Locking or Separating the Tradedoubler Forum

**Qui Gon Jinn** · 24-07-04

Due to Tradedoubler supporting spyware or adware companies with unethical practices.

A few things have been circulated around by members off the forum and thought it might be better to infer a benchmark reaction from the forum as a whole.

What would your thoughts be on the following?

1. Lock the TD forum, thus no further debate on TD or their merchants.

- Should TD benefit from a free forum if they're not protecting our interests. Then perhaps more merchants may start thinking more seriously about which network they deal with by demonstrating their support. Remembering spyware affects merchants more than affiliates.

2. Separate / Segregate the TD forum

- Clearly indicating that other networks are recommended to merchants over and above TD. Each discussion on merchants that are on TD as well as another network wil be moved over to the preferred spyware free network. The TD forum will be moved down the page, clearly labled, with a section called something like "not recommended networks, due to their support of spyware" or more appropiate wording.

Note : The forum will still be open for normal debate but just seprated from the ethicla networks.

3. Bad Idea All Round

- Please provide reasons

4. Not bothered either way

- Why not apply for a job at 180 & WhenU?

**D-Mac** · 24-07-04

I voted for bad idea all round:

1) A4U currently provides a (fairly) balanced opinion on all the networks. This is very important for the credibility of A4U. If you effectively censor the TD forum then the balance is lost. Along with the credibility.

2) As a merchant I only discovered this forum after opening an affiliate account with Awin. Had we forked out the very high TD entry fees, then discovered this forum, I would be very reluctant to consider closing the TD account and losing all that money. By considering locking down the TD forum you run the risk of alienating merchants currently on that network.

3) There are potential flaws in the systems that other networks use. Perhaps not as serious as Spyware, but for one reason or another are not discussed here much.

4) It's much better to allow merchants and affiliates to draw their own conclusions about the way the networks conduct themselves, rather than having a 'party' viewpoint.

**angelabx** · 24-07-04

I feel that if we lock the forum then it is us affiliates who lose out most because we can't discuss important issues relating to TD merchants.

This forum gets noticed and has changed many things for the better. Simply stopping the discussion won't help I don't think.

I can appreciate the thinking behind the idea though.

Cheers

**loquax** · 24-07-04

I went for Bad Idea too...

TD does have merchants e.g. ASOS, Jackpotjoy and Figleaves who all I believe are anti-spyware - so you're not being fair on those merchants who not only are supporting affiliates but taking their own stances.

By closing the forum/moving it, I'll be willing to bet the next move will be from TD along the lines of "well we're not use the forum and no TD employee shall post".

A free forum may benefit TD, but it does benefit affiliates too - and by closing it you takeaway that benefit.

In essence I believe by any such actions you're effectively saying "A4Uforum affiliates don't use TD" - which isn't the case and I do agree with D-Mac's point that credability and balance could be lost by such action.

Jason

**aclarke656** · 24-07-04

The current method whereby both the affiliates and TD are allowed to state their views is the best way forward in my opinion. TD do contribute to this forum and it would be our loss to close the dialogue.

**getvisible** · 24-07-04

no one has commented on "Clearly Separate / Segregate the TD forum"

**drivetowin** · 24-07-04

I too voted bad idea all round for a number of reasons:

1. If you are going to do this to the TD forum you have to do at least the same to the CJ forum too - in my mind CJ's silence on the spyware issue is far worse than TDs position - at least TD have stated clearly where they stand - and it would seem from other threads that they have started to notify merchants when an affiliate is suspected of being involved in adware so that at least the merchant is in an informed position - and the more pro affiliate merchants such as (but not limited to) jackpotjoy and ASOS can act accordingly.

2. Locking the TD forum would prevent discussion of valid issues regarding TD merchants and prevent TD merchants from publicising details of offers etc to us

3. TD would most certainly withdraw from the forum and I think the other networks would be very cautious of their position - wondering at any moment if they were to be exiled too.

4. This forum is a place for frank open discussion - at the moment with very very few exceptions it is mercifully free of censorship and should remain so - once you start censoring one participant you are on a very nasty slippery slope - I'm sure many of us belong to other forums (not necessarily affiliate related) which have gone down this route to their detriment. Free speech is ethical and ethical discussion has to be a two way street.

5. We are far more likely to persuade TD merchants / potential TD merchants of the error of their ways by discussing things openly here - if we simply ignore TD we are kidding ourselves that this will make TD / merchants change - I suspect we need to discuss TD on this forum far more than they need us to discuss them - don't be fooled into thinking if they are segregated they will come on hands and knees crawling to be let back in - this is big business and big business is ruled by the bottom line not by the heart.

Put yourself in the position of a merchant who is thinking of joining TD - they hear about the forum and come and have a look - instead of finding educated threads they find nothing about TD - so probably instead of thinking this is a bad thing they either simply think 'strange that TD are not there?' or alternatively that 'well TD must be good because look there are all these affiliates moaning about problems on other networks but there's not a word about TD'

6. Even moving the TD forum would penalise good TD merchants like JackpotJoy and ASOS as much as the bad merchants - if I was Chris or Jess I would be very unhappy at this idea and regard it as a bit of a kick in the teeth after the help they have given members of this forum both collectively and individually.

7. The aim of this forum should be to represent the whole UK affiliate industry, networks, merchants and affiliates and its large membership speaks volumes for its success in doing this - whether we like it or not TD are and (probably) will continue for the foreseeable future as the largest UK network in terms of transaction turnover - it would be extremely churlish and hypocritical of us to throw all of our toys out of the pram and pretend that they don't exist (when 9 out of 10 forum members would continue to use them and promote their merchants on our sites anyway).

**Tyson Pearcey** · 24-07-04

Bad idea.

Reason being that The Forum is intended for an open debate and that must remain a key point if it is to exist and maintain credibility. If we begin to axe and isolate networks that we don't agree with (regardless if the cause is just or if its not) we are resorting to a communist type environment where only one view is accepted and heard. That's not really the way I like to live my life.

Lets keep the debate alive; the only way change can be achieved is through open and public discussion.

**Shane** · 24-07-04

I voted for "Clearly Separate" TD (and other infested networks)

I think that the networks that have moved forward should be clearly visible and applauded for what they have done, I don't think that TD and CJ should benefit in any way by association from the advances that have been made by other networks.

I think the board should still be open but the Spyware free guys should be at the top and the nodding donkeys/laughing hyenas at the bottom in a clearly market bit saying.. "don't feed, infected"

I do think that at this stage of the game any network NOT making a move is clearly saying "up yours" to us all, they know the score now, it's undeniable what the situation is, although at the same time I don't think for the good of the merchants languishing with these networks and industry as a whole that the TD/CJ forums should be locked.

so how about branded areas such as :

"Spyware Free Networks - Affiliates recieve 100% of commission genereated - Merchants Pay Only for Genuine Affiliate Sales"

and for the donkey's and laughing hyenas ...

"Spyware Infected Networks - Affiliates May Lose Commission To a Third Party- Merchants May pay for their own sales uneccessarily"

I for one think there needs to be some differentiation to highlight the ones that have taken a step and used their morals and made the ethical choice over the ones that a laughing all the way to the bank.

The A4u Forum could do this and still remain unbiased as it's factual, as clear as seperating what an affiliate does and what a merchant does.

**Qui Gon Jinn** · 24-07-04

I voted to "Clearly Separate" TD & CJ, but certainly not to close the thread.

Quoting Shane,

I think that the networks that have moved forward should be clearly visible and applauded for what they have done, I don't think that TD and CJ should benefit in any way by association from the advances that have been made by other networks.

.

Whilst affiliates & merchants concerns go relatively unheeded, with publishers gearing up for christmas, networks are sitting there ridiculing affliates & merchants milking the coffers as we encroach the busiest time of year. Taking advantage of the weakness of members of this forum and ignorance of a majority of merchants & consumers.

People lay down too easily....

The scenario has dragged on too long and I think a number of people are too lethargic in ACTUALLY doing something. Walk the Walk, not Talk the Talk.

It doesn't mean that topics, debate or discussions can't take place as normal in these forums, except that there is a clear distinction in the two classes of networks currently around.

A definitive distinction is required.

Tyson Pearcey, I have no idea where your quote on a communist environment come from, but imho it's sounds like you may envoke a more liberal environment where people are generaly too soft. e.g. You could steal a Liberal persons car and he'll turn around and say something "you had every right to do that, in fact let me save you some time and give you my car keys and here is some money to fill the tank with petrol. " However there is a point when you have to say "no more".

I personally don't think ethical networks are doing enough in the creating of awareness of this to retailers, the problem is worse than spam or viruses but receives less coverage, but at least there is a window of opportunity to control spyware to a certain degree which must be grasped with both hands.

One reason why could be, yes, performance based marketing is a fanatastic model to promote to merchants and networks are working togther on ideas to deliver this message to increase the size of pie, but is this is at the sacrifice of the longevity of the industry (self regulated, responsible, professional, principles). For the industry to mature properly it will have to take a little brusing and dependent on how this are handled will in fact gain the industry more respect.

I must admit a lot of my threads on this forum have been geared towards spyware and less on affiliate marketing strategies, why.. well I gladly discuss affiliate promotion outside of the forum with proactive members, but now I am reluctant to assist others if they can't help themselves.

**justnozy** · 24-07-04

For the record I voted "seperate" as for why, I can't really think about anything that Shane hasn't already said.

**drivetowin** · 24-07-04

I think separating TD and CJ from the others is the best option.

QGJ - I take your point about walking the walk and I'm in the final stages of moving my TD links to other networks where the merchant is on more than one network

However, where I can't move merchants I have to stick with TD. One merchant on TD currently contributes 30% of my revenue. They have no plans to move to another network so I have to stick with them on TD - much as 180 is stealing some of my revenue - it aint stealing 30% and trying to explain to my building society that I'm taking an ethical stance but I can't pay my mortgage wouldn't get me very far.....

I originally posted this in another thread but as that thread rapidly disappeared down the page I'll post it again here where it's likely to get a wider viewing

I would add that some of what is to follow is deliberately designed to be thought provoking and not necessarily my views - just what I suspect a merchant/network would think if I were them:

1. 180s main 'mistake' was in directly targetting merchant sites - if all they did was overwrite our affiliate links then I doubt if many (and I'm not including the more pro-affiliate merchants like Jackpot Joy, ASOS, Buyagift etc in this statement) but I say again many merchants would really have cared a jot - if I'm a merchant selling widgets - my bottom line is how many widgets I can sell - if 180 came along and said hey we can shift 1,000 widgets where your combined affiliates are only shifting 100 widgets but we may force some of your affiliates out of your programme by doing so - I'd think well my bottom line has just gone up 10 fold so if a few small affiliates crumble then so be it - if you think this is far from the truth look what is happening with a number of cj merchants at the moment where they are culling low sales volume affiliates to boost their overall epc - in my opinion a very short sighted attitude but they're doing it....

2. Because of the last cookie gets the sale rule we all spend time working on our sites trying to make sure we are the last cookie - i.e. trying to build site loyalty so people come back to me and buy via my site rather than yours.

While not condoning what 180 et al are doing they have exploited this to their best advantage - many of us who are complaining about their activities probably have a small glint of envy in the back of our minds that we do not have the skills/finance/manpower to build a similar solution / we didn't think of it first....

While I'm sure all of us would have implemented it more ethically - a la Neil and his rebate catcher - which of us wouldn't like to offer software to our site visitors to 'encourage' them to buy via our links if only we had the wherewithall to do it.?

3. Are affiliates who simply do ppc on merchant trademarks actually any better than 180 et al from a merchant viewpoint - if I was a merchant I might again take the view that I'm paying commission on a sale I would have got anyway - and can those affiliates really argue that they add anything from a visitor perspective - hell even greasypalm falls victim to this - type in cashback scheme into Google and three quarters of the GoogleAds are gp affiliates - so a visitor clicking on the ads expecting variation gets greasypalm, greasypalm and er greasypalm, but of course if the visitor joins gp through any of these Neil has just lost 35% of his profit for life on that visitor.

Yes I know some of you are going to argue that the affiliate has paid to advertise but hey 180 didn't get their technology for free you know.

The situation is similar for Comet and other electrical retailers - oh and before someone says 180 pop up over other merchants there are some (less than ethical?) affiliates who advertise say Comet on adwords then actually take the visitor off to another merchant who pays better commission - or even worse (in my mind) - takes them off to a list of espotting results which means the visitor has to click on yet another link marked Comet to get to where they originally wanted to go in the first place.

Well that should be enough to get some discussion going!

**Qui Gon Jinn** · 24-07-04

kbudden,

If there isn't the option of the same program on another network, I wouldn't suggest dropping the TD or CJ program as that would be cutting your nose off to spite your face. The onus is on swapping links or seeking better alternatives but not removing all links from a network completely.

But as earlier polls indicated, the program being on dual networks is a preferred option for affiliates as a majority.

I think the points you raise are well worthy of individual discussion themselves as three separate threads.

With regard to spyware we musn't forget the consumer and further security holes the spyware causes on a companies network or individual pc.

Personally, not jealous in the slighest with 180 et al, a good product search site with price comparison, product reviews and consumer involvement with a community will encourage consumers to save as homepage or favourite place will reap better dividends in the long term.

****
On pcc there are more pros and cons on brand name bidding in essence protecting the brand at forefront of search for phrases and mispellings where the merchant wouldn't otherwise appear at the top or even the first page of organic search.

On tests we've conducted we have calculated merchants would infact loose over 50% of vistors / potential customers, plus the affiliate is taking the financial risk.

It's also a good litmus test on a merchant, if they can't convert on their brand name, it's little use focusing on more generic terms or product specific keyword phrases hereby an affiliate will provide many extra sales.

Another reason is that either a competitor may do it or the results go to a page where there is the possibility of too much leakage to a rival company.

Too many merchants clamp down on affiliates rather than organisations.

It can actually lower costs for the merchchant (case by case).

Gives the affiliate more latitude to operate.

Retailers can easily establish such rules and reap the same benefits. Like say don't bid on the actual registered mark, but phrases mispelling setc are okay, even suggest a max bid. Some merchants take complete libertys by actually over extending their rights on the mispelings & variations and even generic terms.

http://www.internetretailer.com/dailyNews.asp?id=12328

There are a lot more cases and examples which can be gone thro in a further discussion

***

If in the unlikely situation CJ or TD do clamp down on spyware, it will be for monetary reasons of their own coffers, not ethical or cos of the concerns of affiliates and merchants.

**Freebie** · 25-07-04

I opted for segregation, although i would have worded the option differently.

I don't believe that we should hand out 'punishments' - we'll always be judged for doing so. However, handing out praise is always accepted well.

I think a 'Scumware Free' section should be added above the existing network forums. Each network that goes/stays scumware free should be promoted to that forum. No promotions or demotions should happen for those that don't play along.

**Lea** · 25-07-04

Personally - I am not the kind of person who likes to make enemies. I believe the nicer you are to people the better business you make - HOWEVER - it does not work in this instance.

This is affecting MY business - and I am not going to let it.

I think we need to seperate into a different area.

"Ethical Networks" in one

and just "Other Networks" in the other - even this is clear definition enough for now in my humble opinion.

I have been moving my campaigns over to other networks - and although I still have some with CJ and TD, I am sure that by the end of the year I won't have.

If CJ and TD are supporting spyware or adware companies with unethical practices then I CAN'T AFFORD to do business with them.

Also - on top of this - If people can not see my CJ and TD banners / buttons because most pc's are supplied with Norton - then there is no point in me displaying their banners - I am loosing sales.

Seperate - but keep open for discussion.

My pennies worth.

Lea