SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    SitePoint Zealot Paul_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    London
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Fastclick + Defaults?

    Hi all

    I just got one of my sites approved by fastclick....
    But my site serves nearly 85% default ads!!

    How many defaults does fastclick serve for your sites???

    PS: I don't use the pop-unders yet....but might have to if the number of defaults dont increase!!

    PPS: I do use my defults to display some other banners which pay CPA

  2. #2
    SitePoint Zealot alexk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    134
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    80-85% here with all CPM campaigns selected...

  3. #3
    Serial Publisher silver trophy aspen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    East Lansing, MI USA
    Posts
    12,937
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    this is why I left fastclick
    Chris Beasley - I publish content and ecommerce sites.
    Featured Article: Free Comprehensive SEO Guide
    My Guide to Building a Successful Website
    My Blog|My Webmaster Forums

  4. #4
    SitePoint Zealot alexk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    134
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i use fastclick first in the chain (then tribalfusion, then burst), and overall i sell 50+% of my inventory on CPM basis, which isn't that bad these days imho

  5. #5
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Riverwoods, IL
    Posts
    16
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I get around 40% defaults, and I have deselected a few of the CPC campaigns that are doing very poorly. I have mostly unique page views though. From what I can tell, they will not show the same visitor the same ad over and over. Thus, the more pageviews you have per each unique visitor, the more default ads that will be shown. I think it definitely makes sense for CPM campaigns, but not necessarily for CPC campaigns. Overall, though, it probably does increase the CTR.

    Hope that seems helpful.

    Rick

    http://www.webtowns.org/Webmaster_Re...ment_Services/
    Ad services - listed, rated, reviewed

  6. #6
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Springfield, MA
    Posts
    287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It depends on the goal of the campaign -- branding or performance based.

    Originally defined, CPM was for branding and CPC was for performance-based advertising. That's at least the publisher's viewpoint.

    Unfortunately the concepts have flip-flopped, where if an advertiser wants to run a branding campaign they run it as a CPC so they don't have to pay much, and if they want to run a performance-based campaign they run it as CPM so they can have infinite clicks for a fixed price.

    Next, the ad networks bowed down to the advertisers by putting in "capping". So they only show a few CPM banners per visitor on the theory that if no one has responded after 1 or 2 ads, they won't ever respond to the campaign. Of course, that defeats the branding impact of the campaign -- you can't brand a company by showing someone its name once or twice.

    Of course, there's no capping for CPC campaigns, those show over and over again to the same people.

    Then they put in optimization, where if a site doesn't achieve a certain CTR they get the CPM campaign yanked from their rotation. This makes sense for performance-based campaigns, but not for branding campaigns.

    The result? If you have a site with a low pages-per-unique (PPU) (like maybe only view 1-2 pages per unique), you can get most of your inventory filled. You will get a higher CTR, and you will also get few defaults.

    If you have a site that has a loyal visitor base who comes back over and over, and views a lot of pages, you will be optimized out of most campaigns because you can't compete with sites with a lower PPU site. Eventually you won't make anything on banners.

    All advertising is immediate-result based right now. That's the sad reality. If you have a site that can't sell irrelevant products to your visitors, you're in trouble.

    Ralph

  7. #7
    SitePoint Zealot Paul_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    London
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    so what ad-network would you recommend for a
    site with "loyal" visitors.... ie each visitor sees about 15 pages at a time
    and come back every 3 days....?

    Thanx

  8. #8
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Springfield, MA
    Posts
    287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Unfortunately, there are none that I know of. Big advertisers don't care about loyal-visitor sites, they only care about immediate performance of their ad. If your site can't bring them visitors at a 3+% clip, they don't want to deal with you.

    Advertisers seem more willing to advertise on a poorly designed, content-free site if it can achieve 3% CTR than a site that is respected, well-designed, content-rich, that gets 0.5% CTR.

    Your only hope is to maybe get advertisers who are in the niche field that your site pertains to, who know of the reputation of your site, and who are willing to "sponsor" it. They hope to gain a favorable reputation by being associated with your site, regardless of if they get 5% CTR.

    Ralph

  9. #9
    SitePoint Enthusiast Zonify's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Grayson, GA, USA
    Posts
    80
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If only that were not true... I was working a deal with a company for $.50 cpm, then they asked that their banner only be shown 2 times per visitor (capped), I kindly rejected the offer, sicne I don't feel they should pay me such a low rate for high ctr banners. Sheesh, even when ad rates are so low advertisers should be happy... They just want more and more... Well not all of them, but a number.
    Aakshay Kripalani
    Marketing Director
    Zonify Advertising Network - http://www.zonify.com

  10. #10
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Springfield, MA
    Posts
    287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I brought this up in another forum, but didn't get any response, so I'll try it here since it's somewhat on-topic.

    We all know that most CPM programs "optimize" based on CTR. If you don't get a good CTR you don't get good CPM campaigns. The difference can be remarkable -- you might make $0.07 CPM on all your traffic if you have a poor CTR, but $0.70 CPM if you have good CTR. If you're bringing in 1,000,000 impressions a month, that's $630 dollars in lost opportunity cost, a non-trivial amount.

    Most networks audit their traffic, usually at the end of the month. This implies that no auditing is done until the month is over, which implies that optimization uses potentially bogus CTR figures because it's relying on unaudited traffic.

    It would be inherently unfair to throw someone out of a network because they get multiple clicks from certain IP addresses, unless you can prove that the publisher is generating those fake clicks themselves. Otherwise I could train a robot at one of my competitors and destroy their revenue streams nearly instantly.

    I think that most legitimate CPM networks currently just filter out the multiple clicks and don't pay on them. I have no problem with this -- if there are multiple clicks from the same IP in a short amount of time on my site, I understand that I should only be paid for legitimate clicks.

    However, if optimization is based on "instantaneous" CTR, does that give a loophole to people who would in fact cheat a network? Inflate your clicks, get better CPM campaigns, and lose nothing at the end of the month because the clicks didn't give you any more direct revenue (they gave you more revenue indirectly by increasing your paid %)?

    The old way of cheating a CPM network was to inflate traffic. That's pretty easy to catch, and the proof is pretty obvious. If you've got improper code on your site, you're pretty guilty.

    But I suspect that the emphasis on CTR may be creating a new cheating technique -- inflate your CTR so that you get a higher percentage of paying ads. And I don't think that ad networks are set up to detect, filter, and penalize this type of cheating yet.

    Does anyone else see the CTR optimization coupled with more nebulous cheating detection to be a future problem?

    Ralph


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
  •