Too many networks spoil the broth?

[Mogga]

Tweet

1. Duplicates - when merchants are on multiple networks do they clearly state their duplicate policy?

2. Tracking errors - does adding additional network tracking interfere with the original tracking? I'm not saying everytime but its certainly happened that major tracking problems with some merchants have happened at the same time as more network tracking being included.

3. Is it good for merchants to be on more than 2 networks at a time?

4. Is commission always the same at networks, also tiers and bonuses etc.

[sticky]

Mogga,

Some good points. Would it possible to have some kind of sticky thread on one of the forums where merchants that appear on more than one network and have different commission rates/cookies etc could be listed so it could be a useful point of call to make sure your getting the best deal, as there are several merchants I have noticed in the past with a fair difference in rates?

Anyone think it would be useful?

[hpops]

The first two points are frankly, vast! Whilst at a network I have seen the effect of launching with a secondary network on duplications and the policies towards those duplications vary significantly (all the way from pay out both, to just split them 50/50 and delete!!)
The only real publisher advantage is the ability to move links if a networks actions frustrate the progress of your relationship with a program. As for having a different comms structure per network, I think its divisive and down right wrong

[sticky]

As for having a different comms structure per network, I think its divisive and down right wrong

Think that comes down to if the network is cheaper then they can afford to pay us more commissions which I thought the list would be a good idea then we could use the networks who pay us more and eat less of the cake themselves!

[lurker]

You could argue that rival networks carrying the same merchant can be healthy competition - encourages them to take less over-ride + give more commission to the affiliate so that they get more business.

[Supercod]

Would it possible to have some kind of sticky thread on one of the forums where merchants that appear on more than one network and have different commission rates/cookies etc could be listed so it could be a useful point of call to make sure your getting the best deal, as there are several merchants I have noticed in the past with a fair difference in rates?

Anyone think it would be useful?

If you can wait until the start of next month a solution to this problem will be online for all to use. My Affiliate company UK Internet Sites has been recording this information for some time now, and I spoke to Matt start of last month saying that I would be making a website that has all the Merchants listed and he link to it as I be linking to the forum as the official one for that, the problem was while we had an extensive list it wasn’t complete so in fairness to all and for it to be a balanced informative site, all Networks big and small and all Merchants have to be included and wow is that a lot of work.

Too many networks spoil the broth?

That’s like saying Affiliates using more than one Network is a bad idea, and by the way I used to think it was always the Networks fault before I got involved in this stuff and what I found is while it is sometimes the Network, almost always problems are because of Merchants not setting up something correctly or understanding it fully. Networks can take part of the blame if they let them setup without it working but not all of it as not always stuff they know about until it starts going wrong.

1. Duplicates - when merchants are on multiple networks do they clearly state their duplicate policy?

They should but a very easy solution that works exists and I have posted so many times about it that no point in me repeating myself as everyone must know it by now.

2. Tracking errors - does adding additional network tracking interfere with the original tracking? I'm not saying every time but its certainly happened that major tracking problems with some merchants have happened at the same time as more network tracking being included.

Yes it happens, but as you know Merchants on a single network remove or break tracking codes all the time, so you can’t just say if they use more then 1 network they will have more problems as that simply isn’t based on the fact of the problem and that’s a Merchant that’s not taking care of the code when they do any kind of update or redesign.

3. Is it good for merchants to be on more than 2 networks at a time?

Yes, same way it’s good for Affiliates to be on more than one. Simple fact is one Network could be your golden boy and the other a dead donkey but if you pick a Network based on lies and sweet talking sales people then you are an idiot in my book, as you should try a few and see who is working for you. Not everyone has got the money to do that but the Merchants who went with big name network and us often (but not all the time) end up with better results via us and that’s because we work hard for them where as if you just another name on a big network you could be sitting about not doing the right thing and losing millions in sales.

4. Is commission always the same at networks, also tiers and bonuses etc.

No but it should be a level playing field, Paid On Results has a term that Merchants have to agree to and that is to offer the same public rate that they offer else where even if it’s higher on there Indy program. Bonuses can some times be related to Network performance such as AF having Christmas Bonus, good on them for doing that and Affiliate benefits but it has nothing to do with the Merchant so up to you who and what you promote with that kind of bonus in place.

[sticky]

If you can wait until the start of next month a solution to this problem will be online for all to use. My Affiliate company UK Internet Sites has been recording this information for some time now, and I spoke to Matt start of last month saying that I would be making a website that has all the Merchants listed and he link to it as I be linking to the forum as the official one for that, the problem was while we had an extensive list it wasn’t complete so in fairness to all and for it to be a balanced informative site, all Networks big and small and all Merchants have to be included and wow is that a lot of work.

Supercod - that would be great , keep us informed

[deadgoodundies]

As a merchant myself I can tell you that the BIGGEST dilemma when joining a second network was the question of "would running with 2 networks increase our sales" and at this point it's too early to tell as im sure any merchant will say the same that building a programme with some solid affiliates does take time.

RE: dupicates , we had the same probem originally with of having duplicate commissions and having to manually work out who the last referrer was and then awarding the commission to that affiliate but now thanks to futureweb (a member of this forum) he helped us put an automatic system together based on local cookies to automate it for us (the code to do exactly that is posted elsewhere on the forum) and it works really, really well.

Re: Commissions, tiers and bonuses: When we took on the second network it was explained to us that we should offer something better on the new nework than from the original network so we would attract some of the affiliates over, now this kinds of poses the merchant with a moral dilemma - You don't want to upset the affiliates on the original network who happen to be on that network but you do want to attract more affiliates to the new network. End of the day we decided to offer both affiliates the same deal on either network - we don't like to play games with people and it's only fair that no matter what network the affiliate is on they should get the same deal, yes it might make us lose out sometimes but i'd rather feel good about it rather than not.

Our main reason for going with 2 different networks

We wanted to give our affiliates the easiest time possible , and each network had their good and bad points for example if I was to pit feed capabilites between AW and AF then AW would win hands down as it's nice and easy for me to get my feed updated and there is no wait at all, so I can update a feed send out a newsletter to all our affiliates and smack bang whallop its all done, with AF I have to wait for them to get the feed from me, wait for them to check the feed and then they make it available to the affiliates - I know that AF are very proud of the fact that they check the feeds for broken links BUT i know that all my links are good and don't need checking - and then because I never know when AF has approved my feed I have to log in as an affiliate every few days to download the feed and check that the prices and products are correct (whereas with AW I can see straight away)

but then AF is better than AW because its not as expensive, has pretty good reporting tools etc. etc.

so the end of the day both have their good points and bad points which is why we use 2 networks so that it keeps our affiliates happy.

[pricethat]

Well to be honest the AF broken link checker isnt worth anything more than a pat on the back. Theres plenty of links that we come across that dont work, as the checker only checks at a moment in time, doesnt include outages, slowly responding server information and also doesnt include redirects which is as bad as a broken link when it comes to deeplinking anyway.

There is however some good going with more than one network as far as ease of use goes. For us we look at what network has the best tracking and service to us, ease of use etc.

I really really am not so biased, however as a purely data affiliate we need to make use of certain things, API Services data feed quality, range of fields etc.

If you was to ask us what networks we would prefer you to run your program on then we would probably say in this order

1:Tradedoubler
2:Zanox
3:Webgains
4:Affiliate Window
5:Buy.at
6:Affiliate Future
7:CJ
8:Paid on Results

So, if you offered an affiliate scheme on CJ for example and you started a new one on tradedoubler then we are of course going to switch links.

One thing to note is that Webgains data service is probably (at the moment) better than what Zanox offer, but i have placed them at number 3 because its still easier for me to work with Zanox because of my relationship with them. What i mean is that if you were to look at each network purely from a techical point of view it might be different but each affiliate has his or her own preferences.

The biggest thing i would think is the huge amount of affiliates that only work with a couple of networks or prefer to as the amount they earn in comissions doesnt reach the payment thresholds some months.

I really welcome more than one network, especially with data feeds as i can load up both data feeds from both networks providing product ids remain the same and are not switched by the networks, this means if one goes down i have the other, really saves a lot of hassle.

You cant have too much choice as it goes.

[loquax]

I really really am not so biased

Guess you'd have Zanox at #1 if you were biased then? I can't really say too much about them as rarely use them... mainly as the interface is a pain in the butt and wouldn't feature in a top listing imo - but that's a digression from the main thread.

Although it does demonstrate why using multiple networks is useful as we all have our favourites to work with I guess

Jason

[drivetowin]

Have to agree with Jason that the Zanox interface is quirky in the extreme - if they had a better interface I'd use them an awful lot more - as it is for me at least doing anything via their site seems to take 3 times as long as it does with any other network (even DGM)

I think generally merchants being on a couple of networks is probably a good thing but I cant see the logic in merchants who appear on every network going - there really aren't that number of good affiliates to appeal to and the good affiliates a) probably subscribe to every network anyway and b) will track you down if you're a good merchant.

As a general rule I think more networks entering the arena is a good thing but I do have worries over some of the newer networks as to whether they have adequate funding to survive in the mid to long term.

And most definitely the offering from the merchant should be the same regardless of network, networks which play games with commission for short term benefit and then reduce it down to the de facto standard later are playing the short game in my opinion - and you reap what you sow.

[Justin @ LTSBI]

Yes, there are a lot of networks. Many offer different approaches to affiliate marketing so it depends on what you're looking for - levels of personal sevice, platform, exposure in other countries etc. However, I also think there's the odd 'me too' network who have nothing really to offer apart from the sales pitch. I wouldn't count any of those in pricethats list as in this category though.

we're currently with (who I regard as) the big 2 - CJ and TD. One is much easier to work with than the other, but having both does give us a really broad catchment of publishers, in terms of number, type and location. However, such high volumes of low hitters is difficult to manage, and means I don't get the chance to build relationships with the publishers I should. We're about to trial a third network with the intention of building a small number of higher volume publishers - not (at this stage anyway) to replace either of the big 2, but to work with more of a certain type of affiliate. So what I'm saying is that different networks can expose you to different publishers.

Another point is that we reward the same across all networks - as justhom says, we don't want to upset existing affiliates, or networks.

Finally, I want my networks to earn their percentage. If you run 2 +, they should feel a certain amount of pressure to be as good or better than the others. I'll also learn things from one network that I might apply to the others.

[pricethat]

hehe loquax Should of read my words as i typed, habit of doing that.

[Supercod]

More than one Network works, it is really that simple. And Keith is right many top earners are on most Networks but don’t always work with a program on one Network as they might not have been approached about what is on offer. I can give you a real world example, big name Merchant signed up to Paid On Results end of 2004. We contacted a couple of Affiliates we know well and where well known to the other Network but they just never told what the Merchant had to offer them, so end result was we increased the Merchants turnover by Millions all thanks to a couple of Affiliates that we worked very closely with. If that Merchant had stuck to the “we only use 1 Network” they would never have known they where losing out in that amount of additional income.

Keep in mind we all don’t listen to the same Radio station, we all don’t read the same Newspapers or Magazines, we all don’t watch the same TV Channels we even all don’t use the same PPC companies so why would you only use 1 Network if you would advertise on more than one medium in other formats???

Every time a Merchant writes the words “How many Affiliates do you have?” I think here someone that doesn’t know what they want. I would be asking, “What are you going to do to make me sales” and “What are your strong points” and decided on that. Heck I even take a gamble as we are talking monkey nuts in fees and try each out and after 6 months review who I am going to keep. It’s clear as can be everyone has favourites on who the like and don’t like and often that clouds the judgment to what is good or bad. I don’t have a problem in pointing out when something is good and heck I will even do my version of the idea if it’s that good.