I currently only use AdSense… but right now I’m eanring something like € 1,00 per month!
And I suppose that the RPM is so low also for the reasons described in this thread.
It is all depending on the type of site. I have seen from 10% (fashion blog) to 50% (gaming site) ad blocking rate for our clients.
Here are some of the generic steps I always advice my clients when it comes to dealing with ad blocking
Step 1. Tracking your ad-blocked traffic (if you haven’t done so)
Step 2. Asking your users to whitelist your site.
Step 3. Asking those who insist to use ad blocker to pay for content:
- After some tracking, we can suggest visitors who insist to use ad blocker to pay for the content (very small amount).
Step 4. Displaying alternative ads to non-contributing visitors:
- We can now safely show ads to visitors who are refusing to compensate for the content in any shape or form. It is fair to do so at this point. However please keep in mind that most of these ads have very low eCPM because advertisers don’t want to pay for such impressions – this should be our last resort.
Edited by cpradio: removed solicitation offer, prefer to keep discussions on the forum
2 Likes
An interesting quote from the BBC website:
Ad-blocking ‘presents challenge’
Mr Whittingdale also launched a new drive to tackle ad-blocking, saying it poses a similar threat to websites that illegal file-sharing did to music and film a decade ago.
“This practice is depriving many websites and platforms of legitimate revenue,” he said. "It is having an impact across the value chain, and it presents a challenge that has to be overcome. Because, quite simply, if people don’t pay in some way for content, then that content will eventually no longer exist.
“And that’s as true for the latest piece of journalism as it is for the new album from Muse.”
He pointed to research that showed while people do not dislike online advertising in general, they do not like advertising that “interrupts what they are doing”, such as auto-play adverts and pop-ups.
“If we can avoid the intrusive ads that consumers dislike, then I believe there should be a decrease in the use of ad-blockers,” said the culture secretary.
Mr Whittingdale said he would be meeting “representatives from all sides of the argument” in the coming weeks to discuss the issue, adding that he did not think ad-blockers should be banned.
3 Likes
Dude is a genius. I never bothered with a blocker until about six months ago. All the fly in, hard to close ads just did me in, and I had to punt and block ads where they get too invasive.
I try to release the blocker for sites I like and want to support, but even then they can push my limits of patience. It’s why I stopped reading a number of magazines years ago. When it took me to page 20 or 30 to find the first piece of actual content, it was a waste of time…
6 Likes
It is the same with everything - somebody always screws it up to try and make more money.
2 Likes
Those installing ad blockers are screwing it up for everyone else.
Many sites that no longer make enough money from the less obtrusive ads are forced to install more intrusive ads to try to make up for all those who no longer see their ads due to ad blockers. As more people install ad blockers, sites have to install more obtrusive ads to try to maintain their income.
1 Like
[off topic]
I tried advertising and from a peak of over 80,000 visitors in a single day, there was not enough cash generated to supply the electric needed to operate my mouse:(
I tried a donation system for about a year ( and received a single $8 donation). The effort involved was too complicated in having to complete all the registration details.
I was wondering if a donation system could be introduced. The basic idea is to allocate say ten dollars of your own funds, possibly using PayPal and to donate a small proportion to the sites you like. Similar to just dipping into your pocket and giving to charities or street beggars. Simple transaction without the need for registration, authorisation, etc.
Virtually a single click then move on.
1 Like
One would imagine that less invasive advertising would be the solution.
I picked up an ad-blocker when I got tired of scrolling to the bottom of pages to kill the loud ads that kept scaring the shit out of my dogs whenever they would explode into my speakers. I don’t even set my volume very high.
I would rather see a dialogue start like: “I’m looking for a new strategy to hosting ads on my site that people with ad-blockers wouldn’t mind”. Mostly because the people using ad-blockers don’t care about how much money you lose. We DO want to see advertising that isn’t invasive or disruptive.
Maybe a poll to see why people use ad-blockers would be more effective than this thread.
1 Like
There are services like that, such as Flattr. Not sure how well they are doing, though. Seems a lost cause to me.
Many thanks for the Flattr info’.
I have just installed a non-monetary, dynamic Flattr button to one of my sites to see if it is “a lost cause” 
2 Likes
It would be interesting to know how you go with it.
Ad blockers encourage MORE OBTRUSIVE advertising to try to catch the attention of the smaller number of people visiting the site who actually see the ads. The more people block the ads the more obtrusive the ads will get for everyone else. If the ads can’t be made obtrusive enough to make up the difference in the income thenthe site will either need to shut down or to add even more obtrusive ads.
Dynamic Flattr’s per page can be seen on the site
If it is popular I will open a monetize account and see if it is better than Adsense.
It is JavaScript so I wonder if Adblockers will show the button?
I see the (small) button just fine. But it doesn’t seem to do anything. i.e. the counter didn’t increment
Many thanks for the Flattr.
Maybe there is a delay similar to Google Analytics not reporting immediately. I think it takes about two days for their reports.
If no response by tomorrow I will try to raise a support ticket.
Me too,
I don’t use ads on my sites.
It becomes disturbing and annoying to users.
So how does your web site provide you with enough money to live on if you don’t use ads?
1 Like
Comparing using add blockers to illegal file sharing is just plain nonsense. Nobody is forcing anyone to offer content for free. I remember the same discussion from years ago, when some sites, once they got popular, started saying their content was worth money and so people should pay to see it. Most of them disappeared in a short time, because people didn’t want to pay and went to other sites. So then ads became the popular way to generate a cash flow. And now that more people use ad blockers (because the money is never enough and sites get filled with annyoing adds, popping up and under and over) some have the nerve to say that it’s the ad blockers fault? Or the visitors fault? Really?
So you offer a service that costs money. You decide to offer it for free and make money with ads. Then more and more of your visitors are using an ad blocker (for whatever reason, it’s their right to decide what they do and don’t want their browser to display, and how) and you don’t make enough money anymore.
Then you can shut down your service, or put it behind a paywall, or invent some other way to make money. That is your decision. Complaining about those nasty visitors that “steal” your content, or whatever, is useless. It’s a bit like the “paper” newspapers that wanted an internet tax because they don’t sell that many newspapers anymore. Or the SEO “experts” complaining that Google doesn’t let them arrive #1 in the serps.
Is it a problem? Of course. But it’s not the visitors fault, nor the ad blockers. You know, it might be nobody’s fault. Things happen, the internet changes, and you have to evolve with it. Easy? Of course not, if it was easy, everybody would do it, and we would all be happy and rich. So don’t ask me for a solution. But if you want your website to survive, you need to find a solution, and it isn’t blaming the other.
By the way, I started using an ad blocker (and I disable it for a select few sites) because more and more sites were becoming useless because of ads that messed up the site layout, blocking important parts without the possibility of closing the ad.
6 Likes
What are you going to do if Google forces your website to display AMP style then?
How do they even make such estimates? As someone mentioned here, the kind of people who are using adblockers are mostly those who rarely click on any ads. Then there is another issue of banner blindness, which is real. It is definite that adblockers are costing money, but $22 Billion might be an exaggeration.
1 Like