Non fixed merchant costs? Why don't merchants want a lot of affiliates?

[Rich]

Tweet

Do Tradedoubler change any non fixed costs, or non performance linked costs, that would explain why merchants on TD want to cancel relationships with affiliates that generate few sales? (e.g. Dell, ASOS & others)

I always thought the great benefit of affiliate marketing, particually via a network, was that merchants could have lots of affiliates that generate a small amount of sales that, when combined, made a noticable amount?

So I'm wondering if TD make any charges that would affect the cost of having lots of affiliates on a merchant's program. Admin costs for the merchant shouldn't go up as an affiliate making a couple of sales a month shouldn't expect direct interaction with the merchant.

I can't actually think of any charges that would cause this, even a banner serving cost shouldn't matter as an affiliate making few sales should have corrispondingly few impressions.

[angelabx]

Could be ....

From what I know merchants have a lot of problems with 'abuse'. Particularly those who care about how their trademarks are used.

Keeping things to a select bunch of performing affiliates keeps things easier to police.

[Jamster]

A few good reasons may include:

Dilution of brand
Loss of control
Paying out on potentially "free" traffic
The margarine effect (i.e. sales will be spread more thinly across more partners, making the program less attractive overall)