Click to Reveal Banned!

[Mogga]

Tweet

Is it possible for a group of affiliates to put a motion forward to the IAB's next meeting?

[thebusiness]

Obviously, we can only check so many sites and do spot checking on a few pages, so we need affiliates to help us out.

You only need to check 2 and that would account for 90% of the problem. However, since interpretation of what is allowed and what isn't has now been fudged over the only way it can be resolved is to do away with click to reveal entirely.

Give me one valid explanation of how 'click to reveal' creates incremental sales?

[gingersilverfox]

Elephant in the building moment here! The only reason there is a discussion about VC'c and cookie stuffing is that when an affiliate directs a punter to a merchant's site there is a box telling him that he may be able to get a better deal if he searches for a promo code! How helpful is that? These boxes be not serve the needs of the affiliate!

From a straw pole of family and friends -not scientific I know but certainly indicative- I found that they will search until they find the best deal, often not satisfied with the first discount they receive. This is backed up from my conversion stats which are down on the merchants which have this box and the same from merchants which don't have this box!

I don't understand why merchants don't offer the affiliate the opportunity of landing on their site which doesn't have a discount box after entering address details. It could be made even more simple by having a voucher code unique to the affiliate where no matter where it was used, the originator of the code would get the commission. Being that these option are relatively straightforward and certainly more profitable leads me to think that there may be other issues at large - cue thread on this.

[Hero]

You only need to check 2 and that would account for 90% of the problem. However, since interpretation of what is allowed and what isn't has now been fudged over the only way it can be resolved is to do away with click to reveal entirely.

Give me one valid explanation of how 'click to reveal' creates incremental sales?

Look, this is going round in circles - the networks who cosigned the guidelines thoroughly checked the top voucher sites on numerous occasions. We issued warnings to quite a few affiliates and followed up. We have taken collective action against one affiliate who refused to make the necessary changes. We keep doing spot checking to ensure they comply. We also follow up on complaints we receive from affiliates.

You can say that we don't have the balls to take action. Or that we don't care. Or that we want to protect our override, so we turn a blind eye. Or that we have different rules depending on the size of the affiliate. Or that we are the source of all evil. Nothing networks do is going to be enough or good enough, I've come to accept this.

If there is an industry consensus to abolish CTR, networks will ensure it is implemented. You need to bring it up for discussion at the AMC.

I'm not the defender of CTR, let me clarify. But all this constant nagging about it just does something to me... Plus, I have all the time in the world being on medical leave and nothing worthwhile on tv on a saturday

[thebusiness]

I'm not the defender of CTR, let me clarify. But all this constant nagging about it just does something to me... Plus, I have all the time in the world being on medical leave and nothing worthwhile on tv on a saturday

It's quite obvious that a lot of people don't like it, it adds nothing to the user experience, it costs merchants dearly and it gives you a headache.

On the other hand though, a few well connected people are happy with the status quo?

What more is there to say?

[Hero]

It's quite obvious that a lot of people don't like it, it adds nothing to the user experience, it costs merchants dearly and it gives you a headache.

On the other hand though, a few well connected people are happy with the status quo?

What more is there to say?

The current solution has solved A HUGE LOT of problems and has set standards for accepted activity and this is something that should be recognised. It might be time to revisit and expand the guidelines, I don't know, but I would welcome the roundtable. I understand why people use it and I understand why other people don't like it. The AMC is the best place for this to be discussed, as that's the decision-making forum.

But I do think that the timing of the discussion isn't coincidental - hey, we've reached october, we haven't had a hot argument topic in the forum in the run up to xmas yet, let's create 10 threads on the same subject. This industry loves to hate in cycles and in bulk.

[thebusiness]

But I do think that the timing of the discussion isn't coincidental - hey, we've reached october, we haven't had a hot argument topic in the forum in the run up to xmas yet, let's create 10 threads on the same subject. This industry loves to hate in cycles and in bulk.

I agree.
Seeing as you are at a loose end why not read some good books -

Julius Caesar - how I conquered the world be not saying 'owt.
Dale Carnegie - make friends and influence people by keeping your gob shut
Barack Obama - Can we fix it ? No, leave things as they are, it's easier.

[Barry]

I voted for 'I dont care either way' because as long as the playing field is level - its a fair game.

After all the voucher sector is open to everyone - thats everyone - new and novice affiliates and the seasoned ones. There are so many voucher code scripts available now for free with built in voucher datafeed importers its easy to setup. A content affiliate or a PPC affiliate or a cashback affiliate or even a blogger can now complement their affiliate marketing with discount codes to help sell the products they promote and they are all free to use CTR if they so choose to raise their chances of the sales they are after.

Its also untrue that if your a big affiliate you can get away with more as well as peoples fears that networks are not proactive in enforcing current IAB regulations. As one of the oldest VC sites I can assure you that its just not the case.

As for the comments on the user experience "it adds nothing to the user experience" - your right, to most users its completely invisible!! They have absolutely no idea what the CTR mechanism does in terms of it generating revenue for the voucher site - so dont worry about all those 'poor' users - they will be OK

As for costing merchants money. - I would say quite a few of my sales are made by users on the checkout page of a merchant who retrospectively search for a merchant - but I also have access to stats which say otherwise. Why do you think its possible for big discount sites to bid on terms like 'discount code' and 'voucher code' on google PPC? Its becasue there are loads of people looking for bargains and offers. They dont care what store its from just as long as they are getting a bargain (or they perceive themselves to be getting a better offer than anyone else). Why do you think people come to my site and search for things like 'shoes' and then choose a store that sells shoes and has a voucher its because they think they are getting a deal. So OK coming up in the SERPS for merchant name + voucher code is very lucrative but voucher sites also offer merchants the chance to make a whole load more incremental sales if their offers are good and they can offer a good bargain.

Ta

Baz

[Leeky]

Hero, I'm a bit concerned about you thinking I started this thread purely because we haven't had a hot argument topic for a few weeks, and that its now October???, believe me, I have far better things to do than come here to start an argument just because it's October or because it's been a bit dull round here for a while.

I'm not actually sure what to make of your posts regarding this matter, I think i'll just bow out of this topic now as i've made my views clear, and cannot see any valid reasons as to why CTR is still being used, and why it should carry on being used in the future.

Lee

[thebusiness]

After all the voucher sector is open to everyone - thats everyone - new and novice affiliates and the seasoned ones.

Yes, this is true. We can all publish vouchers - this I know.

Its also untrue that if your a big affiliate you can get away with more as well as peoples fears that networks are not proactive in enforcing current IAB regulations. As one of the oldest VC sites I can assure you that its just not the case.

It isn't hard to find sites who are in breach of merchants terms and the 'guidelines' and they are always the same names. It's been going on for 2 years to my knowledge - the only site to have been banned is a US one (not in the old boys club - but, hey they have a UK site now!!).
If networks were enforcing the rules then it wouldn't be happening - instead they are looking at ways to fudge the issue to a point where anything can be explained as either 'within guidelines' or 'a mistake'.

Someone once said to me about a clear case of fraud: 'we can't just tell them to remove the link you know!'
Why??

As for costing merchants money. - I would say quite a few of my sales are made by users on the checkout page of a merchant who retrospectively search for a merchant - but I also have access to stats which say otherwise.

Everyone has the opportunity to enter a voucher code regardless of whether they have come from an affiliate link or not. Common sense dictates that a lot of natural traffic is going to voucher sites from the checkout. Forced clicks which do not offer the user any saving are costing merchants money - how can they not be?

All in all, if your argument is true then you have nothing to fear from the removal of CTR and you are right not to care one way or the other.

So, the question remains - why are networks so reluctant to remove the mechanism?

Either way, I think we will see more and more merchants selecting the option of not appearing on code sites altogether - so the big offenders are slowly killing their golden egg laying geese?

[dougs]

I can't believe this thread. People were invited to the IAB meeting to setup the guidelines. Many people decided not to come.

So myself and about 50 other people sat in a room and thrashed out some guidelines. Some people wanted more draconian rules, some wanted less, eventually everyone sort of agreed on some guideliness.

Now the people who did not even get off there arse to come to the meeting want to change the guidelines. Stuff you is my simple view. Go and keep whinging and whining or stop acting like spoilt little bratts.

Note this has nothing to do with my personal view. But I will go to the meetings and argue my point. I will then conform to the guideliness.

If you want to raise the issue then come to the IAB and present it, as I do belive the IAB has proven to be sucessful in its implementation of the VC guidelines. Well done to the networks and the IAB

Now there is a framework to address things use it.

Doug

[ian]

I can't believe this thread. People were invited to the IAB meeting to setup the guidelines. Many people decided not to come.

So myself and about 50 other people sat in a room and thrashed out some guidelines. Some people wanted more draconian rules, some wanted less, eventually everyone sort of agreed on some guideliness.

Now the people who did not even get off there arse to come to the meeting want to change the guidelines. Stuff you is my simple view. Go and keep whinging and whining or stop acting like spoilt little bratts.

Note this has nothing to do with my personal view. But I will go to the meetings and argue my point. I will then conform to the guideliness.

Doug

OK everyone, it's time to stop having an opinion as Doug has spoken. If you can't get time off work, or can't afford to take the day off to attend an IAB meeting then you must check your opions at the door. Now, all grow up, bow your heads and keep quiet, the IAB has spoken and may not be challenged.

<edit> that was a dig at Doug's attitude rather than the IAB </edit>

[thebusiness]

Now the people who did not even get off there arse to come to the meeting want to change the guidelines. Stuff you is my simple view. Go and keep whinging and whining or stop acting like spoilt little bratts.

You are entitled to your opinion Doug, however, I think the guidelines are being too loosely interpreted and enforced either half-heartedly or not at all. That is my opinion.

I guess the wind is blowing in your favour at the moment - I'll wait 'till it isn't and then call you names back

[Hero]

Lee, I have a single opinion and it's the same regardless whether it's expressed privately or publicly, so allow me to reply the same in both:

Before anything, let me tell you what I voted in your poll: don't care; and I voted prior to engaging in the conversation.

As I mentioned in one of the threads, I do see the reason why it's in use and I do see the reason why it's controversial and causing issues in the industry. I have also stated that my personal opinion is that it is excessively used for my liking, but I will say again that if used in the way it's intended and as -currently- defined by the IAB, it's just like any other legit method to entice the customer to engage with the merchant.

I am not a defender of CTR. I am voicing a defence for the forum that decided on the guidelines and the networks that took over its implementation. These 2 are being battered left, right and centre for no reason other than disagreeing with the decision. Come argue your point at the next AMC, the forum for the decision to be updated and I will back whatever decision is reached. As I mentioned, it might be time to revisit the guidelines, but that needs to come as a result of a specific process, not 10 people expressing their disagreement on a4u.

As for the annoyance over my comment - I'm sorry that you got annoyed or angered by it, it certainly was not my intention as it wasn't meant to either offend you or even point you as the "culprit". I don't get personal in my posts, because I get angry when others do that to me (calling my opinion stupid is an example of that).
I do get annoyed that there are 3-4 threads on exactly the same subject, as that dilutes the discussions. I also find the timing of the issue to be risen as very predictable; it is the time of year that big debates on the 3 beloved topics happen, ppc, vouchers, cashback. There's more at stake now than 3 months ago, and I understand that. But I also don't think it's prudent to make fundamental changes on a spur of a moment when we're in october.

I also believe that certain people do have a lot to gain by having CTR banned altogether. Don't take this personally again.

The 2 threads that I've participated are theoretically meant to be for discussion and exploration of common ground; instead, they have become a "us and them" battle where people are forced to defend themselves for "daring" to have a different opinion, rather than back up that opinion.

I wish I could be at the October AMC - it would be most intersting, if indeed someone does bring this up for discussion.

[dougs]

Sorry but if you can't make time to come to the meeting to discuss something that you feel so strongly about then tough. I don't believe you care you just want to whinge.

The simple point is you can whine and whine and whine on here as much as you want but it will make no difference, the decisions are made by the people who turned up at the meetings. There is now a process and it has been effective.

Leeky I emailed you several times and have invited you to the IAB and you do not come, I don't know why.

Hero darling you are just too nice

Doug