Agenda for Thursday 24th June 2010, 3pm

[KevinEdwards]

Tweet

Hi all,

Please see agenda for Thursday’s meeting below. If there are additional points you’d like to see added to the agenda please let me know.

The meeting will take place at the IAB’s offices in Macklin St, WC2B 5NF at 3pm on Thursday this week. Nearest Tubes are Holborn and Tottenham Court Road:

IABUK : Contact us



Agenda, AMC Meeting, 24th June 2010

1, Behavioural Retargeting:
·Presentation from MyThings Media.
·Discussion to follow on whether networks need to standardise approach.
·Thoughts on Post Impression / Post View cookies

2, De-duplication on Natural Search:
·Presentation from TradeDoubler’s International Head of SEO on best practice

3, VoucherCode, Code of Conduct:
·Update on networks’ audit from all member networks
·Action against non-compliant affiliates
·Does the code need to be strengthened / expanded?

4, Downloadable Software :
·Clarification of focus
·Emphasis to be placed on ‘interruptive’ software

5, Update from Regulation Committee:
·Best practice guidelines for Product Feeds
·Standardisation of affiliate categories
·Affiliate Ethical Charter

6, Update from Marketing Committee:
·Affiliate Handbook
·Multi/Value Attribution update from Julia Stent
·Other projects

7, AOB

Kind regards,
Kevin

[KevinEdwards]

Hi,

Small amendment to the agenda - we'll be allocating sections of the updated version of the Affiliate Handbook for members of the community to write. The new handbook will be aimed at a more intermediary level than the original with plenty of illustrative case studies. We'll ask for volunteers for each section.

[DanWBC]

Is there a way for the public to learn about the meeting outcome?

Is someone from IAB doing meeting minutes and if so where they are being published?

Personally I am interested in the update on affiliates who operate in violation of IAB guidelines and what networks are (co-operatively - as it seems no given network would be brave enough to action alone) doing to keep guidelines enforced.

Regards,

Dan

[KevinEdwards]

Hi,

The minutes are written and I'll post them here tomorrow.

Thanks,
Kevin

[DanWBC]

Thanks - looking forward to see it.

[KevinEdwards]

Apologies for the length of this post but there's a lot to report back on...


IAB Affiliate Marketing Council Meeting
June 2010 Minutes
Kevin Edwards, AMC Chair


June’s AMC saw a bumper turnout of more than 50 affiliates, merchant, agency and affiliate employees for what proved to be one of the most lively meetings to date.

It seems a number of recent developments have resulted in the AMC offering probably the only forum for open discussion of these issues.
Behavioural retargeting and de-duplicating against natural search dominated the meeting with excellent discussion from all sides about the wider and longer term implications for affiliate marketing.

Several networks also fed back on the work they had carried out auditing 25 of the top voucher sites and updates were given on the work of the two sub committees.

Further details on this and the remaining topics discussed can be found in the full minutes:


1, Behavioural Retargeting (BR):
• Presentation from MyThings Media that explained how retargeting works. MyThings stated they are in advanced discussions with a number of networks to work together to the standard CPA model.
• The key points from the meeting centred on two issues. The first is whether networks should look to offer post impression (PI – or Post View – PV) cookies in a controlled way on their affiliate programmes when traditionally very few networks have offered this technology. The second is if PI or PV cookies are allowed, should they carry the same weight as a click cookie. In other words what would the cookie overwriting policy be of a campaign with PI or PV cookies.
• In addition the Council discussed whether there should be network consensus on standardised working practices as well as best practice guidance for advertisers.
• Concern was expressed that if networks start working with PI or PV companies they will drop millions of impressions that will wipe out a large number of click cookies on an ‘equal weighting’ (of impression and click cookies) basis.
• General consensus amongst networks is cookies should not carry equal weighting and PV or PI cookies should be limited to a much smaller window than a click cookie (for example 48 hours). This would mean PI or PV cookies could not overwrite click cookies that already exist. This may also necessitate BR companies having to re-negotiate higher CPAs in order to make the activity profitable.
• It was agreed this topic needs greater discussion at network level so has been referred back to the Regulation committee to understand what the impact PI activity has from display campaigns. This will help to give a greater understanding of what percentage of sales could be overwritten if equal weighting was in place but also shed light on what uplift there could be.
• It was generally agreed the technology offered by retargeting companies is excellent and it would be better to grow the channel by working with such companies rather than merchants working directly, especially with the now commonplace de-duplication policies and the knock on effect of equal click / PI or PV cookie weighting when not run via the affiliate channel.


2, De-duplication on Natural Search:
• Presentation from TradeDoubler’s International Head of SEO and UK Head of Publisher Services & Development on why merchants shouldn’t de-duplicate their activity against natural search
• Following a number of advertisers being approached and encouraged to de-duplicate against natural search it was felt a session addressing why this shouldn’t be common practice would be beneficial.
• It was however asked whether there was any difference de-duplicating against natural search and all other online channels. It was suggested for more ‘directional’ brand led traffic the policy could be different but the consensus seemed to suggest this was a far less clear cut area of online than other channels and merchants needed to approach with caution.
• Clearly a lot more analytical work would need to be carried out to understand the impact of natural search listings on other channels.
• It was also suggested this had only recently become a topic of conversation because some newer third party tracking and analytics solutions offer the ability to de-duplicate against natural search whereas more established platforms do not.
• A key reason for flagging this issue is it could be a policy of the future and therefore best practice guidelines could be drawn up now. It was agreed that more education and information needs to exist to enable network and agency staff to offer better guidance.
• It was also suggested this information should be stored in the Ethical Merchant Charter and made available to affiliates so they were clear on whether any current merchants de-duplicate against natural search.
• The regulation committee will again look to provide clarification on this.


3, VoucherCode, Code of Conduct:
• Update on networks’ audit from member networks
• Affilinet, Webgains and Digital Window (Buy.at and Affiliate Window) were the only networks who offered feedback on a recent audit that all member networks were tasked with carrying out.
• The general conclusion was that the spirit of the current code was being maintained. The main issue that was flagged was regarding expired codes and how strongly this should be enforced. There seemed to be an agreement between the networks that had carried out the audit that some affiliates could do more to ensure expired codes were clearly labelled.
• It was suggested the terminology of the code of conduct could be strengthened to make certain wording clearer and stronger. It was also pointed out that the code was originally drawn up to address an immediate concern and should therefore be revisited in the future. The current code of conduct will therefore be reviewed at the next regulation committee to see whether it is both clear and extensive enough in its coverage.
• Action against non-compliant affiliates. One affiliate is due to be contacted for posting codes not issued to them and monetising them with affiliate links. This communication will come from the IAB AMC as supported by ten member networks.
• It was also stated that the warning and suspension procedures should be made clearer and included within the code to ensure everyone is aware of the severe implications of breaking the code.
• There is a general email address for information on the code or clear violations to be directed to: vouchercode@iabuk.net


4, Downloadable Software :
• It was suggested following affiliate feedback that the current code wasn’t clear enough in what activity it was looking to address.
• In light of this the wording has been expanded to place emphasis on what is termed ‘interruptive’ software. The new wording is:
 The code of conduct is exclusively aimed at affiliates who are implementing what could be termed ‘interruptive’ software; that is software that prompts a consumer who may already be engaged in the purchase cycle and, based on that consumer’s on site behaviour and navigation, is then presented with an offer, deal, code or reward.
 For example a consumer may be browsing a retailer’s website and as a result of being on that site is offered a voucher code or prompted to collect cashback for that retailer. If links for that code or cashback contain affiliate links the code of conduct will apply.
 The code exempts ‘non-interruptive’, standalone software that may sit in a browser as a toolbar or on a desktop as a widget suggesting offers, deals, codes or rewards that are not influenced by a consumer’s on site navigation.
• The code of conduct will continue to be rolled out as agreed although some ongoing amendments have meant the deadline for this will be pushed back to ensure clear and effective communication and fair notice periods for affected affiliates.


5, Update from Regulation Committee:
• Best practice guidelines for Product Feeds
This project is still a priority but has been rolled over to the next AMC meeting

• Standardisation of affiliate categories
The consensus amongst member networks who attended the regulation committee is that categorisation of affiliates is problematic regardless of any categorisation. It was also suggested that it was unrealistic for networks with a UK and non-UK focus to be offer this.

• Affiliate Ethical Charter
There was a general appetite for this project, offering guidance for affiliates on how to approach affiliate marketing professionally. This will now be a project for the regulation committee.


6, Update from Marketing Committee:
• It was agreed this committee should meet every other month to the full Council meeting and one meeting a month couldn’t be justified based on workload and recent turnout.
• Affiliate Handbook
Following the success of the first Affiliate Handbook, additional IAB budget has been secured to revisit the handbook. This will be aimed at intermediary level affiliate marketers and will be heavy on case studies and best practice.

The format has been suggested as follows:

• Affiliate Marketing & The Wider Industry

(Top 5) Things a Marketing Manager Needs to Know (500 Words)
1. Do you know your own site? E.g. does it convert?
2. Brand control
3. Things you may get asked from a publisher
4. Link to Merchant Charter

Forecasting Affiliate Marketing Programmes (500 Words)
1. Why agency/client may want it but why it may not work
2. Budgeting
3. Why it’s different forecasting affiliate marketing than display or video
4. Sound bites to explain this to your boss

Integrating affiliate campaigns (500 Words)
1. Separate from other forms of budget
2. Deduping
3. Sky case study
• Making Your Campaign Work Harder

The different affiliate models (500 Words)
1. Affiliate marketing as a multi-channel discipline
2. Positive & negatives of each model
3. How to communicate

Incentivising Affiliates (500 Words)
1. Requesting Red Letter Days case study

Working with networks, agencies or in house (500 Words)
1. Strengths & weaknesses of each
2. Using networks as a partner

Using affiliates as partners (500 Words)
1. E.g. Big publishers can give overviews of product sectors

Case study Affiliate Nightmares (500 Words)
1. What not to do
2. Fictional account of the worst run campaign
• Summary (500 words)

The affiliate marketing community
1. We’re a good bunch
2. Support & Assistance
3. Entrepreneurial

Appendix & further reading.

• All the topics have now been allocated to volunteer companies. Deadline for completion is late summer. The IAB will print a number of copies with the potential for other companies to order additional copies if required.

• The AMC website is not live yet but is still a priority.


7, AOB
There was no AOB

We are also keen to hear from new affiliates with something new and innovative to share with the wider community. In April’s meeting we heard from an affiliate who has developed new and fully interactive banners and offered them a ten minute slot to present.

If you’d like to find out about this presenting opportunity please drop Kevin Edwards an email: kevin.edwards@affiliatewindow.com

The next full Council Meeting is on Thursday 26th August at the IAB’s offices in London. Remember to follow the work of the Council on Twitter @IAB_AMC.


Kind regards,
Kevin

[DanWBC]

The main issue that was flagged was regarding expired codes and how strongly this should be enforced. There seemed to be an agreement between the networks that had carried out the audit that some affiliates could do more to ensure expired codes were clearly labelled.

My translation:

So we reviewed Vouchercodes.com and believe they could do more to stop making expired codes look like they didn't expire (which is done in direct violation of current IAB guidelines).

• Action against non-compliant affiliates. One affiliate is due to be contacted for posting codes not issued to them and monetising them with affiliate links. This communication will come from the IAB AMC as supported by ten member networks.

But IAB is only contacting one affiliate, because other code-breaking affiliates deserve to take their time and hopefully they "can do more" to be compliant in time for the next VC sites review.


Pathetic.

[KevinEdwards]

Thank you for your constructive feedback.

[DanWBC]

Yes, Kevin - it is constructive. This affiliate is breaking the guidelines and IAB decided it's fine to continue.

Moreover, you didn't bother to reply to my last e-mail because I am touching important issues which - I don't know - perhaps not comfortable to discuss?

[KevinEdwards]

Dan,

As I stated to you in a number of email responses you received from me, I don't think anything I ever say will be satisfactory to you so I don't really know whether there's any point in continuning the conversation?

I gave you the contact details of the previous Chair who presided over the code of conduct for voucher codes being brought in. You also have the email address at the IAB regarding issues with voucher codes. Your email has been seen by a number of people who are on that distribution list and I would imagine you will receive a response in due course.

I would rather someone else reply to it given my comments above.

Rgds,
Kevin

[DanWBC]

Kevin,

Yes - I sent an e-mail to that VC list set up by IAB (affili.net recipient isn't correctly configured, btw)

Nobody seem to be very eager to respond.

So on that front, thank you for being most responsive. If only most important topics were not omitted (as for example - why this affiliate is not receiving a notice from IAB), then we could had indeed a very constructive conversation.

[hpops]

My translation:

So we reviewed Vouchercodes.com and believe they could do more to stop making expired codes look like they didn't expire (which is done in direct violation of current IAB guidelines).

But IAB is only contacting one affiliate, because other code-breaking affiliates deserve to take their time and hopefully they "can do more" to be compliant in time for the next VC sites review.

Pathetic.

What the hell? So when we contact people to change things we're pathetic, when we don't we're pathetic. When we introduce rules, we're pathetic, when we don't, we're pathetic. When we concentrate on any issue that you don't want us to, we're pathetic.

Hypocricy and ranting may be your idea of constructive progress. I'll stick with the able, progressive and crucial team at the AMC thanks.

[DanWBC]

What the hell? So when we contact people to change things we're pathetic, when we don't we're pathetic. When we introduce rules, we're pathetic, when we don't, we're pathetic. When we concentrate on any issue that you don't want us to, we're pathetic.

Calm down. Where is my hypocricy? You are making it look up-side-down and trying to hit me with something I am not related to.

My only issue is how networks allowing IAB-guidelines breaking affiliates to continue. And that's what I stand here for.

Do not try to accuse me of something I never said or done.

Keep your emotions to yourself if you can't add anything to the development of this topic.

[hpops]

I think the "development of this topic" is something that I take incredibly seriously and have added an awful lot to. Still, not looking to blow my own (already considerably inflated) trumpet.
My emotions are well in check. I do take issue with non-constructive criticism, particularly when made personal against a volunteer group looking to improve the industry's standing.
I also, am not trying to hit you with something you are not related to, I don't know what that could possibly mean.

[DanWBC]

I do take issue with non-constructive criticism, particularly when made personal against a volunteer group looking to improve the industry's standing.

The problem is that you (and the much talked-about volunteer group) seem to be breeding double standards in the industry.

From what I see (perhaps I have only seen a smaller picture, but nevertheless, it gives such impression) is that IAB doesn't want to hear any criticism at all, blaming it to be "non-constructive".

Yes, the criticism can't be constructive, because it criticizes what has been already constructed but fails to deliver.


I am seeking a one simple answer, why the affiliate (who is a top 3 affiliate) is allowed to operate in violation of long established (year 2009) IAB guidelines.

If IAB allows this to happen - all you have constructed seems to be built on sand.

And for outsiders it simply looks as IAB is covering this particular affiliate, because most other affiliates are compliant and this issue could have been re-solved in a few days, if everyone would place morals and ethics above other things.

Instead of answering this simple question, I am getting a lizard's tail from IAB Council, shameful silence from other IAB members and a puff of blames from you, hpops.

Dan