Wiseaff's shared items in Google Reader

LinkShare links and AVG anti-virus software

2009-10-26T15:35:07Z

As you may have heard, an update over the weekend to some anti-virus software from a company called AVG is interfering with some LinkShare links between affiliates and advertisers. We assume this was unintentional. We discussed this with executives at AVG this morning, and expect this matter will be resolved soon.

We will post more as soon as we have news.

Update, 7 PM - We’ve spoken with AVG and the issue appears to be resolved. LinkShare links are working as they normally would on computers with AVG installed.

Mark Kirschner, CMO

Affiliate Links being Blocked by AVG AntiVirus

2009-10-26T17:16:23Z

I was reading a couple of disturbing threads at AbestWeb over the weekend. Members there have discovered that AVG, the #1 free antivirus program, is totally blocking all Linkshare affiliate links and is also blocking CJ links on one of their domains.

Google content network basic strategy

2009-09-02T16:55:28Z

With the social ad networks like Facebook and Myspace getting all the attention these days, its easy to forget about the #1 largest ad network: the Google content network. With an 80% reach of all Internet users and 140 Billion page views a month, the Google Content network drives some serious traffic. And just like social networks, you can also do specific GEO targeting and some demographic targeting.

But are the clicks still cheap? Here is screenshot of a couple test campaigns from just last month. These 2 campaigns received over 20,000 clicks at .02 per click!

The Content network can still be a goldmine of cheap traffic, if used correctly. So what is a simple game plan to access that traffic?

Basic content network strategy.

1. Always create separate content network and search network campaigns.

2. Create your data gathering campaign. This is generally a keyword targeted campaign. Use only about 15-25 keywords per adgroup. Duplicate keywords are fine across adgroups, this establishes a theme that Google uses to trigger your ad. Individual keywords don’t matter, its the theme of the keywords in an adgroup that matter. Use lots of negative keywords to hone down your themes.

3. Tracking performance and being able to interpret the data and reports is what I consider the biggest component of any campaigns success. In order to do that you will need to set up your landing site with tracking. Install conversion tracking on your thank you or success page. Also install Google Analytics on every page of your destination site. Set up Goals and Funnels in Google Analytics for each step of the landing page to conversion process. (Those steps aren’t just for a content network campaign, I recommend them for any landing site you are driving traffic to.) Now you are in a position to see all the possible data from your campaign.

4. Run a Placement report in Adwords to show what sites on the content network are showing your ads. Be sure to include conversions in your report data. Then sort the report by conversions. The results shown are the gold mine of data that you are looking for.

5. You can now use the data to create a new Placement targeted content campaigns with the URLs of the converting sites. In those, I would continue to use keyword based adgroups as well as adding image ads. If the image ads also convert well on those placements, you can split them off into another campaign. These Placement campaigns should convert very well based on your previous data.

6. You can also continue to optimize the original keyword campaign by using the site exclusion tool to block the non converting sites. For the converting adgroups you can increase bids, and narrow your demographic targeting. Eventually the keyword campaign should provide good results on its own, as well as a further testbed to extract more converting URLs for the Placement campaign.

That’s just one basic strategy, there are many ways to use the content network. But however you use it, don’t ignore this valuable traffic source!

Google Patents Simple Search

2009-09-03T13:05:35Z

One of the secrets to Google’s massive success is not the immense size of its search index, but the sparse design of it’s homepage. A design that is now officially patented!

From now on, if you launch a search engine, it had better not use a homepage design that contains the bolded elements below:

It might have taken Google 5 years to get the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to issue the patent, but issued it is. Of course, even Google doesn’t sit on a winning homepage design. In the five years it’s taken the USPTO to grant the trademark, the search giant has tweaked the design some.

Now all we need is some brave soul to test how far Google will go to enforce the trademark. It’s going to be hard for Google to enforce a patented search interface, when even it’s current homepage looks different.

Any legal eagles wish to way in on this?

(via)

SEO’s Need To Adapt Or Die

2009-09-03T13:17:40Z

Companies have an unlimited budget for items that give them a positive return. Even in a recession this is true.

Unfortunately for SEO’s (Search Engine Optimization Experts) companies are considering their work one of these unmeasurable and many of theme are now out of work.

About everyone I know who attended (and was not a incisive media employee) was talking about how the SEO flag ship conference, SES San Jose, was completely dead… and everyone is blaming the recession. I concur the recession has hit the SEO industry very hard. In a recession people go into survival mode and if they cant easily justify the spend then they cut it.

Lately it seems like SEO companies have had to learn to adapt or die. SEO client work not only sucks but it does not scale and its definitely not stable.

Also there is no magic secret sauce to SEO anymore. Its pretty obvious how to get your site to the top of Google and people are making great products available to these businesses for a fraction of the cost.

Check out how the smart SEO’s are adapting:

Stephan Spencer – Stephan is a ninja when it comes to SEO but he has also embraced social media and creating super viral content. A bit ago we did a contest to design my business card. This contest was orchestrated by Stephan Spencers company Netconcepts. The contest generated a huge amount of buzz online and tons of links for his client overnightprints.com.

Aaron Wall – In addition to writing one of the best selling books on SEO, Aaron has a EXCELLENT paid forum. I wonder if Aaron takes client work anymore =P.

David Naylor – One of my best friends in the industry Dave is always constantly evolving. He owns a very large ISP in England and is also involved in many new cool products like firewall script.

Neil Patel After seeing their was no future in SEO Neil sold his SEO company and started making more service oriented companies like crazyegg.com and the about to be unveiled kissmetrics.com

Patrick Gavin – Patrick was one of the first old school SEO’s to turn entrepreneur and start his own company – Text link Ads, maybe you have heard of it ? Patrick is now about to launch his new product Do It Yourself SEO. I have a feeling Patricks new service is going to put a bunch more SEO’s out of business but we will see when it launches.

Well I could go on for ever but the pattern is pretty clear. I am not going to go into the whole SEO is bullshit or seo is dead… the facts speak for themselves.

SEO Agencies providing client work are a dying breed. Especially when any monkey can have wordpress or any other CMS system up and running in 5 minutes and totally SEO’d as much as needed.

Noticed a trend it what dominates most search results lately? Wikipedia and wordpress blogs. How many SEO’s do you think they hired ? =P

This Post Is From ShoeMoney’s Internet Marketing Blog

SEO’s Need To Adapt Or Die

20% of Online Advertising is on Social Networks

2009-09-03T18:03:15Z

We reported one stat from a new comScore report yesterday—that Facebook served 8.2% of all online ads—but the full report is even more impressive.

More than one in five of all online ads are served on social networks. MySpace still leads the pack with 9.2% of all online ads, and Facebook is a close second with 8.2%. The 3.7% of online ads served on social networks is split among such sites as Tagged.com, MocoSpace.com, Hi5.com, Bebo, Classmates.com and other smaller sites, most with 0.1% or less of the total online ad market:

Top Online Display Ad Publishers in Social Networking Category June 2009 Total U.S. – Home/Work/University Locations Source: comScore Ad Metrix
	Total Display Ad Impressions (MM)	Share of Display Ads	Ad Exposed Unique Visitors (000)
Total Internet : Total Audience	326,899	100.0	188,589
Social Networking	68,927	21.1	129,620
MySpace Sites	30,004	9.2	64,472
Facebook.com	26,813	8.2	67,389
Tagged.com	1,940	0.6	7,422
MocoSpace.com	496	0.2	1,067
Hi5.com	461	0.1	3,459
Bebo	435	0.1	6,350
Classmates.com Sites	400	0.1	9,181
BlackPlanet.com	345	0.1	2,084
GaiaOnline.com	258	0.1	1,859
DeviantArt.com	204	0.1	3,681

The top advertisers on social networks was AT&T (seriously?), with >2B ad impressions, 30% of its online advertising (seriously?). Other top advertisers included Experian (1.25B impressions, 24% of its online ads), Ask.com (950M impressions, almost 47% of its online ads), Sprint (790M impressions, 26% of its online ads), Pangea Media (572M impressions, almost 90% of its online ads) and Microsoft (564M impressions, only 17% of its online ads).

So mobile phones and also-ran search engines are among the top advertisers on social networks. I guess the mobile phones make sense—we’re on social media to connect to other people, and that’s what cell phones are for, right? But somehow, I don’t think that’s going to be quite enough to turn around Microsoft’s and Ask’s online fortunes.

What do you think? Are you surprised by the proportion of online advertising social networks have grabbed? Do you think social network advertising is worth it? Can it help Microsoft and Ask?

Google’s Schmidt Gives Search Insight

2009-09-04T14:26:03Z

Over at TechCrunch Michael Arrington has been doling out portions of his interview with Google’s Grand High Pubah (that’s code for CEO) Eric Schmidt. It’s interesting to see what one of the more influential people in the space (and in business overall) sees for the future of the industry / service. There is even some evidence that the folks at Google get some chuckles internally discussing mind control and connecting directly into brains for the real “intent of search”. Man, they sure know how to ’yuck it up’ out in Mountain View, don’t they?!

On a more serious note Schmidt talks about where search is now and what the next 10 years may hold

So I don’t know how to characterize the next 10 years except to say that we’ll get to the point – the long-term goal is to be able to give you one answer, which is exactly the right answer over time. Okay, you know, the question I’ll ask today, how many Americans have – what percentage of Americans have passports?…The Google’s answer was a site, which was somebody who had attempted to answer that question and had multiple answers. It’s quite interesting actually to read…So you go to a very good definitive site. And what I’d like to do is to get to the point where we could read his site and then summarize what it says, and answer the question…Along with the citation and so forth and so on.

As noted earlier the folks at Google like to think about the ultimate search experience of being tapped directly into your brain so there is little question as to what you are really searching for. Schmidt tells us

Now, Sergey (Brin) argues that the correct thing to do is to just connect it straight to your brain. In other words, you know, wire it into your head. And so we joke about this and said, we have not quite figured out what that problem looks like…But that would solve the problem. In other words, if we just – if you had the thought and we knew what you meant, we could run it and we could run it in parallel.

Wow, creepy, intriguing and completely nonsensical all at once. What seems to be very apparent is that Google is not resting on its laurels when it comes to search. Schmidt gives the impression that there is plenty of work to be done. With the growth of the Internet itself comes the growth of data sets. Managing those huge sets are a challenge and then making sense of them for the rest of us will always be a challenge.

Sounds like job security to me. I have to remind myself from time to time that the way we see information today, which seems so familiar and almost comfortable, could be gone as progress takes place. At some point, what we consider high end search to be today look like the industry’s equivalent of communicating with smoke signals. What won’t change much though is the industry model around it. As innovators like Google and others make new ‘toys’ it’ll be our job to make those toys work in ways that are helpful to everything as a whole. Hmmmm, it does sound like job security to me.

$200 into $4,000? Local Lead Generation Can Be Very Profitable

2009-08-31T17:00:58Z

If you’ve embarked on the affiliate marketer route, you might already be very successful with pay-per-sale, pay-per-lead/pay-per-action, and maybe even the new-fangled pay-per-call business model for a network or merchant-direct program. But are you awesome of the awesome profit potential of lead generation for local businesses? There’re a number of marketers who’ve shared their experience in [...]

Former Googlers Spamming Site Competitors To Beat Them In Google Search Results?

2009-08-31T13:28:12Z

A Google Webmaster Help thread has one 'lurker' reporting that an ex-Googler is using spam tactics to both threaten and intentionally hurt his site. By hurt his site, the ex-Googler is allegedly using hacking and injection techniques to push the site out of the Google search results, thus boosting the ranking for his (the alleged ex-Googler) in the Google search results.

This is a bit hard to believe, but who knows - anything is possible. Let me quote the webmaster from the thread, because he makes it sound like he has been around the block and there is nothing he can do.

Around May I discovered another competitors site recent appearance that looked very similar to mine, in fact even the sentences on my homepage were copied directly to his. Then by reading the press release for the company I found out it was started by a high up google employee who quit his job with google to form the company. Shorty after contacting the owner politely introducing myself, I received a threat letter back through email. I don't know if I can publish the email on this site so I will hesitate for now. Basically the owner said he was going to crush me with his skills he had received from google. He then proceeded to tell me if I want traffic on my site that I should buy links. Being a avid reader of the google webmaster forums and faq's I know this is not a good thing to do.
So at the end of all of this my page rank dropped from a two to a zero. And now my site has started showing up on malicious porn sites on the internet and in bad forums, and some seem to be in the form of hidden links that appear to be bought by someone else.

It just seems so hard to believe that anyone, let alone, someone who was employed by Google, would go to these measures. Yes, I know, people do take extreme measures, especially in this area, but a former Googler? The thing is, anyone can pretend to be anyone else on the Internet - emails, names and so on, can be spoofed. So this may be someone using a name in order to threaten and scare this webmaster out of the competition. This wouldn't be the first time Google had impersonators on the webmaster side of the coin.

Hard to know for sure, based on the information I do and do not have.

Forum discussion at Google Webmaster Help.

7,000 Domains Won Through UDRP Have Expired

2009-08-24T13:49:15Z

Expired domain names show disconnect between corporate functions.

Corporation Service Company (CSC), a brand protection company, released a study today about the expenses incurred by brand holders to get domain names through UDRP. The study suggests companies have spent $220 million getting domains back through UDRP, and that it would have only cost $1.1 million had they proactively registered the domains.

But what I found more interesting is how many domains won through UDRP have been allowed to expire:

Of the domain names that were won and handed back to the brand owner, almost 4,000 have been subsequently lapsed and are now available for registration. Also, an additional 3,000 domain names were lapsed after they were won and then re-registered – in some cases, by third parties. In fact, CSC found that several companies have disputed the same domain name up to three times because they continued to allow it to lapse.

This shows a major disconnect at companies between three groups:

1. Trademark attorneys that feel they need to get every possible trademark domain name.
2. Brand managers who don’t know what to do with the domains when they get them.
3. Corporate domain managers who are are reactive instead of proactive. Often times they don’t even work in conjunction with the trademark attorneys.

I’ve looked through portfolios of Fortune 500 companies and found that a good portion of their domains don’t resolve. Others are merely forwarded to the company’s home page when they should direct to a specific page on the web site. CSC’s statistics quantify this mismanagement.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

Trademark Issues in ICANN Domain Name Initiative Create Perils, Opportunities

2009-08-16T18:32:40Z

For over a year controversy has swirled around the plans of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the non-profit organization that sets policy for the Internet’s domain name address system, to authorize potentially hundreds of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) starting in 2010. At present there are only 21 gTLDs, including .com, .net, .org, .info, .biz, etc. If ICANN continues full steam ahead, however, you could soon see domain names ending in .paris, .bank, .google or .pizza, among other things. ICANN’s plans have created a major headache for trademark owners, who face the possibility of a huge increase in cybersquatting, typosquatting and phishing incidents. At the same time, if the trademark issues can be navigated successfully, the new gTLDs may mean a revenue enhancement opportunity for affiliates.

Brand protection in the domain name sphere is already expensive for trademark owners. Preemptive or “defensive” registration of domain names identical to a business’ trademarks can lead to ownership of literally hundreds or thousands of registrations if the business is, for example, Disney and has a large trademark registration portfolio spanning the globe. But a defensive brand protection strategy actually requires more than this, since the trademark owner must also anticipate that domain name cybersquatters and typosquatters will register common misspellings and mistypes of its trademarks, as well as combinations of the trademarks with other terms (e.g., www.mickeymousecartoon.com).

When you throw all of the common existing gTLDs (biz, .info, and national or transnational gTLDs like .eu) into the mix, there can be thousands or tens of thousands of domain names with the potential to cause brand damage or consumer confusion in the hands of a squatter if the trademark owner doesn’t secure them. Aggregated, the registration fees alone can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. In addition, under U.S. trademark law, an owner must actively police the use of its marks or risk the loss of its trademark rights. Active policing and brand protection do not require registration of every possible domain name and legal action against every single typosquatter, but there must be a coherent, reasonable and vigilant strategy to protect the business’ goodwill; in other words, if you don’t care enough about your trademarks to spend money on brand protection, don’t go whining to a court about infringers.

As expensive and imperfect as a defensive domain name registration strategy is, it is much cheaper than the alternative, i.e., letting cybersquatters and typosquatters gobble up large numbers of sensitive domain names and then siccing your lawyers on them. The problem is not an absence of legal recourse – both the federal Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(d) (ACPA), and ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), a policy followed by all domain name registrars enabling a trademark owner to compel the cancellation or transfer of an infringing domain name by mandatory arbitration, provide relief against squatters who have no legitimate interest in a domain name and have registered it in bad faith.

However, in practice this system is cracking under the strain of cybersquatter and typosquatter proliferation and innovation. While arbitration under the UDRP is generally much cheaper than litigation under the ACPA, it still costs thousands of dollars in legal and filing fees at a minimum and frequently a lot more. Furthermore, if the culprit is using a proxy registration service or an offshore rogue domain name registrar as an accomplice, identification of the culprit and securing of the registration are much more difficult. Finally, successful acquisition of the abusive domain name registration doesn’t cut off the expense, since it must now be added to the portfolio of existing registrations to be maintained.

If all of this makes your head spin, now imagine adding several hundred more gTLDs to which squatters can hitch a trademark or a misspelling of a trademark. Some of these domain names a trademark owner will have to register or acquire, even under the most permissive brand protection strategy, if it cares at all about protecting its customers from phishing schemes and avoiding consumer confusion. Regulated financial institutions, which have a compliance mandate to educate their customers about security threats as well as to protect their reputations (and the bottom line from fraud losses), will need to be particularly vigilant. For example, letting a squatter use www.chase.bank is simply not an option. No wonder, then, that financial services companies and associations like Bank of America Corp. and the American Bankers Association have been among the most vocal objectors to ICANN’s gTLD initiative.

ICANN Responds to Trademark Owners

Faced with such objections and requests to delay implementation of the new gTLDs until a new trademark abuse prevention strategy could be devised, ICANN convened the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), a group of intellectual property experts, in March 2009 to examine the problem. On May 29, 2009 the IRT published its Final Report on Trademark Protection in new gTLDs (pdf) for public comment. In the report the IRT recommends coupling the implementation of the new gTLDs with several significant measures to protect trademark owners, including the creation of:

An IP Clearinghouse to serve as a repository of data about asserted trademark rights (both registered and unregistered trademarks) throughout the world and a validator of these rights where trademark claims impact domain name registrations, and
A Globally Protected Marks List (GPML) of select trademarks which have a large number of registrations in numerous countries and, accordingly, are targeted for the highest levels of abuse.

A “reasonable fee” would be assessed for the submission of marks to the IP Clearinghouse and GPML, but at a low enough rate so that holders of large trademark portfolios would not incur substantial costs exacerbating those of defensive domain name registration as described earlier.

The report also recommends the creation of a variety of trademark rights protection mechanisms (RPMs), some applying to the period prior to launch of the new gTLDs and others applying post-launch, which would utilize information in the IP Clearinghouse and GPML to resolve disputes and, in certain limited cases, block registration of infringing domain names. These measures would supplement, not replace, the UDRP.

The new gTLDs and the process ICANN is developing would apply worldwide. All registry operators for the gTLDs would be governed by the process, and they in turn would be required to bind all domain name registrars to certain commitments (like participation in the URS, if the IRT’s proposal is adopted). ICANN has been working with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and other international groups on this project, and the IRT team is composed of IP experts from a number of different countries.

Rights Protection Mechanisms: an Alphabet Soup

The RPM proposals are complex and contain much administrative detail, so I do not attempt to provide a full summary here. However, a few elements of these proposals are particularly noteworthy Third-party applications for top-level domains that match or are confusingly similar to trademarks in the GPML (such as, hypothetically speaking, .apple) would initially be blocked, as would third-party applications for second-level domains that are identical to marks on the list (apple.computer, again hypothetically speaking). Applicants to be gTLD registry operators would be required as part of the application to specify both pre-launch and post-launch RPMs they intend to implement.

An example of a pre-launch RPM endorsed by the IRT report is participation in a Pre-Launch IP Claims Service, whereby, if a gTLD registry does not provide some other type of pre-launch RPM, and a third party attempts to register a second-level domain that matches a trademark contained and validated in the IP Clearinghouse (and that is not a Globally Protected Mark subject to blocking), the registry would notify both the trademark owner and the registrant. The registrant receiving the notice would not be blocked from registering the domain name, provided that it makes certain contractual representations and warranties – i.e., it has a right or legitimate interest in the domain name, will not use it in bad faith and (under penalty of cancellation of the domain name) has provided accurate contact information. (You can see what I mean about the procedures being complex.)

The IRT proposal also recommends that all gTLD registries be required to participate in a new Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS), sort of a cheaper, fast-track, limited-purpose version of the UDRP for super-bad cybersquatters. Successful use of the URS would not result in cancellation or transfer of an infringing domain name registration, as with the UDRP; rather, the registration would be frozen for its natural life, and Internet users attempting to access that domain name would see a specific error webpage.

While the “substantive” standard for evaluating a URS complaint would be the same as the UDRP’s – bad-faith registration and use, with no legitimate interest in the domain name – the complainant’s “evidentiary” burden would be greater, so that it would have to establish its case by clear and convincing evidence, and the complaint would be denied if there was any “genuine contestable issue” about the infringement or the illegitimacy of the registration. (The URS is intended to resolve only the most clear-cut cases of trademark abuse; an unsuccessful complainant would still be able to seek relief under the UDRP or ACPA.) Complaints would be submitted to a third party selected by ICANN, which would retain a qualified legal expert to render a decision. Fees would be assessed by the third party on a cost-recovery basis. All in all, the process would be more streamlined and less formal than under the UDRP, and complaints could be submitted by e-mail.

Thick WHOIS Reporting

Finally, the IRT report recommends requiring all registry operators for the new gTLDs to provide WHOIS information under the “Thick WHOIS” model, as is currently done in the .biz and .info registries. This model contemplates the provision of detailed WHOIS information by the central registries for all domain names registered within those registries, rather than reporting by domain registrars (the “thin WHOIS model”), which tends to be less complete and reliable. Using the thick WHOIS model for the new gTLDs will make it easier and more cost-effective for trademark owners to identify and pursue squatters.

Will this Improve Inefficiencies in the Current Trademark System?

The IRT’s proposals are not going to sweep away the complications of preventing trademark abuse in the domain name sphere since the system of preventing domain name abuse in its current form is certainly overtaxed and inefficient. Brand protection is still going to be administratively complex and expensive, but the IRT’s proposals, if adopted, should compensate for some of the increased risk from the new gTLD’s. The GPML blocking proposal, in particular, should be helpful, although it will apply only to a relatively small handful of well-known marks registered throughout the world.

An Opportunity for Affiliates?

While these protections will undoubtedly aid trademark owners and represent a much needed supplement to the rather clunky and expensive UDRP, in light of the sheer number of domain name possibilities that the new gTLDs will open up, trademark owners can still expect to have their hands full (and wallets emptied) protecting their brands and fending off squatters. However, this headache and expense might create opportunities for new types of arrangements between merchants and their affiliates.

For example, rather than a merchant trademark owner trying to anticipate and register all domain names under the new gTLDs that could pose a problem if acquired by an unfriendly third party, it could license its affiliates to do so; the affiliates could either keep the domain names inert or have them resolve to approved ad copy. Affiliates could be paid a premium commission for clicks or transactions resulting from Internet traffic visiting the new domain names, to compensate the affiliate for both its initiative in opening up new real estate and the mitigation of trademark risk to the merchant from having the domain name in “friendly” hands. The affiliate contract could even contain a buyout clause giving the trademark owner the option to purchase the domain name registration from the affiliate at a designated price (the affiliate’s out-of-pocket costs plus some kind of premium).

For affiliates, such an arrangement would mean new sources of revenue. For the merchant, in addition to increased Internet traffic, the arrangement would mean lowering its trademark abuse and brand protection costs – fewer domain name registrations to acquire and maintain, fewer disputes to pursue under either the URS or UDRP. The “good guys” (affiliates) would effectively be deputized to compete with the “bad guys” in the new gTLD gold rush. However, affiliates sensing an opportunity should get on the same page with their merchants and enter into an appropriate contract before snapping up domain names; otherwise, they risk being lumped together with the squatters.

As the 2010 launch date approaches, hold on tight – it’s going to be a bumpy ride for sure.

Which Affiliate Network Has More Affiliates?

2009-08-28T00:12:45Z

This is one of the most frequently asked questions by merchants that are deciding between different affiliate networks. Today it came to me in the following form:

Which network was the highest number of strong affiliates?

My answer is twofold: (i) most affiliate networks do not disclose such information, but (ii) every major/strong affiliate has accounts with all worthwhile affiliate networks (Commission Junction, LinkShare, Google Affiliate Network, ShareASale, buy.at, etc).

Some affiliates do prefer to work with one network only, but this is seldomly so, especially when we are talking “strong affiliates”. Smaller affiliates may prefer to stick only with one affiliate network for the purpose of consolidated payments across different affiliate programs they promote. But even smaller affiliates have to join different networks when they decide to promote multiple brands/merchants (even in the same vertical). Looking at the famous online malls, for example, we will see that the Overstock.com’s affiliate program is now on Commission Junction (CJ), Walmart.com is on LinkShare (LS), Target.com is with the Google Affiliate Network (GAN), whereas Amazon.com is an “indie” (in-house affiliate program). Looking at the insurance sector, as another example, we will see that Insure.com runs their affiliate program through buy.at, InsureMe.com is with CJ, Medex is with GAN, QHealth.com is with ShareASale, and the list of such examples could go on through every category.

I believe that it’s not the number of affiliates within any given affiliate network that one should focus on, but rather on the quality of the network (this includes, but is not limited to: tracking and reporting, unique tools and technologies, level of their technical and customer service support, overall reputation among merchants and affiliates, etc.) and how their offer fits into your existing marketing plan, budget, and strategy.

Affiliate Marketing Program is Like a Lawn Mower

2009-08-28T17:43:41Z

Building a successful affiliate program is in many ways akin to lawn mowing. The mower symbolizes your affiliate program, whereas the lawn is the market. There are three integral elements without which the lawn cannot be mowed effectively, even with the presence of the mower. They are: (i) fuel, (ii) motor oil, and (iii) persistence.

I have just recorded the following video to illustrate this more visually:

In the affiliate program context: (i) affiliates are the force that fuels your program, (ii) affiliate program manager is the one who lubricates, inhibits corosion, and cleans the program out, (iii) and persistence remains the same. Exclude any one element from the equasion, and the system will collapse.

Publishers-Get Found

2009-08-28T19:39:00Z

One of the common phrases you hear in Affiliate Marketing is that this is "a relationship business." That's a broad statement; and at Google Affiliate Network we ask what does that actually mean? We believe it's our job to help both publishers and advertisers create effective relationships through highly productive partnerships. We take our role in facilitating these relationships seriously. As the holiday shopping season approaches, I want to alert our publishers to a tool in the Google Affiliate Network interface that can help you establish more and better relationships with our advertisers.

Earlier this summer we launched the "Opportunity Center." Advertisers use this tool to find new publishers and to identify opportunities for growth.
Google Affiliate Network advertisers have the ability to view a report that highlights two things:

Publishers who are under-performing in their program but are performing well in the advertiser's category

High potential publishers who have not joined the advertiser's program.

Advertisers are constantly looking for ways to improve the productivity of their affiliate programs, and this feature will help you "get found" by engaged advertisers.
To appear to advertisers looking for new publishers, visit your Communications Preferences in our interface and opt-in to "Non-Joined Advertiser Opportunities." Publishers are identified as opportunities for existing advertiser programs when you opt in to receive promotional communication for specific advertisers.

If you want to "get found" by advertisers who want to add you to their programs or do more business with you, we recommend you update your communication preferences. We wish you a successful holiday shopping season.

On behalf of the Google Affiliate Network Team,

Tony Nelan
Manager, Publisher Services

2009 Top Performance Marketing Companies in the Inc 5000

2009-08-31T15:42:11Z

I culled through this year’s Inc 5000 Advertising and Marketing list to try to pick out companies primarily focused on performance marketing and broke them down into 3 categories. Here are the top Affiliates, Affiliate OPMs, and Affiliate / CPA networks in the Inc 5000 for 2009 based on Revenue Growth from 2005 to 2008. If I missed any companies, I apologize, it’s not always easy to identify performance marketing companies by their descriptions on Inc.com and their websites.

Here is the list:

Affiliates in the 2009 Inc 5,000 List of Fastest Growing Private Companies

Company	2009 Ranking	Employees	2008 Revenues
Adlucent	73	20	6.5M
Plus1 Marketing	226	9	3.2M
Lead Research Group	391	25	2.4M
Relocation.com	1469	29	9.2M
Clickspeed	1491	17	5.7M
Memolink	1929	50	34.9M
Wpromote	2004	49	7.1M
LeadCreations.com	2440	8	5.4M
imwave, inc	2610	8	2M
JBR Media Ventures	3634	18	19M
Elephant Group	4530	350	74.3M

Affiliate OPMs in the 2009 Inc 5,000 List of Fastest Growing Private Companies

Company	2009 Ranking	Employees	2008 Revenues
Direct Agents	1080	35	23.2M
NETexponent	1216	16	6.1M

Affiliate Networks in the 2009 Inc 5,000 List of Fastest Growing Private Companies

Company	2009 Ranking	Employees	2008 Revenues
IntegraClick	5	55	96.4M
One Technologies	8	89	50.7M
MediaTrust	9	60	38.3M
Affiliate Media	129	25	7.7M
Gilispa	137	15	30.7M
Go Internet Media	146	35	7.6M
Smiley Media	168	24	31.4M
Hyper Interactive Media	184	47	41.3M
Lead Flash	314	45	49.9M
Intermark Media	320	40	56.9M
Hydra	450	70	108.6M
The Media Crew	488	14	3.2M
IronTraffic	512	21	6.9M
Clearlink	589	182	22.3M
MarketLeverage	1115	51	35.3M
Trancos	1120	50	18.3M
Spectrum Direct	1271	30	10.3M
Bridgevine	1379	65	21.5M
One on One Marketing	1430	46	62.1M
Plasmid Media	2897	6	2.3M

Trademark and Brand Bidding: Working with your Top Affiliates

2009-06-05T13:34:04Z

In this video, from Affiliate Summit West 2009 in Last Vegas, Tony discusses performance search marketing and the hot topic of if you should allow your search affiliates to use your trademarks:

Display URL & Direct Linking Issue Discussed. How to work with your PPC Search Partners

2009-06-05T13:36:17Z

In this video, from Affiliate Summit West 2009 in Last Vegas, Tony discusses how you can work with performance search marketing firms and how allowing them to run search campaigns for you, using your display url, can bring incremental sales without driving up your own search campaign's costs.

Protecting your Brand: How to Utilize Top Performance Search Partners

2009-06-05T13:38:28Z

In this video, from Affiliate Summit West 2009 in Last Vegas, Tony discusses how you can work with performance search marketing firms and still protect your company's brand image.

One of the top reasons companies give for not allowing affiliate to fully utilize paid search to market them is "We need to protect our brand". How do you protect your brand and get the full benefit of the search engine advertising opportunity?

How to Setup a Test with PPC Search Publishers

2009-06-06T18:50:09Z

In these two videos, Tony explains what a good test looks like and then describes a real world example:

How to Setup a Good Test with Potential Search Affiliates

Testing Search Partner Relationships: A Real World Example

Lowering Affiliate Commission Rate = Big Mistake

2009-07-30T03:08:21Z

Every once in a while affiliates post (in blog, forum, or other social media channel) about merchants lowering the commission rates in their affiliate programs. History also testifies that this happens not only with smaller brands, but larger online merchants were caught doing this as well. Some justify commission drops by inaccurate initial calculation of the default commission level, others by financial constraints, but no reason will ever be good enough reason in the eyes of the affiliates.

You want to make your calculations right at the very outset. Lowering the commission rate (permanently or even temporarily) at any time during the life of your affiliate program is a grave mistake. It can easily bury your reputation, and your affiliate program. Put yourself into your affiliates’ shoes and you will understand why.

Respect your affiliates, and let your actions mirror this respect. You can go up, but never, never, never go down on that commission rate.