Will add a long opinion in due course when got a bit more time.
Re: Policing, going back to previous threads, networks or merchants may engage by being firm with an affiliate but they won't with the likes of competitor merchants (even those within their own network) or "ebay" .. double standards & cowardliness, what kind of message does that end out? Affiliates are easy targets.
With regard to threats, a polite email and telephone call is best approach & should suffice .. in case it's inadvertent or overlooked because there is a problem where all too often policies are changed without affiliates being duly informed by the network & if are mostly inadequate periods of notification when policies change (go back to discussions on contract law). Genuine mistakes are made by all parties. What I endorse & say to anyone, make sure you print copies of merchant details & ppc polices out, you'll be surprised how often you'll need to pull these out.
Unfortunately with say for example CJ and their network quality, you have the characteristics of a "police state", threatening accounts when all too often they are mistaken. A networks roll should be more of a facilitator not a policing unit ...
The solutions are simple & etiquette is required. Firstly the merchant should register marks with respective ppc search engines (if they don't own the mark, then c'est la vie), compulsory emails plus internal mail notifications (where applicable) of the slightest changes which take place to a policy, an adequate period of notice applied to these (contract law?). If an affiliate is found in breach refer to a polite email & telephone call to rectify asap. If this is not implemented then suspend the relationship between merchant & affiliate (Not the Account)
And any termination's should be only between the merchant & not that affiliate not a whole account. Otherwise the network is jeopardising prosperous & ethical relationships with existing merchants, which shouldn't be their realm.
BTW have you seen a typical email from CJ network quality? Quite disgusting & merchants think so too.
The role of the network needs to change, maybe it shouldn't be their jurisdiction to police these, but yes send email or contact obo of client. On a side not perhaps management of programs should now be outsourced as .. again as I have stated in previous threads, I do think that networks have too many programs to handle.
Do we really want to see networks image portrayed a "police state" and acting like "The Borg"
Possibly, there is room for an independent company who can manage this as a whole by simply monitoring ppc policies. This will save account managers time by out sourcing to this company allowing the account manager to focus on promoting the program & attracting new & existing affiliates into the program. Because at the moment it's out of control & networks are handling hot coal.
----------------------
Marketer .. You'll be surprised of the loss in traffic .. ie not a 100% transition even when someone is looking for a brand, but that is another case study altogether.
----------------------
Re brand bidding, there is a thread here called "PPC : Is the Brand Bigger Than The Generic Term"
http://www.a4uforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=43759
The pitching is maybe the wrong way around, as affiliates who are good with generics, will choose who they want to promote in a sector. The brand bidding should maybe be offered to the affiliate as leverage to push those their way.
Do we really want networks to move towards & be perceived as a Police OR Nanny State, where from affiliates perspectives it won't be all things equal.
Oh and re closed groups & "teachers pets" or the occassional "cartel" or whatever it's refered to, i wouldn't be surprised is a couple of networks get found out, about time this came out, when most networks are honestly trying vary hard to do what is a very difficult job.