There's a relatively new contextual adware group on the scene. They've been gaining some traction over the last few months and have been making the rounds at many online marketing forums as well as booths at affiliate conventions. Depending on where you run across them, it may or may not be clear what their business model is so I wanted to post here a heads up.
The contextual adware is called LoudMo, the site that handles the pay-per-install of the software is also LoudMo and the site where advertisers buy traffic is DirectCPV. They also have another company called AdManage.
This is bascially the same set-up as Zango, TrafficVance and MediaTraffic where people buy can buy contextual ads to be displayed through the LoudMo adware by targeting other people's URLs and/or keywords on some else's site.
The CEO of DirectCPV is Charlo Barbosa, who has been around the Internet for quite some time. He has been involved in the porn and gaming biz. DirectCPV also owns quite a few porn sites....a mechanism for installing the LoudMo software. Around 2000/01, he settled charges with the FTC related to some of his porn sites regarding billing of consumers using those sites (excessive phone charges). He was also behind the public offering of Poker.com way back.
Charlo Barbosa is also a VP at RevenueGateway, a CPA network. RevenueGateway is owned by Blue Whaler Investments, which also owns Coreggy.
It's never a good mix of adware company and CPA network IMO.
The software itself displays ads a bit differently than Zango. Why restrict oneself to just pop-ups?
Their adware has the ability to deliver interstitial ads. So the end user is browsing a site and suddenly they are shown a page to another site in the same browser window.
From the screenshot above, you'll see that the page is loaded in frames, so the URL in the address box remains the same for the site that was previously being viewed by the end user. Even though the browser is titled LoudMo and there is a link to "skip" the ad, I imagine this can be confusing for some end users as to where the ad is really coming from. This also has implications with regards to the http referrer information.
The software also delivers inline ads as seen below. I've highlighted the adware link, but it's just a hyperlink delivered by the adware.
As you can see in the example, sometimes these links look very similar to the legitimate links on the targeted web site, again potentially causing confusion for the end user.
DirectCPV appears to be on a marketing campaign for more mainstream advertisers. This includes both merchants and affiliates. We are already seeing some CPA affilaites using DirectCPV.
Affiliates with the traditional networks should beware of using this type of advertising themselves. ALL the major traditional networks do not allow such ad buys. ALL are actively monitoring for such use (to varying degrees). The most likely result if you are found to using such adware is termination of your account with loss of current earnings.
I have already come across a few traditional network links with the LoudMo software.
__________________
Ron Bechdolt | Affiliate Program Management Consultant 7 Days A Week Marketing
Try Datafeedr to integrate datefeeds into your Wordpress affiliate site
Thanks so much Kellie for all the details about this company.
Really appreciate you coming here to share this with our members!
There is SO much I want to say about this and it's a topic I've been wanting to bring up for a long time. Just have to be careful not to give anyone ideas that does not already know about this company and others like it, so I've been reluctant to say too much.
1st of all this company is, like you said, very active in affiliate marketing circles and they are also aggressively advertising. They have contacted me several times and I turned them down explaining why, in no uncertain terms. HOWEVER I've seen some top affiliate blogs, that are considered to be stand-up white hat guys, advertising for DirectCPV. So they either don't understand the issue or don't care and just want the money.
Thank you so much for letting me know the connection with RevenueGateway. I have tons of CPA networks that try to advertise with me and I turn most of them away after doing some basic background checks regarding adware use, reputation, etc. But I'm not certain I would have discovered the connection with DirectCPA had you not mentioned it.
The last thing I want to mention is about PPV and CPV in general and again I don't want to say too much. But, these are just new "in" acronyms for parasitic adware. In certain forums (even fairly white hat forums) it seems everyone is talking about it as if it's a new totally legitimate way to get traffic. There are many other players in the space besides this one and new courses seem to pop up every day teaching how to use it (in a bad way) and sharing tricks about how to do it without getting caught.
I've even seen honest affiliates and newbie affiliates use PPV without understanding the full ramifications of it. Once I educate them about it they stop, but the way it's being presented, they don't realize how wrong it is.
I think this is one of the biggest threats to honest affiliates these days. Worse even than the big well known parasites, are the growing throngs of regular affiliates that are using PPV to steal from each other.
The free forum support we provide is made possible by all the 5 Star programs at the top of the right sidebar & in the directory below. Please visit & support our merchants.
Thanks Ron & Linda. Wish I didn't have things like this to post about, but such is life.
I've been seeing the same things Linda, which prompted my posting. I think they're running a promotion for getting advertisers to sign up, so that's probably why the increase in ads and blog postings.
It's a reminder to understand to the best of your ability who your partners are. Of course, newbies to the biz are the ones most likely to be impacted. What's at risk is the termination of the affiliate accounts. I hate to see that happen.
Just joined your forum and saw your comment about PPV.
Is this really the only view towards this traffic source?
I just wonder because people like Gauher Chaudrey and Moneyshoe are using this traffic source as well, actually they are even selling - maybe sold out by now - a course teaching the "right" techniques to make a profit out of it.
Since these guys have a very good reputation, I wonder what your take is on this one.
Great question! Here's the thing in my opinion that's a little tricky about PPV. On one hand it's a tool - like a hammer. A hammer is supposed to be used to build things, but can also be used as a weapon to hurt someone.
PPV can probably be used ethical ways but the way people typically teach to use it is to target URLS. Well actually even if people just target keywords it's the same thing. You are POPPING over someone else's site and stealing their traffic and potentially affiliate sales.
Here's my brick and mortar analogy of PPV.
Lets say you own a local video store. You bought the property, built the store from scratch and pay for all the advertising to get people INTO your store. (like a webmaster or affiliate owns and builds up their site and traffic)
Joe owns XYZ video store. Joe comes on YOUR property that you own, he puts up a big XYZ billboard right in front of YOUR front door, BLOCKING the entrance and tells people to come to XYZ video store instead.
It's YOUR property. You got the visitors to come to YOUR store. They are already at YOUR front door. YOU paid to get them there. Joe has no legal right to STEAL your customers right off your property as they are ready to walk in your front door!
So that's how I see PPV in general. (and in simple terms)
However some people use it more specifically to directly steal affiliates sales and some people teach very specifically exactly how to do it. Not sure about the exact teaching methods the people you mentioned use.
But either way, as in the example above, I think this traffic source, even if used as innocently as possible, it's still stealing traffic from other webmasters/site owners at the very least.
The free forum support we provide is made possible by all the 5 Star programs at the top of the right sidebar & in the directory below. Please visit & support our merchants.
Thanks for joining and posting your very good question. Just FYI, this is Linda's forum. I've known Linda for years and am just a member here myself.
Obviously from what you've seen at other places, my point of view regarding PPV is not the only one out there. It's a debate with regards to what are considered acceptable revenue and traffic generation within the affiliate marketing channels. I want speak for others points of view, but I'll elaborate on my own.
My focus is advocating for fair business practices for online businesses so that true competition can flourish (essential in free markets) and businesses are afforded compariable protection to operate their businesses which are available in the offline world (recognizing there are unique issues for the online world).
The PPV/CPV model is available without adware being involved. That being said, at the moment in the majority of cases adware is involved. I want to be clear that I have no problem with contextual advertising (indeed it can be a good thing for consumers) when the owner of the web site has implemented the ads themselves (as in the case of AdSense) and the web site owner is earning the revenue from said ads.
The problem I have with contextual adware is that the owners of the web sites have no control over it and it costs those web site owners revenue in the form of lost traffic to their site and/or interference with their own ad revenue on their sites.
This type of interference is not allowed in any other type of media (print, tv, radio) except online. Indeed it is illegal and businesses have recourses.
In the case affiliates using this type of ad generation, it can result in tracking overwrites, poaching of the merchant's shopping cart, undermining of the overall performance based model when affiliates "pop" a merchant with their affiliate link over the same merchant site.
As I mentioned earlier, all the major traditional networks (as well as some large inhouse programs such as ebay and amazon) now consider the use of contextual adware by affiliates a violation of their TOS. It doesn't matter if the affiliate is putting their affiliate link as the ad URL or their own web site, it's not allowed. If (i.e. when) the affiliate is caught doing so it generally results in the affiliate having their account terminated. That is the risk factor for affiliates who utilize these types of companies and it's a real risk. I've personally seen hundreds of affiliate accounts terminated over the years.
That's traditional networks (and many retail merchant's own program TOS). CPA networks can be a different issue. There are some who restrict it in their TOS, some who restrict it but turn a blind eye unless stuff hits the fan then will hang it on the affs shoulders, some who allow it under certain circumstances, and others who openly allow it and encourage it. And there are some merchants who are more than happy have their affiliates use this type of marketing, so they don't have to.
Why is that? Because of the many legal issues that have arisen over the years regarding contextual adware usage for companies such as Zango, DirectRevenue, Gator, WhenU, etc, etc. There were civil suits between major merchants as well as major merchants & adware companies (names like WeightWatchers, UPS, Hertz, Overstock, SmartBargains). A clear legal decision never came out of those suits and didn't have much impact on advertiser usage.
Then the FTC and Attorney Generals started filing suits. Very large merchants were slapped around by both for buying ad inventory through contextual adware. Large contextual adware companies were slapped around and eventually put out of business by the FTC.
Ever had the FTC and/or an AG coming knocking on your door? Not a fun thing and is costly just in legal expenses.
Now those cases centered primarily around installation methods of the adware on end users computers. All the companies, of course, claimed they were only installing with end user's consent. Advertisers were still held accountable for advertising through the software which regulatory bodies determined consentual installs weren't happening. As an advertiser, can you determine for a fact that FTC and state laws aren't being violated with the installation techniques for the software your ads are being dsiplayed through?
However there was one FTC ruling against the contextual adware company FullContext which doesn't get talked about. In that ruling the FTC specifically disallowed FullContext from displaying it's own ads on other's web sites without permisssion. Food for thought.
The ethics of putting your own ads on someone else's site without their permission aside, there is a risk assessment anyone who uses this type of advertising should consider prior to running campaigns.
That's pretty much my point of view of this type of advertising. Yes, there are other points of view as well.
Thanks for your answer, I understand what you are saying and agree on it for most of the points.
I am thinking of getting into the PPV traffic, that's why it's good to have a "second opinion" before taking action and investing time and money.
I am selling my own products as well as affiliate products (mainly backend) so my URL would be a target for everybody in the same niche. IF a user of adware really agrees on looking at a limited amount of ads during a day/week/whatever, he should be fine.
The question remains how I feel when someone is "stealing" my traffic. Hm......
Another angle could be to compare it with the offline world. Let's assume I am promoting my grocery 50meters before you have to turn to the left. Now, another grocery shop would place his poster 100meters before mine, making sure his bill is the first to be seen.
Stealing my customers?
Isn't this the case all the time in marketing/traffic generation?
Let's think of all these SPY TOOLS for PPC. Amazing, first time I've came across was by learning it the hard way. People did clone my campaigns, not just a bit, a 100 percent copy by using my research. These days, everybody is using it in one or another way; I do it as well when testing a new niche.
Or let's talk SEO: Is it "fair" to check out my backlinks, link structure, density, you name it, just to copy it in order to 'steal' my organic ranking?
It's like Linda said: Every method is like a hammer, it's up to us how we use it. PPV may be more on the edge than the other methods, maybe.
I first want to say that being able to potentially market yourself directly on a competitors web site is going to be an extremely enticing proposition. There's no doubt about that one. That's not a carrot being dangled, but more like filet mignon.
There are many things which are possible to do with technology on the Internet. But just because something is possible, doesn't mean it's the best thing to do.
Quote:
Another angle could be to compare it with the offline world. Let's assume I am promoting my grocery 50meters before you have to turn to the left. Now, another grocery shop would place his poster 100meters before mine, making sure his bill is the first to be seen.
Stealing my customers?
No, fair competition. And don't get me wrong, I'm a HUGE fan of competition. I strongly believe it is essential capitalistic marketplace.
In online terms, I'd equate your scenario with the promotion of your site via another web site (it's up the road from your store) such as Search Engines, shopping comparison sites, whatever other site that doesn't belong to you. You place an ad on Google and your competitor may place an ad for the same keyword search. May the best ad win! I'm excluding trademark bidding issues here.
In your example, contextual adware displays would be the equivalent of a competitor handing out flyers to their store in your parking lot, at your front door, to your custormers throughout your store or while they are in the cash register line. What would be the most likely reaction in that case? I'd imagine having the cops come out. Unfortunately, online businesses do not yet have the same legal rights afforded to them for their cyper real estate place of business that offline businesses do.
Again, just because you can do it online doesn't mean it should be done. There are very good reasons why you can't do that kind of thing in the offline world.
In your example, contextual adware displays would be the equivalent of a competitor handing out flyers to their store in your parking lot, at your front door, to your custormers throughout your store or while they are in the cash register line. What would be the most likely reaction in that case? I'd imagine having the cops come out. Unfortunately, online businesses do not yet have the same legal rights afforded to them for their cyper real estate place of business that offline businesses do.
Kellie,
Not sure about US but this is what happens in front of many shops over here and other countries I used to live in. Obviously not in the cash register line but in front of the shop, front door, parking lot, putting leaflets on windscreens.
Anyway, will do some more research before taking a final stand.
DirectCPV/LoudMo
I hate to see that happen.
