I got a message from an owner of a network who pulled all of their insurance offers (auto, health, and life) a couple of weeks ago.
He said they weren’t planning on getting them back any time soon because they just weren’t worth the risk.
Could anyone provide more information on what he may mean by this?
Do you think he’s referring to a legal risk? Or just not getting paid by the advertiser – because of the low amount of conversions on the back end?
I would suspect they are referring to lead reversals due to bad quality. We run a little bit of insurance and advertisers will sometimes not pay on bad quality. We now have most of our insurance campaigns on manual approval and will lead cap publishers and slow down payment terms until we confirm quality. We always will honour conversions but this strategy allows us to pull a publisher off a campaign if their quality is not up to scratch. It also works the opposite way, so publishers who send good leads get faster payment and more budget.
A lot of networks get burnt by paying their affiliates quickly and later find out that the advertiser is refusing to pay. I noticed Clickbooth raised their standard payment terms to Monthly, Net 30 today – probably due to similar reasons.
Advertisers also have to make sure that they are tracking their quality and revenue so that they can make these judgments faster. No affiliate wants to dedicate time to scaling a campaign only find out a month later that their leads are not backing out and the advertiser is ending the relationship.
Thanks for the information Marcus.
You’re definitely right. I spoke with the network owner again – and he said the problem was not getting paid consistently by the advertisers due to bad lead quality – I guess that is where a majority of their losses were coming from.
It’s smart of networks to have these offers, but as you said, keep them on manual renewal with a lead cap to judge quality before allowing the affiliates to scale.
The Article Published IN 07-31-2011 10:09 PM