Affiliate Association : Accepted Good Practice by Affiliate

[Qui Gon Jinn]

Tweet

For now, just purely focusing on affiliates / publishers.

If an affiliate association of some description was set up whether a new body or through an existing body.

What would you include as part of the terms as Accepted Good Practice / Accepted Good Behaviour by affiliates?

What prerequisites would be required?

Input from Merchants & Networks would be particularly appreciated.

[a4uforummember]

It would be nice for known affiliates to ahere to a PPC etiquette.

It's all quite obvious really... but PPC bullying in the affiliate playground should not be tolerated.

... that is the first amendmant to the affiliate constitution (if accepted of course) any one else?

If you come at me with your right to bear large credit card, I shall fly a trojan into your twin websites.

[renegade]

I'm not sure what you're looking for, could you give us just a little more detail - I don't want to post something and be laughed outta town

[a4uforummember]

well, as everyone who operates ppc will have seen, sometimes you will get a new arrival on a particular search term who will wade in and give it the big one and perhaps bid a pound more than everyone else.

That could leave someone in position two with several options if they want the position one back and in effect 'see off' the bully. Ideally what would occur is that you bid right behind them and make them pay their chosen amount which will then encourage the big bidder to gradulaly reduce, back to the more realistic price.

But what really happens is that if you bid behind the number one, some one else, who perhaps cannot see your motives, bids right behind you, and then everybody compresses at this higher level, the only winner then is for example, Overture.

I have what I consider to be a good relationship/ding dong battle with other affiliates on certain keyphrases and we have developed an almost unspoken rule, which enables us to ultimately keep our costs down.

I hope this makes some sense, at the very least it's a start in this good practice topic.

[Qui Gon Jinn]

I do agree with you, however this ppc bullying, maybe too strong a term, let's call it strategy.. and from what i understand is used by Google for clients they manage as well as agencies in the know.

Scenario : Merchant X has campaign managed by Google or Agency for the term "Loan". it's too competitive to come in at a sensible level because of the Factor CTR X Max BID, which determines where your ad appears, resulting in the keyword being deactivated within approx 1000 impressions.

So what happens is that the Client is encouraged to bid OTT at the top to acheive a high enough CTR, whilst probably experiencing a negative ROI. Then gradually as this factor of CTRxBID increases, the max bid can be decreased gradually until a postive ROI is attained for the advertiser and an equilibrium is reached.

What's wrong...well the problem is that to get a decent CTR you need to overbid at the start and hence the compression as you say. Risky, yes, but some budgets are frivolously spent by agencies, it depends on the objective.

And until ad agencies can bid effectively without over bidding obo client that problem will always be there. Sometimes % of ad spend they earn whether it's from one end or both, some look at the short term rather than long term gain without looking at ROI. If a client got a decent ROI they might spend twice as much. Some just think that with a greater volume of visitors, the campaign is working. longeavity & positive ROI is more rewarding for everyone.

What's wrong...the system should give greater precedence to exact matched of phrases rather than broad match.

To get around the CTR x Max Bid value, it's sods law that the 1st ad may get 50% ctr, 2nd 25% ctr , 3rd 10% ctr and so forth no matter of the quality of the ad, so those ads lower down will always get keywords deactivated if a certain ctr is not attained.

Now the quality of the new ad lower may even be more compelling, but doesn't get clicked on due to its position. Therefore by inverting / altering the forumula so that CTR x Max Bid is based upon the position of the ad in the list as well, would allow the cream of the ads to rise to the surface and create a fairer environment.

So the formula could be

CTR X Max Bid x (1/position of ad)

We don't use Overture UK anymore so can't comment on bidding wars. Albeit a few shortfalls with Google they are imho the best set up for userability and ease of set up for campaigns, conversions & coverage, so the neagtive points is really just suggesting how it could be improved and not a reflection of the service.

From a personal perspective, I rather bid low to moderate and obtain a greater % ROI. i.e. Spend £1000 and earn £1000 profit, rather than spend £15000 and make a £2000 profit. It really depends on what can be affforded for the individual advertiser and over what period that ROI is attained.

[jrisby]

I have what I consider to be a good relationship/ding dong battle with other affiliates on certain keyphrases and we have developed an almost unspoken rule, which enables us to ultimately keep our costs down.

as long as it is unspoken, you don't want to end up operating as a cartel (well, you might want to, but the government don't want you to!)

[Qui Gon Jinn]

perhaps the "unspoken rule" is more gentlemanly conduct, and shows affiliates who are competitors with each other willing to get along & co-operate with each other in a good mannered spirit.

Hence the quoted "PPC etiquette" mentioned by a4uforummember

[Qui Gon Jinn]

renegade,

Simple things like registered business address, vat number, company number, data protection licence, opt in newsletters, no porn sites or indecent content, no spyware are some of the basics.

I was thinking more along the lines of a publishers responsibilty to portraying a merchants brand correctly, our responsibilty to the consumer and how we can demonstrate internet shopping is safe with shopping guides.

Please come up with whatever you think, treat it as brainstorming, as sometimes what may seem silly ideas become quite workable.

[jess1]

Ditto QGJ

[Draco]

I have just joined this forum in the hopes of finding a recognised body that would accredit training for affiliate managers, and for those running affiliate site. At present are their any bodies that the Affiliate Association is looking at for examples of good practice or codes of conduct.

I believe that affiliates and managers learn to do their jobs through trial and error, and along the way can pick up bad habits, which can turn into bad practice, I know that when looking at employment vacancies for affiliate managers that even employers are not sure what skills are required to be an affiliate manager and just look for someone with a proven track record.

I know the skills base for affiliate managers is very high and covers many disciplines, an in most cases is learned on the job through practical knowledge, Would the Affiliate Association act as a body who would monitor it’s membership and accept some or all of it’s members on a register which will act as a licence to practice.
By being licensed by the Affiliate Association members could be held accountable for bad practice by being struck of the register, what do you think?

[renegade]

I can see the merits of an Affiliate Association as the industry expands to provide a baseline skills and codes of practice levels BUT I'm also highly skeptical about anything that could potentially limit or curtail my business plans.

I get the feeling I'm not the only one sitting on this particular fence...

[Elaine]

the difficulty with this sort of idea is - how would you 'police' it -

what would be the criteria for being allowed to join and - even more important how would you go about blacklisting someone, who didn't comply with the 'accepted good practices'

how would you stop a non-members using the 'name/logo/stamp-of-approval' on an 'iffy' site.

I think it is basically a good idea and if created properly, from the ground up, could only enhance the Affiliation business in the eyes of the consumer and - more importantly - the merchants.

As I'm sure some merchants would then only insist on working with 'accredited' affiliates - someone they could trust to promote their business properly and ethically - might even mean higher payouts - or am I being naive?

[Draco]

Let look at joining the register, which could just be as simple as a directory each member is given a ‘name/logo/stamp-of-approval’, which links, directly to his or her place within the directory.
A rating system could be put in place to cover length of time with in the industry and the directory, new members could be nominated by other member, who would in a sense act as guarantees of good practice.

In the beginning I can see a lot of hard work checking sites and members to see if they are complying with accepted good practice, a test could also be included which should cover requirements.

As for blacklisting someone this could be done in many ways, if a member has a complaint made against them it will be investigated if the complaint is up held a number of things could happen a fine, a suspension or ban, or even a permanent blacklist.

If their was a fee to join the directory and a annual subscription for members to use the logo (a new logo could be created for each year) this would help to off set the cost of setting the venture up and policing it.

Yes merchants would insist on working with ‘accredited affiliates’ but that is the same with any industry, we all expect a good service and when we don’t get it we need someone to complain to and act on our complaint, it not the fact that something needs to be done it must be seen to be done.

Membership does not need to be compulsory since merchants will strive to pick the best affiliates and good affiliates will desire to be members and yes this will lead to higher payouts because the market will open up you could also get the support of search engines.

No I don’t think your being naïve, but may be I am