Adult Friend Finder position statement - Page 7 - GoFuckYourself.com

Brujah · 10-17-2006, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LegendaryLars

If you were not so quick to bash you might have clicked the link and found it was an affialite who was banned.

Redirects to reach ad destination: http://adultfriendfinder.com/go/p128244.subcreative1

But you just want blood so continue on.

That's a great page Lars. Can you take it further now and automatically just send ALL ZangoToolbar useragent users to that page?

Far-L · 10-17-2006, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by damian2001

Thats starting to sound a bit desparate Will.....

Its Lars we are talking about - not Bush.

In-house affiliate accounts to track specific traffic are commonplace.

mortenb · 10-17-2006, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brujah

That's a great page Lars. Can you take it further now and automatically just send ALL ZangoToolbar useragent users to that page?

Something like this

RewriteEngine on
RewriteBase /
RewriteCond %{HTTP_user_agent} zango
RewriteRule ^$ banned_affiliate.html

Pleasurepays · 10-17-2006, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

In all fairness, how do we really know it was an affiliate and not an AFF account set up by AFF so if it got heat they could blame it on their "affiliate" and just close the account and make a new one.

thats what Ibill used to do when we used to spam way back when... they would give us a master account... unlimited sub accounts... then when someone would post spam on the boards and make a big deal for Ibill to terminate the account... they would make a statement "hey man, thanks! we terminated account number xxxxx" and you never saw spam with that ID again. meanwhile, behind the scenes, the money always stayed in the master account and no one ever missed a beat.

not a wild assumption at all. in fact, its quite common practice to play games like this. all anyone ever sees is an account number or affiliate id. who creates affiliate id's? why would you do shady shit in your own name when you can just create an affiliate id like "rogue_russian" and do whatever you want... then "terminate" it when you get called out for it?

damian... i swear to christ... is this the first day in the biz for some of you clowns?

Alex From San Diego · 10-17-2006, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mortenb

We are talking about someone who has openly admitted to redirecting affiliate traffic to serve their own purposes. I know Lars has done a lot of good for the business and he is probably a very nice guy, but this situation in being handled very poorly and there is really no nothing good to be said about what they have done.

A lot of good?....maybe so but those "good deeds" had an alterior motive in the end.

will76 · 10-17-2006, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by damian2001

Thats starting to sound a bit desparate Will.....

Its Lars we are talking about - not Bush.

I am not talking about LARS, I said AFF. It's large company. I doubt LARS went and sat down in the advertising department and did this himself. He may not have even know that AFF bought traffic from zango until this came out a few weeks ago. Maybe he knew before hand, maybe he didn't. Thats why I have always made it clear by saying AFF to what is going on and only saying "lars" in response to what he is posting here.

Damian_Maxcash · 10-17-2006, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

I am not talking about LARS, I said AFF. It's large company. I doubt LARS went and sat down in the advertising department and did this himself. He may not have even know that AFF bought traffic from zango until this came out a few weeks ago. Maybe he knew before hand, maybe he didn't. Thats why I have always made it clear by saying AFF to what is going on and only saying "lars" in response to what he is posting here.

So who do I speak to when ClickCash are pulling a fast one?

We both know they are....

ClickCash - NastyDollars - MaximumCash

I have been trying to get a response from CC for 7 years. You are as close as I have got - so speak up Will.... whats your response?

Major (Tom) · 10-17-2006, 02:19 PM

fyi I got hit with a zango install and i didnt even know i had gotten it. so dont give me this "its legal shit."
whats funny is in florida i walked past rocco and saw he had a zango badge on, lifted up and laughed in his face. Later that evening he asked what that was all about. I told him. Then he explained his side of the story. He told me that people were prompted to install and there were clear removal instructions. He made it sound not that bad. He was actually a nice guy too. I guess while they shake you with your right hand they stab you with the left. In anycase, Im not from geek squad.. but i can install a raid 5, overclock a dual xeon board etc etc, and removing this was harder than that.
thanks for wasting about 4 hours of my life zango.
Duke

mortenb · 10-17-2006, 03:37 PM

I think the worst part about AFF's involvement in this, is the fact that the remain completely silent unless they are forced to take some kind of action. I don't believe that we would have had any kind of comment from AFF if Zango hadn't named them as one of their customers and they are still playing the same game. I guess they are still hoping that this mess will be forgotten in a few days.

Lars and AFF. Come forward and inform us of the actions you are taking against spyware. If any.

jayeff · 10-17-2006, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by damian2001

ClickCash - NastyDollars - MaximumCash

I have attempted several times in these threads to get the focus off AFF, Zango too for that matter. No-one has claimed that the sponsors Lars represents are the only ones at fault, but the threads do keep returning to them. My concern is that such a narrow focus may make the problem seem smaller than it is.

But I'm not clear what point you are trying to make. Are you suggesting that if other sponsors tolerate or work with scumware companies that makes it okay? Because if you are condemning these three sponsors, that would appear to weaken the defense of AFF that you have been so tirelessly mounting these last few days.

You are absolutely right that someone cannot reasonably condemn one company without condemning all. But that applies to you as well as to the posters you appear to be trying to discredit.

Damian_Maxcash · 10-17-2006, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayeff

I have attempted several times in these threads to get the focus off AFF, Zango too for that matter. No-one has claimed that the sponsors Lars represents are the only ones at fault, but the threads do keep returning to them. My concern is that such a narrow focus may make the problem seem smaller than it is.

But I'm not clear what point you are trying to make. Are you suggesting that if other sponsors tolerate or work with scumware companies that makes it okay? Because if you are condemning these three sponsors, that would appear to weaken the defense of AFF that you have been so tirelessly mounting these last few days.

You are absolutely right that someone cannot reasonably condemn one company without condemning all. But that applies to you as well as to the posters you appear to be trying to discredit.

You got it right when you said I was trying to put some balance into the debate.

This thread has been a GFY feeding frenzy from post 1.

Lars has put himself on the line. The only sponsor who has BTW, and trust me there are more that should be.

I choose to believe him - and not the GFY rabble - what he said makes total sense to me....

Peaches · 10-17-2006, 04:54 PM

If you think about it, programs now would be smarter to play with companies like Zango and a handful of the whales instead of spending large amounts of $$$ catering to the minnows in the pond.

There are a lot of "behind the scene" programs that make millions and don't have more than 20 affiliates and they are by invitation only.

At some point, smart business owners are going to sit down and see how much ROI they get for giving out $200 of free drinks and lap dances to someone who sends them 2 sales a month, in addition to the salaries and benefits they are paying employees to cater to the "little guys", plan lavish parties, etc.

I know 99% of the posters here don't want to hear this, but if a lot of these "companies" start actually acting like buisnesses and have P/L statements, etc., having small affiliates really won't be worth the effort.

Brujah · 10-17-2006, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

If you think about it, programs now would be smarter to play with companies like Zango and a handful of the whales instead of spending large amounts of $$$ catering to the minnows in the pond.

Yes, because that "insignificant" (their words) 0.5% of their traffic makes them so smart. You're dumb.

Brujah · 10-17-2006, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by damian2001

You got it right when you said I was trying to put some balance into the debate.

This thread has been a GFY feeding frenzy from post 1.

Lars has put himself on the line. The only sponsor who has BTW, and trust me there are more that should be.

I choose to believe him - and not the GFY rabble - what he said makes total sense to me....

After Zango released a statement confirming that AFF was their customer, and had been purchasing ads that would overwrite their affiliates urls, etc.. etc..

SureFire · 10-17-2006, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

If you think about it, programs now would be smarter to play with companies like Zango and a handful of the whales instead of spending large amounts of $$$ catering to the minnows in the pond.

There are a lot of "behind the scene" programs that make millions and don't have more than 20 affiliates and they are by invitation only.

At some point, smart business owners are going to sit down and see how much ROI they get for giving out $200 of free drinks and lap dances to someone who sends them 2 sales a month, in addition to the salaries and benefits they are paying employees to cater to the "little guys", plan lavish parties, etc.

I know 99% of the posters here don't want to hear this, but if a lot of these "companies" start actually acting like buisnesses and have P/L statements, etc., having small affiliates really won't be worth the effort.

Peaches, how many 'little guys' go to shows? How many 'little guys' ask for special favors from reps?

I am a 'little guy' and play by the rules...I expect any company to respect this and not screw me over. My two or three or x amount signups a month are not costing them anything but to cut the check and postage.

Last year my AFF was a couple of hundred negative and I kept my links up (it all worked out). With cams.com, last month they double paid me and not one person via email could respond..my links are still up and I did cash the check (it will work out again).

I am not pulling any links and I do feel 'little guys' are worth the effort to keep...most of them are honest and are not looking for a free ride.

BTW, I am Little Gal

Peaches · 10-17-2006, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SureFire

Peaches, how many 'little guys' go to shows? How many 'little guys' ask for special favors from reps?

IME as both an affiliate rep and as a freesite owner, most of the work done and money spent is on smaller fish. They go to shows - they get 4 of them to pitch in and get a room. They eat free food and drink free booze. They email you constantly for every single little thing. Will some of those become whales? Possibly, but these days, unlikely. But when you put down $20K for a party/sponsorship, pay one or two people $80K a year plus benefits and travel expenses to run these events and only 3 of your biggest customers are there and the rest are just sucking up the freebies, at some point you have to question "Why are we doing this?"

Like I said, it's harsh, but it's true. I would predict in the next few years you'll see fewer affiliate programs, per se, and more "invite only" programs. I've seen several programs already cut down on their parties, sponsorships, contests, etc. I've also noticed quite a few are "combined" sponsorship parties. It used to be you'd have to decide between 4 or 5 different parties to attend at the same time during a show. Now the whales are being treated to private sit down dinners and the minnows to the combined sponsorships free for alls.

A good program, with several years of customers and traffic streams, could even run with no affiliates. One of these traffic streams could easily be programs like Zango.

Peaches · 10-17-2006, 06:15 PM

I guess what I'm gently trying to say is that to program owners, $$$ is the grease that runs the engine. If they have a way to make more money while spending less, they're going to do it. Keeping little affiliates happy isn't always on the top of their priority list.

Brujah · 10-17-2006, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

IME as both an affiliate rep and as a freesite owner, most of the work done and money spent is on smaller fish. They go to shows - they get 4 of them to pitch in and get a room. They eat free food and drink free booze. They email you constantly for every single little thing. Will some of those become whales? Possibly, but these days, unlikely. But when you put down $20K for a party/sponsorship, pay one or two people $80K a year plus benefits and travel expenses to run these events and only 3 of your biggest customers are there and the rest are just sucking up the freebies, at some point you have to question "Why are we doing this?"

What about attracting whales from others programs that show up? Could be one good reason why it's good to have a presence. Why does anyone exhibit anywhere? They probably question it and/or vent about it but at the end of the day there are reasons they continue doing it.

Quote:

A good program, with several years of customers and traffic streams, could even run with no affiliates. One of these traffic streams could easily be programs like Zango.

Aren't affiliates really just a way of brokering traffic that you get to test first before you pay for it? Doesn't that marketshare add up? Would AFF give up it's marketshare to it's competitors like Sexsearch, Datinggold, etc? Wouldn't it start to add up as new affiliates come online?

Any "minnow" can steal your programs traffic with Zango. It isn't exclusive to whales.

Bird · 10-17-2006, 06:32 PM

Just buy em out

Peaches · 10-17-2006, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brujah

What about attracting whales from others programs that show up? Could be one good reason why it's good to have a presence. Why does anyone exhibit anywhere? They probably question it and/or vent about it but at the end of the day there are reasons they continue doing it.

Aren't affiliates really just a way of brokering traffic that you get to test first before you pay for it? Doesn't that marketshare add up? Would AFF give up it's marketshare to it's competitors like Sexsearch, Datinggold, etc? Wouldn't it start to add up as new affiliates come online?

Any "minnow" can steal your programs traffic with Zango. It isn't exclusive to whales.

You just pointed out what I was saying:

1. Fewer and fewer programs are throwing out good money with expensive exhibitions, parties, etc.
2. Whales are being treated like gold.

SureFire · 10-17-2006, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

IME as both an affiliate rep and as a freesite owner, most of the work done and money spent is on smaller fish. They go to shows - they get 4 of them to pitch in and get a room. They eat free food and drink free booze. They email you constantly for every single little thing. Will some of those become whales? Possibly, but these days, unlikely. But when you put down $20K for a party/sponsorship, pay one or two people $80K a year plus benefits and travel expenses to run these events and only 3 of your biggest customers are there and the rest are just sucking up the freebies, at some point you have to question "Why are we doing this?"

Like I said, it's harsh, but it's true. I would predict in the next few years you'll see fewer affiliate programs, per se, and more "invite only" programs. I've seen several programs already cut down on their parties, sponsorships, contests, etc. I've also noticed quite a few are "combined" sponsorship parties. It used to be you'd have to decide between 4 or 5 different parties to attend at the same time during a show. Now the whales are being treated to private sit down dinners and the minnows to the combined sponsorships free for alls.

A good program, with several years of customers and traffic streams, could even run with no affiliates. One of these traffic streams could easily be programs like Zango.

A bit confused over IME...assuming it means In My Experience.

I do believe you are wrong about traffic streams like Zango and other 'somewhat' legal adware/spyware but time will tell.

You are probably right about sponsors not spending so much money on shows but mainstream companies still do it.

Brujah · 10-17-2006, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

You just pointed out what I was saying:

1. Fewer and fewer programs are throwing out good money with expensive exhibitions, parties, etc.
2. Whales are being treated like gold.

You'll have to explain it to me. I don't get that from my post at all.

american pervert · 10-17-2006, 06:55 PM

if aff has so much money, why can't they hire a couple of people to surf the web and cancel the accts of people who run their banners on warez, illegal torrent and simliar sites?

crockett · 10-17-2006, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by damian2001

You got it right when you said I was trying to put some balance into the debate.

This thread has been a GFY feeding frenzy from post 1.

Lars has put himself on the line. The only sponsor who has BTW, and trust me there are more that should be.

I choose to believe him - and not the GFY rabble - what he said makes total sense to me....

Lars never said he is going to stop the pratice.. Instead of standing up and putting a stop to it. Instead he tried to justify it, and they plan to contiune using zango from the looks of his posts.

That's why there is a feeding frezy.. If he would have stood up and accepted it for what it was and stopped. This thread would have never been this big.

Missie · 10-17-2006, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

A good program, with several years of customers and traffic streams, could even run with no affiliates. One of these traffic streams could easily be programs like Zango.

No it couldn't be programs like Zango. Without affiliates there would be no adware. Simple reason... the only one to steal from would be the sponsor itself.

Now imagine if sponsors no longer had affiliates. That sure cuts down on an awful lot of sites to pop on, doesn't it? Those like AFF, SexSearch and so on would have to pop up only on other sponsors' sites because that's the only target they have. Makes no sense to target their own site anymore, they don't have affiliates to steal from. All direct type-ins, all natural SERPS, ppc ads, gallery spots, etc. How long do you really think that would last? I can see a lot of lawyers being busy and getting richer...

Missie

jayeff · 10-17-2006, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

But when you put down $20K for a party/sponsorship, pay one or two people $80K a year plus benefits and travel expenses to run these events and only 3 of your biggest customers are there and the rest are just sucking up the freebies, at some point you have to question "Why are we doing this?"

Sponsors not already asking these questions should be doing so. But you are looking at the whole issue through a distorting lens.

First, many sponsors are no more professional than the majority of affiliates. Thus they have chosen marketing directions which appeal to their own personalities and comprehension more than because there ever was much financial reason involved. Putting money put into affiliate development would be far more productive, but a lot less glamorous. In consequence, few sponsors even bother to hire reps who are more than minimally competent.

That isn't the only way most sponsors are stuck firmly in the 90's as regards their view of affiliates. The majority still pitch their main marketing straight at newbies, which was fair enough when there was a constant flood of newbies and experienced webmasters were in a minority, but those days are long gone. As you pointed out, very few newbies will make it these days, yet existing affiliates are still largely left to their own devices.

Which is not to say that even if affiliates were monetized more efficiently, there are not alternatives. But diving into the arms of operations like Zango would be one of the most dangerous options. No-one in his right mind would make his business dependent on an operation which is skating so close to the edge of the law.

Settling down to work only with existing "whales" doesn't come far behind on the list of things not to do. This has already been discussed at length in one of these threads and it is obvious how it would appeal to a few of the least bright candles. But it really isn't an option at all for anyone who plans to be in business for more than 5 years or so.

DTK · 10-17-2006, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett

Lars never said he is going to stop the pratice.. Instead of standing up and putting a stop to it. Instead he tried to justify it, and they plan to contiune using zango from the looks of his posts.

That's why there is a feeding frezy.. If he would have stood up and accepted it for what it was and stopped. This thread would have never been this big.

he's pushing the same line of nonsense here: http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showpo...3&postcount=22

apparently, to some people "we're gonna keep doing what we've been doing" = "standing up, putting yourself on the line and doing something about it, {insert spin cliche here}, etc"

MarkMan · 10-17-2006, 07:21 PM

Peaches,

you would be wrong .. its worth it having the small affiliates.. it keeps the balance .. without the small affiliates zango would charge a hand and a leg for their stolen traffic.

its all a balance.. if AFF gives up on that traffic .. it would be crazy.. if i had % in AFF i would demand they use some of that Zango traffic.. but I would like to keep my normal affiliates .. so to keep Zango's prices under control

did anyone notice Googles charges today.. they are so high ... its unbelievable

that's what happens when one company control too much traffic.. and that's what would happen if all of AFF's or any Sponsors traffic came only from Google.. or Zango or any single big traffic programs

just my 2cent

I don't support Spywere or Adware or any of that scumware .. but i understand the logic behind the people who create it .. the people who advertise with it and the victims of such software(including me in this one).

now that i understand why ratios have been going down so much in the last few years... i will deal with it .. but i don't hate anyone for trying to make money.

that's what we all do

Missie · 10-17-2006, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkMan

now that i understand why ratios have been going down so much in the last few years... i will deal with it .. but i don't hate anyone for trying to make money.

that's what we all do

WOW!

That's not what we ALL do. I don't have to steal from anyone to pay my bills. That's like saying you caught a robber in your house, a "coworker", he was blatantly stealing from you. Then he tells you "sorry man, got bills to pay and if I don't rob you, someone else will some day, so might as well be me. Let me see if I can find another sucker to rob, and if I can't, I'll be back to your house, k ?" To which you'd reply "oh no problem, I don't hate you, I understand, we all need to make money somehow, that's what we all do. You can come back anytime you want".

I find a robber in my house, he'll be lucky to get out alive. If he ever came back, he'd leave in a bodybag, empty handed. BANG! You're dead.

Why that's allowed online? Sure beats the hell out of me!

Missie

gooddomains · 10-18-2006, 02:28 AM

we'll see how this will all end

TheSwed · 10-18-2006, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missie

WOW!

That's not what we ALL do. I don't have to steal from anyone to pay my bills. That's like saying you caught a robber in your house, a "coworker", he was blatantly stealing from you. Then he tells you "sorry man, got bills to pay and if I don't rob you, someone else will some day, so might as well be me. Let me see if I can find another sucker to rob, and if I can't, I'll be back to your house, k ?" To which you'd reply "oh no problem, I don't hate you, I understand, we all need to make money somehow, that's what we all do. You can come back anytime you want".

I find a robber in my house, he'll be lucky to get out alive. If he ever came back, he'd leave in a bodybag, empty handed. BANG! You're dead.

Why that's allowed online? Sure beats the hell out of me!

Missie

....

roly · 10-18-2006, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

If you think about it, programs now would be smarter to play with companies like Zango and a handful of the whales instead of spending large amounts of $$$ catering to the minnows in the pond.

There are a lot of "behind the scene" programs that make millions and don't have more than 20 affiliates and they are by invitation only.

At some point, smart business owners are going to sit down and see how much ROI they get for giving out $200 of free drinks and lap dances to someone who sends them 2 sales a month, in addition to the salaries and benefits they are paying employees to cater to the "little guys", plan lavish parties, etc.

I know 99% of the posters here don't want to hear this, but if a lot of these "companies" start actually acting like buisnesses and have P/L statements, etc., having small affiliates really won't be worth the effort.

no one is born a whale and 1-5% of those minnows will become whales further down the road.

regarding zango, all of the dating sites like aff, sexsearch etc should multilaterally agree not to use them, and then none of the programs lose out to each other (if the bigger programs like aff and sexsearch agreed to do this the smaller ones would have to follow). and if one breaks the deal, affiliates should then boycott that program until they come back on board.

Peaches · 10-18-2006, 07:53 AM

It's obvious a lot of small affiliates think they are more important to programs than they really are. That's why I said my comments would be unpopular with 99% of the posters here ;)

Handpicking of affiliates is probably one of the best things a program can do. For instance, to play Devil's Advocate, programs could now remove all affiliates that are using Zango. In reality, most of the older programs have so many affiliates sending 2+ signups a month, it would take forever to find and remove those using Zango or any other spyware. And I'll bet you it's those little affiliates that are causing most of the problems.

RawAlex · 10-18-2006, 11:45 AM

There is exactly one thing that I respect about AFF/ Cams - when they ban an affillate code, they stop taking the traffic as well. That is a class act that other programs should learn how to emulate.

Now if we can just stop buying Zango traffic...

Alex

FM-teem · 10-18-2006, 11:50 AM

And here an advertising pause

will76 · 10-18-2006, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkMan

now that i understand why ratios have been going down so much in the last few years... i will deal with it .. but i don't hate anyone for trying to make money.

that's what we all do

Competition is trying to make money. Trying to out bid you on adwords, or even advertising on the site sites, etc..

Stealing traffic is not the same. Not many of us do that. You got a little off track there.

I will do what it takes to be competitive. I would open a MC Donalds up across the street from a Burger king, but I am not going to go hire a guy with a gun to sit outside of Burger king and escort their customers to my store.

RawAlex · 10-18-2006, 02:24 PM

It has always been my feeling that the affiliate system will die when programs find new ways to get traffic without having to pay so much. Why pay 50% or $105 or whatever if you can pay 10 cents a click and score 1 in 100 "borrowing" surfers from other sites?

Amazing how it all works out.

Alex

Missie · 10-18-2006, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

It has always been my feeling that the affiliate system will die when programs find new ways to get traffic without having to pay so much. Why pay 50% or $105 or whatever if you can pay 10 cents a click and score 1 in 100 "borrowing" surfers from other sites?

Amazing how it all works out.

Alex

Even with that reasoning, sponsors would have to advertise with every piece of scumware available and would still not reach the level of traffic that all their affiliates combined give them now. Advertising would become expensive. Not every surfer on the planet is infected with spyware, not all infected computers have zango or cws or look2me. Some have many of them, the luckiest of the unlucky ones only have one or two and it may not even be one of the application that the sponsor is using.

It would quickly become a "battle of sponsors" and it wouldn't last. To be profitable to anyone involved in these shady practices, scumware advertising NEEDS legit affiliates to feed on.

Missie

jayeff · 10-18-2006, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

It has always been my feeling that the affiliate system will die when programs find new ways to get traffic without having to pay so much. Why pay 50% or $105 or whatever if you can pay 10 cents a click and score 1 in 100 "borrowing" surfers from other sites?

You are skipping a few points...

First that if the average affiliate is as big a drain on resources as arguments like your suggest, who is to blame except the sponsors themselves? They drove the payouts up by not having the imagination (most of them) to compete on any other level. They make zero effort to identify and assist affiliates who show potential for further development. They spend almost all their affiliate marketing budgets on impressing other sponsors and attempting to pull in newbies. There is a vast army of affiliates, yet the typical sponsor does absolutely nothing of practical value except give them the URL's for some banners, galleries, etc.

The other major flaw in your reasoning is that the hundreds of thousands of sites which provide traffic, directly or indirectly, for virtually every traffic source, are affiliate sites. Not only are these webmasters the source of the scumware operators' traffic, but they fuel TGP's, directories, sponsors' own consoles... you name it. You can change the affiliates role. You can call them something else. But so long as traffic has a value, they will not be going anywhere.

And it's a damned good thing, because as someone else pointed out, if sponsors encourage anything approaching a monopoly or "club" of traffic sources, they won't get more traffic: it will just become more expensive. The existence of "affiliates" is what ensures that no-one's business is held to ransom.

As I have already written somewhere here, we have enough cowboys running big sponsor programs that I'm sure some will go that route. But hopefully more are smart enough to realize that the solution is not to get rid of affiliates but to utilize them better.

BlackCrayon · 10-19-2006, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

If you think about it, programs now would be smarter to play with companies like Zango and a handful of the whales instead of spending large amounts of $$$ catering to the minnows in the pond.

There are a lot of "behind the scene" programs that make millions and don't have more than 20 affiliates and they are by invitation only.

At some point, smart business owners are going to sit down and see how much ROI they get for giving out $200 of free drinks and lap dances to someone who sends them 2 sales a month, in addition to the salaries and benefits they are paying employees to cater to the "little guys", plan lavish parties, etc.

I know 99% of the posters here don't want to hear this, but if a lot of these "companies" start actually acting like buisnesses and have P/L statements, etc., having small affiliates really won't be worth the effort.

i don't think most small guys care about or even go to parties/conventions. maybe the ones who want to play like something when they're not. they can cut all of that out and still have small affiliates. they can cut out large chunks of advertising and still have small affiliates. the current climate for recuiting people isn't how it always was.

also if companies only choose to work with big guys and zango, they're only stealing sales from the big guys. thats ok with you? and whales don't just appear from nowhere. sure a lot of the established guys are easy enough to find but you never know when the next 20 sale per day guy is gonna come from.

scottybuzz · 10-19-2006, 06:13 AM

Jay Z rocks!!!!!!!

C_U_Next_Tuesday · 10-19-2006, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebus_dk

"Adware is software that is installed on a user?s computer with notice and consent by the user"

who do you thing you are fooling with that?

I was going to say the same thing.. what a crock.. that shit is never welcomed on my comp but somehow sneaks in..glad I have been spared the Zango shit.

adware and spyware are about the same in my book....shit.

RawAlex · 10-19-2006, 08:28 AM

Jayeff, you miss two very important parts of the deal:

I don't disagree that the programs have created their own issues with (often insane) increases in payouts, etc... but in many cases they need to do it to make up for the shaving, the outside click buying, and the poor performance of their tracking software. Otherwise people would make so little per click that they would stop sending traffic. The highest payouts are in places like cams and dating, because in most cases they are "mature markets" where your conversions are going to be lower, and many of the surfers you send are already members, long since bought and paid for.

As for traffic, well... there will always be some sort of affiliate programs. If the only dating program left was "bob's dating" it would get all the dating traffic, and AFF and sexsearch would just buy zango consoles off of that, Google traffic, yahoo traffic, and away you go. As long as their is some semblance of an affiliate system there will be a way to use Zango style tools to piggy back on that traffic and make money without any affiliates.

Heck, as long as people keep searching on google, they can pop stuff up on the searches... that would be enough.

Alex

MarkMan · 10-19-2006, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

Competition is trying to make money. Trying to out bid you on adwords, or even advertising on the site sites, etc..

Stealing traffic is not the same. Not many of us do that. You got a little off track there.

I will do what it takes to be competitive. I would open a MC Donalds up across the street from a Burger king, but I am not going to go hire a guy with a gun to sit outside of Burger king and escort their customers to my store.

lol

its funny that a few of you think that I think Stealing traffic is ok, I don't but i know that if a company like AFF would like to play by this rules .. well i am ready to take it up a notch .

like you said will76 , AFF is acting like as if you are hiring a guy with a gun to take our customers.. so if that's the way they would like to do it.. we can do it that way..

i prefer to not get angry at human nature no matter how unbelievable some acts are!

nothing is worth me blowing a fuse in my head.. i am just going to accept it.. not get angry and adept to the situation.

pussyluver · 10-19-2006, 05:04 PM

Peaches, Sometimes little guys grow up to be whales.

Tickler · 10-21-2006, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worldnet

OK, what programs are using Zango? Is there a list in a thread here? I'm dropping every dam sponsor using it.

Linkster is trying to build one over at GG&J.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brujah

That's a great page Lars. Can you take it further now and automatically just send ALL ZangoToolbar useragent users to that page?

Except it may not be the affiliate using the toolbar. The surfer could just have the toolbar on their machine, and arrive via a real link. That would mean that all these flagged hits should be back checked to verify that the account matches the link on the sending page.

I have been at this quite awhile, and yet do not understand why sponsors just ban affilates over BS like this. Hell, file criminal charges and include Zango, or whoever as accomplices.

Quickdraw · 10-23-2006, 06:32 AM

So how is your "attempt to address this unforeseen consequence of adware ad buys " going?

SpeakEasy · 10-23-2006, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quickdraw

So how is your "attempt to address this unforeseen consequence of adware ad buys " going?

It appears that aff (legendary Liar) is not doing anything to end their adware campaigns. They continue to scamming and cheating the webmasters out of their hard work.

jayeff · 10-23-2006, 07:39 AM

Albeit slowly, more "names" are beginning to speak out against scumware operations. Although it remains to be seen how many statements will result in action (and of course some sponsors have stayed ominously quiet), I guess the biggest question is how many affiliates are dropping at least those sponsors who have said they will not stop supporting scumware?

The board drama has its entertaining moments, but if affiliates will not switch from sites which steal their traffic and/or which support affiliates who are thieves, it becomes pointless to be critical of such sponsors.

Naja-ram · 10-23-2006, 04:08 PM

you know Lars, you are a piece of shit for that response and Alla Akbar I will never promote cams.com or whatever you touch because you a greedy son of a....
oh well, who gives a fuck, i'll keep promoting Zango with allt he crap

10-17-2006, 02:19 PM	#308
Major (Tom) Anti Communist Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Null Posts: 29,771	fyi I got hit with a zango install and i didnt even know i had gotten it. so dont give me this "its legal shit." whats funny is in florida i walked past rocco and saw he had a zango badge on, lifted up and laughed in his face. Later that evening he asked what that was all about. I told him. Then he explained his side of the story. He told me that people were prompted to install and there were clear removal instructions. He made it sound not that bad. He was actually a nice guy too. I guess while they shake you with your right hand they stab you with the left. In anycase, Im not from geek squad.. but i can install a raid 5, overclock a dual xeon board etc etc, and removing this was harder than that. thanks for wasting about 4 hours of my life zango. Duke __________________ My mother said, to get things done You'd better not mess with Major Tom

10-17-2006, 06:32 PM	#319
Bird Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Stockton Posts: 4,365	Just buy em out __________________ ICQ:268731675

10-17-2006, 06:55 PM	#323
american pervert Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,830	if aff has so much money, why can't they hire a couple of people to surf the web and cancel the accts of people who run their banners on warez, illegal torrent and simliar sites? __________________ I can resist everything except temptation

10-18-2006, 11:50 AM	#335
FM-teem Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 70	And here an advertising pause __________________

10-19-2006, 06:13 AM	#341
scottybuzz Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2006 Location: NY Posts: 14,800	Jay Z rocks!!!!!!! __________________ $$$$$ MAKE HUGE MONEY IN CAMS - CLICK HERE $$$$$

10-17-2006, 03:37 PM	#309
mortenb Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Denmark ICQ: 7880009 Posts: 2,203	I think the worst part about AFF's involvement in this, is the fact that the remain completely silent unless they are forced to take some kind of action. I don't believe that we would have had any kind of comment from AFF if Zango hadn't named them as one of their customers and they are still playing the same game. I guess they are still hoping that this mess will be forgotten in a few days. Lars and AFF. Come forward and inform us of the actions you are taking against spyware. If any.

10-17-2006, 04:54 PM	#312
Peaches Old broad Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Away Posts: 13,933	If you think about it, programs now would be smarter to play with companies like Zango and a handful of the whales instead of spending large amounts of $$$ catering to the minnows in the pond. There are a lot of "behind the scene" programs that make millions and don't have more than 20 affiliates and they are by invitation only. At some point, smart business owners are going to sit down and see how much ROI they get for giving out $200 of free drinks and lap dances to someone who sends them 2 sales a month, in addition to the salaries and benefits they are paying employees to cater to the "little guys", plan lavish parties, etc. I know 99% of the posters here don't want to hear this, but if a lot of these "companies" start actually acting like buisnesses and have P/L statements, etc., having small affiliates really won't be worth the effort.

10-17-2006, 06:15 PM	#317
Peaches Old broad Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Away Posts: 13,933	I guess what I'm gently trying to say is that to program owners, $$$ is the grease that runs the engine. If they have a way to make more money while spending less, they're going to do it. Keeping little affiliates happy isn't always on the top of their priority list.

10-17-2006, 07:21 PM	#328
MarkMan Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Money Land Posts: 1,370	Peaches, you would be wrong .. its worth it having the small affiliates.. it keeps the balance .. without the small affiliates zango would charge a hand and a leg for their stolen traffic. its all a balance.. if AFF gives up on that traffic .. it would be crazy.. if i had % in AFF i would demand they use some of that Zango traffic.. but I would like to keep my normal affiliates .. so to keep Zango's prices under control did anyone notice Googles charges today.. they are so high ... its unbelievable that's what happens when one company control too much traffic.. and that's what would happen if all of AFF's or any Sponsors traffic came only from Google.. or Zango or any single big traffic programs just my 2cent I don't support Spywere or Adware or any of that scumware .. but i understand the logic behind the people who create it .. the people who advertise with it and the victims of such software(including me in this one). now that i understand why ratios have been going down so much in the last few years... i will deal with it .. but i don't hate anyone for trying to make money. that's what we all do

10-18-2006, 02:28 AM	#330
gooddomains Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10,127	we'll see how this will all end

10-18-2006, 07:53 AM	#333
Peaches Old broad Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Away Posts: 13,933	It's obvious a lot of small affiliates think they are more important to programs than they really are. That's why I said my comments would be unpopular with 99% of the posters here ;) Handpicking of affiliates is probably one of the best things a program can do. For instance, to play Devil's Advocate, programs could now remove all affiliates that are using Zango. In reality, most of the older programs have so many affiliates sending 2+ signups a month, it would take forever to find and remove those using Zango or any other spyware. And I'll bet you it's those little affiliates that are causing most of the problems.

10-18-2006, 11:45 AM	#334
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	There is exactly one thing that I respect about AFF/ Cams - when they ban an affillate code, they stop taking the traffic as well. That is a class act that other programs should learn how to emulate. Now if we can just stop buying Zango traffic... Alex

10-18-2006, 02:24 PM	#337
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	It has always been my feeling that the affiliate system will die when programs find new ways to get traffic without having to pay so much. Why pay 50% or $105 or whatever if you can pay 10 cents a click and score 1 in 100 "borrowing" surfers from other sites? Amazing how it all works out. Alex

10-19-2006, 08:28 AM	#343
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	Jayeff, you miss two very important parts of the deal: I don't disagree that the programs have created their own issues with (often insane) increases in payouts, etc... but in many cases they need to do it to make up for the shaving, the outside click buying, and the poor performance of their tracking software. Otherwise people would make so little per click that they would stop sending traffic. The highest payouts are in places like cams and dating, because in most cases they are "mature markets" where your conversions are going to be lower, and many of the surfers you send are already members, long since bought and paid for. As for traffic, well... there will always be some sort of affiliate programs. If the only dating program left was "bob's dating" it would get all the dating traffic, and AFF and sexsearch would just buy zango consoles off of that, Google traffic, yahoo traffic, and away you go. As long as their is some semblance of an affiliate system there will be a way to use Zango style tools to piggy back on that traffic and make money without any affiliates. Heck, as long as people keep searching on google, they can pop stuff up on the searches... that would be enough. Alex

10-19-2006, 05:04 PM	#345
pussyluver Clueless OleMan Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: ICQ - 169903487 Posts: 11,009	Peaches, Sometimes little guys grow up to be whales.

10-23-2006, 06:32 AM	#347
Quickdraw Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: → → → Posts: 1,717	So how is your "attempt to address this unforeseen consequence of adware ad buys " going?

10-23-2006, 07:39 AM	#349
jayeff Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 2,944	Albeit slowly, more "names" are beginning to speak out against scumware operations. Although it remains to be seen how many statements will result in action (and of course some sponsors have stayed ominously quiet), I guess the biggest question is how many affiliates are dropping at least those sponsors who have said they will not stop supporting scumware? The board drama has its entertaining moments, but if affiliates will not switch from sites which steal their traffic and/or which support affiliates who are thieves, it becomes pointless to be critical of such sponsors.

10-23-2006, 04:08 PM	#350
Naja-ram Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Iran Posts: 639	you know Lars, you are a piece of shit for that response and Alla Akbar I will never promote cams.com or whatever you touch because you a greedy son of a.... oh well, who gives a fuck, i'll keep promoting Zango with allt he crap __________________ http://www.muslimmatrimonial.com/