Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamis
Unfortunately NATS will always deffend the sponsor, no matter what.
For NATS, the affiliates are a bunch of idiots who they would throw away in the garbage. They do not care about affiliates.
They only care about sponsors and about selling their worthless shitty platform programmed by a 7 year old kid with basic skills.
Period.
|
For the best part of 12 years affiliates have been the most important part of the adult Internet for most sites and maybe for the online porn business. And let's see what that meant.
An enormous, expensive buffer between the customer and the supplier. That always competed with the supplier for sales. Even in the very earliest of days traffic off a TGP was lucky to convert at 1-100. That's 99 people consuming free porn rather than paying for it. Not clicks on a banner to a site, clicks on the free porn alternative to paying.
Some thought this system worked so well they made it really easy for affiliates to give away free porn, they gave them all the support possible and paid them as much as possible. And the buffer grew and became even more attractive to people surfing to NOT pay for porn.
Eventually, prior to Tubes, the ratio on free surfers to buying surfers might of been as high as 1-1,000. We all know in 2007 the biggest problem after getting a gallery on the top 5 TGP sites, was paying for the BW and getting enough buyers to make it worthwhile.
If affiliates needed exclusive content because non exclusive couldn't be used on TGP sites, they got it. Even though for members it was often crap. Members needs were less important than affiliates needs. And that's just an example of the way the business was run.
If a sponsor is caught shaving affiliates, NATS would ban him. If the sponsor was caught scamming customers nothing happened. Did NATS ever pull it's program from a sponsor using cross sells or a dating site conning members that theres a girl in the next town waiting for a date with me or penis pills that are useless, or any other underhand dealings toward customers? No way, the collective opinion was.
Screw the customer, he will keep buying. Even though the proof was clear many weren't. The ship wasn't sinking and a few were making some money. If you read Lamis's comments about affiliates, I'm sure many thought the same about customers,
who were putting the money on the table.
That's the only place this industry earns money. The guy who gets his credit card out and joins a site is the only source of income this industry online has. And his needs became secondary, or even third.
Fast forward to 2011. If you want free hosted 6 minute clips for your Tube, there's tons who will offer them, if you want automatically updated blogs there are tons of them. In fact what ever affiliates want is supplied. And the ship is sinking under the cost of free online porn. So let's put up more.
And why? Because without 10,000s of affiliates giving out porn, the surfer would never find a site to join.
Well they seemed to have found the free sites well enough.
Why do Tubes truly exist, is it because of BW costs or the return on adverting because of the inflated "traffic" budget?
Why are there 10,000s of affiliates, or were, is it because they sent so much traffic to sites or they were paid and helped too much?
What would of happened if the bar for being an affiliates was 10 times higher, say no support and 5% rev share. Would there be more or less joins? Anyone who thinks less isn't thinking straight. Affiliates don't create traffic, they only steer it to a site. By over paying and supporting them you create a great reason not to buy. By disappointing customers, you make that reason even more attractive.
Surfers who found The Hun, could of found Bang Bus as well. If they were that stupid, they wouldn't of found The Hun in the first place. And what's to stop sponsors submitting to TGP sites. Or affiliates having to make it pay for 5%?
But I don't understand Online porn marketing.
You're dead right, marketing is meant to build sales, not give customers a better alternative to buying.