SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 129
  1. #26
    SitePoint Addict noxcel.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    323
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by techmonkey
    Is that to provide a match to their high quality ads? LOL!
    , lol

    Anyway, look for Casale Media to get more referrals.
    Webmaster Tutorials | Photoshop, Flash, 3D Tutorials

  2. #27
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Suwanee, GA USA
    Posts
    310
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by techmonkey
    Is that to provide a match to their high quality ads? LOL!

  3. #28
    SitePoint Guru SimonMc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    The Office
    Posts
    616
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell

    They IPO'ed in April at $12 a share and the stock has gone straight downward since and today is at $8.42 (current quote 20 minutes delayed).

    Some legal action would pull it down more, but it's already fallen like 2000 when it started at a post-2000 adjusted IPO price .
    Where were you in 2000? Bubble burst was from $15 a share or in many cases...$85 a share. Tanked big time to 0.22c a share. Now that is fallen like 2000

    Simon

  4. #29
    SitePoint Wizard OnlineGuide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    PENN
    Posts
    2,390
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    With all of the other networks providing referral programs (ValueClick, Casale, Buds, RealTech, etc.) you really do not need to hold on to FastClick that much. I think this was a stupid move on FastClicks part. If they go any lower, they could be a takeover target from a larger company or network. Or they merge with another one. Just think of the new names that would bring LOL.
    The Online Guide

  5. #30
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Someone should send them a link to this post.

  6. #31
    Level 8 Chinese guy Archbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Somewhere in this vast universe
    Posts
    3,741
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Going public is the downfall fo many companies because then you have to please all those pesky investors.

  7. #32
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Suwanee, GA USA
    Posts
    310
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SimonMc
    Where were you in 2000? Bubble burst was from $15 a share or in many cases...$85 a share. Tanked big time to 0.22c a share. Now that is fallen like 2000

    Simon
    Who are you telling ? I was working for a now dead .com builder then! Ever heard of Rare Medium? I started there in January 2000 with a ~$31 stock option deal. And in less than a year I watched the share price go up above $90 and then DOWN below $10! All before a single one of my options was vested!!! Anyway, I got outta there before the end of 2000. Before I left I told folks I was not looking to work for another .com again anytime soon! And some folks I worked with thought I was CRAZY for saying that . They saw the bridges burning and still thought things would be OK for the sector overall !!! (They all were not that dumb, but some just really didn't see the obvious!)

    So yea I know a drop like 2000! I know it all too well.

    To be honest, to have a drop like 2000 you've got to start out a heck of a lot better than FastClick's stock .

  8. #33
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    257
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell
    Who are you telling ? I was working for a now dead .com builder then! Ever heard of Rare Medium? I started there in January 2000 with a ~$31 stock option deal. And in less than a year I watched the share price go up above $90 and then DOWN below $10! All before a single one of my options was vested!!! Anyway, I got outta there before the end of 2000. Before I left I told folks I was not looking to work for another .com again anytime soon! And some folks I worked with thought I was CRAZY for saying that . They saw the bridges burning and still thought things would be OK for the sector overall !!! (They all were not that dumb, but some just really didn't see the obvious!)

    So yea I know a drop like 2000! I know it all too well.

    To be honest, to have a drop like 2000 you've got to start out a heck of a lot better than FastClick's stock .
    So you should have known fastclick drop so far is way far from 2000esque drops.

  9. #34
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Suwanee, GA USA
    Posts
    310
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by apastor
    So you should have known fastclick drop so far is way far from 2000esque drops.
    This is the problem with folks taking jokes too seriously.

    However my joke does have some factual context. FastClick has been public for only a few months and seen its share price fall over 30%. In 2000 stocks did not fall super low over night. It happend over a period of months. At the current rate FastClick is already on a 2000-like slide.

    They never took the peak like web stocks of 2000, but their current slide is similar to times past.

  10. #35
    SitePoint Addict psyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cedar Rapids
    Posts
    295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If I was making $3,700 a month off referrals, WITHOUT QUESTION I'd speak with an attorney, especially if you've got the words "for life" saved anywhere. Maybe even the "indefinitely" clause might be worth it! I mean we all did honestly feel the deal was to get referral payments as long as that publisher (and we) remained with Fastclick.
    The terms of service does say they can change their terms at any time. I know some people posted about not being able to change retroactivly, but they really aren't. Some of my referrals are 2 or more years old, and they are not going to require me to pay the difference on what I would have only earned for 12 months of that referral. They are only changing the future payments.

    I would really love to see them add a grandfather clause, and think they should to please the current publishers, but legally there is no grounds for a lawsuit that I can tell.

  11. #36
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    866
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by psyon
    The terms of service does say they can change their terms at any time. I know some people posted about not being able to change retroactivly, but they really aren't. Some of my referrals are 2 or more years old, and they are not going to require me to pay the difference on what I would have only earned for 12 months of that referral. They are only changing the future payments.
    Your logic is flawed. This is obviously not what people in this thread meant by retroactively.

  12. #37
    SitePoint Addict psyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cedar Rapids
    Posts
    295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Your logic is flawed. This is obviously not what people in this thread meant by retroactively.
    I know what they mean by retroactively. The point was that it could be viewed either way.

  13. #38
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Suwanee, GA USA
    Posts
    310
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Psyon, given you will be out of over $40,000 a year because of this. Do you think it might be worth an hour's time getting the opinion of a professional with a working knowledge of this kind of law?

  14. #39
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    44
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by psyon
    I know what they mean by retroactively. The point was that it could be viewed either way.
    This is not true. When Joe Schmoe provided a referral on May 1, the terms of the agreement were this:

    Joe Schmoe refers Jane Schmoe to Fastclick, and will get 10% of the earnings for the life of the account. The service you provided was completed on May 1st, and FastClick is obligated to the terms of their contract as of that day.

    Fastclick cannot then say on June 1 that the terms of what you have already done have changed. This would be the equivalent of retroactively paying a smaller percentage for an ad you served a month ago. The key is when the service was performed and the terms of the agreement on that date, not when people are getting paid.

  15. #40
    SitePoint Addict psyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cedar Rapids
    Posts
    295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't really think a lawsuit will have any ground, but Im not a lawyer, but maybe I will contact mine. I do think the best thing to do is to be vocal about it. Im not sure if FastClick has a person that monitors the forums, but I did mention that there was a bit of an outcry to the manager of media operations.

  16. #41
    SitePoint Addict psyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cedar Rapids
    Posts
    295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeMan01
    This is not true. When Joe Schmoe provided a referral on May 1, the terms of the agreement were this:

    Joe Schmoe refers Jane Schmoe to Fastclick, and will get 10% of the earnings for the life of the account. The service you provided was completed on May 1st, and FastClick is obligated to the terms of their contract as of that day.

    Fastclick cannot then say on June 1 that the terms of what you have already done have changed. This would be the equivalent of retroactively paying a smaller percentage for an ad you served a month ago. The key is when the service was performed and the terms of the agreement on that date, not when people are getting paid.

    I do believe that the terms say they can cancel the contract at any moment for any reason, so they could just kill your account and not pay you anything any more. The key thing here is that doing that, or what they did ruins the relationship with publishers. We all like working with trustworthy companies who don't seem to be out to cheat us. With them changing their terms in this way, it will drive away some publishers, and probably will impact the number of referals they recieve from now on.

  17. #42
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    44
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by psyon
    I do believe that the terms say they can cancel the contract at any moment for any reason, so they could just kill your account and not pay you anything any more. The key thing here is that doing that, or what they did ruins the relationship with publishers. We all like working with trustworthy companies who don't seem to be out to cheat us. With them changing their terms in this way, it will drive away some publishers, and probably will impact the number of referals they recieve from now on.
    This would certainly be an interesting gray area. They can cancel your account, but unless you have violated your terms, they still must pay you for all services provided before the cancellation. Since your referrals are a service provided, and their payment terms when you provided said referral was "for life", I suspect most ad networks would stop paying simply because they can get away with it - its not worth the trouble for anyone to really question it. However, if it was challenged legally, I think you'd have the stronger case.

    Now, if the terms for FC are "for the life of your account", then that would work a bit differently. But if it's just "for life" or "for the life of the referral's account", I don't think they legally can simply cancel an account and stop paying on referrals.

  18. #43
    fad (n): a craze; interest... Fahd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    India/US - Depends!
    Posts
    2,737
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Class action law suits can really work wonders. Like already mentioned it would hurt them even worse through all the bad PR they would be getting.

  19. #44
    SitePoint Zealot neoenvision's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i wonder where did all the fastclick staff (sitepoint members) go
    I would wonder what they'll reply in this thread
    ģ Myspace Codes
    Terry J. Z.

  20. #45
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't have any referrals with FastClick, but I think that legal action against FastClick for this has a very good chance of succeeding, due to the fact that there's a pretty darn good prior settlement on it.

    http://www.geek.com/techupdate/justi...9/ftcapple.htm

    Apple Computer Corp. settled a "deceptive advertising" complaint filed against it by the Federal Trade Commission and agreed to give customers free support.

    Apple ran an ad campaign in 1992-1996 enticing consumers to buy Apple products with the promise of free lifetime technical support under the "Apple Assurance" program. In 1997, Apple began charging US$35 for each support incident.

    Apple has agreed to reimburse customers who purchased products under the Apple Assurance time period and paid the support fee, and willprovide free support for future incidents.
    And I'm pretty darn sure that apple had the usual "out-clause" that everyone has in their agreement, but that doesn't change that they advertised "for life". The above settlement shows that if you advertise something, you cannot hide behind some "well, it's not really life" clause in a long legal document. Advertising must be correct, or it isn't legal.

    I encourage the people who makes substansial referral earnings to get together and stand up for your businesses in this matter.
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  21. #46
    SitePoint Addict psyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cedar Rapids
    Posts
    295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeMan01
    This would certainly be an interesting gray area. They can cancel your account, but unless you have violated your terms, they still must pay you for all services provided before the cancellation. Since your referrals are a service provided, and their payment terms when you provided said referral was "for life", I suspect most ad networks would stop paying simply because they can get away with it - its not worth the trouble for anyone to really question it. However, if it was challenged legally, I think you'd have the stronger case.

    Now, if the terms for FC are "for the life of your account", then that would work a bit differently. But if it's just "for life" or "for the life of the referral's account", I don't think they legally can simply cancel an account and stop paying on referrals.
    To quote section 2C of the Publisher Agreement:
    "Upon termination all ties to referrals will be permanently severed and Publisher will not receive nor be entitled to receive future referral commissions hereunder."

    Also, the page pulled from archive.org say indefinatly, not for life.

  22. #47
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    866
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by neoenvision
    i wonder where did all the fastclick staff (sitepoint members) go
    I would wonder what they'll reply in this thread
    Thats an easy one. This latest move by FC is so low that they couldn't possibly have anything to say about it.

  23. #48
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Suwanee, GA USA
    Posts
    310
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    http://web.archive.org/web/200010190.../pub_card.html
    Referral Fees
    Monthly Bonus equal to 5% of net earnings of all referred Publishers
    That was the deal when I signed up. So I expect 5% of all my referrals net earnings so long as they are with FastClick.

    M. Johansson is correct IMHO. If I made enough off referals to make an attorney take notice I would take action. If anyone else does have enough referrals worth taking action and is looking for others to sign on in support of a case PM me!

  24. #49
    Level 8 Chinese guy Archbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Somewhere in this vast universe
    Posts
    3,741
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would contact a lawyer, but my $15 per month off referrals isn't worth my time. However, like I said, I'm going to focus efforts on other networks now.

  25. #50
    Website Publisher incka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Wakefield, Airstrip One
    Posts
    1,039
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't earn anything off referals, but I'll add some thoughts to this.

    In the UK I'm pretty sure this would be covered by false advertising laws as in the publisher section they said for lifetime of account.

    I'd also like to recommend a boycott of fastclick, I'll take part if others do, to show them they can't abuse publishers like this.
    Sean Spurr @ Incka Limited
    Fun Games - put games on your site GamesForYourWebsite.com!
    Sites:ABCDEFGHIJ


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •