An Open Letter to IAB / AW: 19 months on… Voucher Code Compliance

[DanWBC]

Tweet

Ironically referring to AW's post here (Affiliate Window | Affiliate Marketing Network Blog ) named "Eight months on… Voucher Code Compliance", it seems that the initiative ("we are committed to auditing voucher code sites") is badly failing.

At that time AW has concluded that only two of the top 50 sites were actively running their sites in IAB non-compliant way.
Green light, then it seems.

Now, 10 months later, non-compliant sites are still actively running.

And if one takes a closer look, it's one of top 3.

Yes, I am talking about Vouchercodes com, which publish expired vouchers in a non-distinctive way , 'unknown' expiry dates (when it's perfectly known) and 'ongoing' vouchers, those long ago expired. And this deception is going on literally on every merchant's page on that site..

Affiliate Window's response is that "while we have a large affiliate team, who work closely with most of our affiliates, it is impossible for them to be watching all vouchercode sites all of the time".

Now, back to that September 2009 blog post: "we are committed to auditing voucher code sites ongoing as well as at designated intervals."

How come that one of the most prominent voucher code sites is abusing the industry and everyone pretends nothing is going on?! Did he start doing this just yesterday?

Meanwhile, IAB is busy introducing "new guidelines" for software downloads and we are being frantically targeted by AW's staff for our Firefox vouchers add-on which doesn't plant cookies and only refers users back to our site, as being non-compliant. But that's another story.

So how about stopping this IAB nonsense if you can't (don't want to) make it work?

The whole "click-to-reveal" thing seems to be a highly-guarded scam of the century. Merchant's are being defrauded of the affiliate+network commission in cases where they shouldn't have paid for it.

Meanwhile, networks are not ashamed to report that 'voucher code sites' are being top revenue generators in the whole affiliate sector. Heh.

Yes, voucher code sites can bring incremental sales, but only from those customers who see the code first and then makes a purchasing decision. Merchants shouldn't pay for all those customers who stop at the checkout and start searching for codes, then return to proceed. It is simply illogical and absurd.

VC sites can be profitable without click to reveal. We do it on our website (of course we don't want to look like altruistic idiots), but we don't show click to reveal for customers visiting from e-mail newsletters. And that still gives 30-48% of affiliate click troughs. Not that bad, eh?

Networks must be ashamed of not having guts to admit that the "Click to reveal" is a scam and it's not sustainable.


All the best

Dan

Vouchers.im

[KevinEdwards]

Dan,

I'll pick up the specifics of your case re. downloadable software on Monday. I've seen the communication Jacky has sent you. She is only doing what has been requested of her and will be required of you by ten member networks. You should have received initial communication from the IAB on behalf of all member networks outlining why this initiative is important and it will become effective by mid-July.

There are ten member networks of the IAB Council and I agree the voucher code, code of conduct can only be effective if all networks adhere to it and enforce it. As such an audit is currently taking place on the top 25 voucher code sites by these networks as I felt it was needed. Again, it will only work if all networks carry this out. I'll be ensuring this is the case over the course of June with feedback being presented at the next Council meeting on June 24th.

It is also worth remembering the AMC doesn't have a full time employee to carry out its work; the work is in addition to the normal day to to day roles of everyone involved.

Thanks,
Kevin

[JohnnyCash]

The whole "click-to-reveal" thing seems to be a highly-guarded scam of the century. Merchant's are being defrauded of the affiliate+network commission in cases where they shouldn't have paid for it.

So if its the "scam of the century", I'd absolutely love to hear why you are participating in it.

[DanWBC]

Kevin,

Re: downloadable software, I am sure we will be able to debate this in private, I only mentioned it because IAB introduces new 'guidelines' without any ability to enforce existing.

The audit of top XX voucher code sites is long due.

Your account managers visit and monitor ours every day and God forbid them find something inaccurate.
I wonder how top X voucher site meanwhile could be working disregarding guidelines in it's whole site structure and "nobody is noticing".

Networks are commiting the same fraud if they allow this to happen.

[DanWBC]

So if its the "scam of the century", I'd absolutely love to hear why you are participating in it.

Johnny, you want me to elaborate on this? To your disappointment, I won't. It must be pretty obvious why we have to participate.

[confuscius]

Johnny, you want me to elaborate on this? To your disappointment, I won't. It must be pretty obvious why we have to participate.

Does that mean that two wrongs do make a right?

[KevinEdwards]

I think it's worth adding networks have been asked for feedback on whether the code needs to be updated or amended.

Affiliate marketing continuously evolves and therefore it's natural rules and regulations should do so too.

[scriptmonkey]

Remember DanWBC this is a talking shop, and, if you're not at the shop, then you will be disregarded. one of the top VC sites is now a 'merchant' on affiliate window, the same network that the head of the IAB represents, I don't see how a conflict of interests could come into play, do you?

@Kevin Edwards - please think about what you are doing

[KevinEdwards]

scriptmonkey - what a nice thing to say - calling into question my integrity - if you have anything you'd like to elaborate on please do.

Incidentally - I'm not 'head of the IAB', I was elected Chair of the Affiliate Council for 12 months.

No wonder so few people now participate on this forum, given the level of debate and general dismissive air - words are cheap I guess.

[scriptmonkey]

Kevin, I don't generally participate in this forum because I feel that the network and the biggest rule-breakers are now 'partners'. Is that dismissive? You may think that an off-the-cuff remark may make you seem 'above' this discussion, but, does it? Talk about cheap words!

Where did you read into what I said a question about your integrity? I was asking you, personally, to think about what you are doing. Your remark was a cheap shot, it won't work my friend, people are more sensible .

@Kevin, who is the head of the IAB?

[scriptmonkey]

Kevin, do you seriously suggest that people don't participate in this forum because of the things that I say, you're handing way too much power to me my friend? Reminding me of Ben Stiller in Dodgeball

[JohnnyCash]

Johnny, you want me to elaborate on this? To your disappointment, I won't. It must be pretty obvious why we have to participate.

I really would love you to elaborate, please.

You call this a scam, yet you're doing it yourself?

[KevinEdwards]

Where to start - 'above' this discussion? If I was would I have bothered answering in the first place?

Questioning integrity - yes you did as you implied/stated my motivations are swayed by something I consider to be entirely separate. Ask anyone involved in the Council whether they feel it compromises my decision.

If you want to find out more about the general IAB then you can find far more detail than I have time to go into here .

I'm happy to answer additional questions based on valid comments.

[DanWBC]

I really would love you to elaborate, please.
You call this a scam, yet you're doing it yourself?

Absolutely.

Click to reveal is a scam. It is forced click for the consumer. Something which is prohibited by networks at a large but strangely got green light for vouchers case.
And we are doing this because nothing will change whether we do it or not. Networks dictate the rules in this game.
My morals are high but I am not naive to believe that if I stop doing this someone will notice or it will change anything. Removing click-to-reveal from our website won't make things a yota better, but the website will simply vanish under the pressure from those who define and bend the rules.

But I am at least voicing these concerns, because I am happy to see click-to-reveal go. I am not bothered about decreased revenues because of that, as I am not driven by greed.

Not sure you will understand as you seem to be having a limited 'black or white' logic, nothing fits in between.

[jonsp]

Absolutely.

Click to reveal is a scam. It is forced click for the consumer. Something which is prohibited by networks at a large but strangely got green light for vouchers case.
And we are doing this because nothing will change whether we do it or not. Networks dictate the rules in this game.
My morals are high but I am not naive to believe that if I stop doing this someone will notice or it will change anything. Removing click-to-reveal from our website won't make things a yota better, but the website will simply vanish under the pressure from those who define and bend the rules.

But I am at least voicing these concerns, because I am happy to see click-to-reveal go. I am not bothered about decreased revenues because of that, as I am not driven by greed.

Not sure you will understand as you seem to be having a limited 'black or white' logic, nothing fits in between.

You seem to be saying 2 totally opposing things here
1/ You don't like click to reveal but you do it because it's the only way to make money
but
2/ You don't care about decreased revenue.

If it's true that click to reveal is the only way to make revenue but you don't actually care if your revenue decreases then why not take a moral stand and stop using it? It sounds like you want to claim the high moral ground but you're (reluctantly) forced into taking the money from using click to reveal because other people have low morals.

Having it both ways is never a defensible position in this or any other business.