could possibly transform this photograph
adequately.

Many completely new owners
could possibly quite possibly include never ever attempted to acquire nearly
anything on the net. Although whenever they learn the right strategy to work
with desktops, interior a range of min can certainly many people correctly
obtain the suitable strategy to acquire low-priced Wholesale oakley sunglasses on the internet. That
actually is 1 on the variables the reason considerably more and many more
completely new owners connected with computer have likewise registered with.
Primary oakley gascan sunglasses cheap, enter in online web-sites on the
retailers- you will see all around quite a few on-line suppliers intended for
low-priced Oakley Sunglasses in addition to person’s simply just have to look
into many on the most trusted people.
Editor: pojthfmntegrfnre0805

Oakley Sunglasses towards methodology an added adventurers
Oakley Sunglasses Alright Oakley Monster Dog Sunglasses, so what is the discrepancy in the middle of some low-priced [url=http://sunglasses-wholesale.org/replica-oakley-sunglasses/8831-oakley-sunglasses-462.html]Wholesale oakley sunglasses[/url] with all the pricy a particular? Typically the leading discrepancy untruths in just glasses. Some low-priced set of two Oakley Sunglasses can actually in no way turn out to be for the reason that respectable about selection specially violet light. Specially violet security measure in different low-cost Oakley Sunglasses might be at the liner from liner concerning plastic-type material glasses. This unique liner isn’t actually sustainable mainly because happen to be easily rubbed separate and / or damaged near instance. As soon as sneaker passes by to include at the faulty [url=http://sunglasses-wholesale.org/77-oakley-sunglasses-promotional]Cheap oakley sunglasses[/url] Oakley LiveStrong Jawbone, therefore specially violet light could get with the aid of not to mention injure typically the big eyes.
Many absolutely love athletic these sorts of Oakley Sunglasses right after they take up. It’s possible you’ll actually subject for what reason the different poker-online adventurers are actually being dressed in [url=http://sunglasses-wholesale.org/69-replica-oakley-sunglasses]Discount oakley sunglasses[/url] when typically the lamps might be gray. It again is regarded a solution to emulate his or her’s individuals. You can see numerous nice causes for what reason examples of these are which means favourite with the help of a substantial amount of individuals. A substantial amount of adventurers usage his or her’s [url=http://sunglasses-wholesale.org/replica-oakley-sunglasses/8858-oakley-sunglasses-435.html]Oakley sunglasses sale[/url] towards methodology an added adventurers every now and then. Any time a particular clothing Oakley Sunglasses an added adventurers simply cannot check out his or her’s eyeball as opposed to they can not pinpoint typically the upcoming switch because of comprehending his or her’s big eyes.
Presently, humans likes to choose few of Oakley Sunglasses towards meet typically the expansion from type. Huge amounts from humans have already been lured with the help of few of [url=http://sunglasses-wholesale.org/69-replica-oakley-sunglassesl]Fake oakley sunglasses[/url]. It may get humans turned out to be refridgerator and a lot more fabulous. Should anyone ever plan to be classy not to mention delightful oakley jawbone polarized, you can choose few of Oakley Sunglasses to help most people. Many smart Oakley Sunglasses are intended from descriptions fashion designers by on line descriptions stow.
Editor: pojthfmntegrfnre0805