Brokered Offers

I just don't understand why the network brokering the offer out to subnetworks doesn't put a clause in to cap the max commission the subnetwork offers out to the max they offer to affiliates so that the subnetwork cannot a) undercut them and b) is not sooo motivated to over quote and then scrub.

This way of doing business is very messy and causes very nasty practices (sub-networks scrubbing), don't pretend that this doesn't happen because it 100% does!
 


I think you'll find all networks broker deals between one another. We have had deals on copeac, azoogle, etc. And we've picked up offers from them. Some affiliates appreciate the help that the network they're working with gives them and don't want to run somewhere else for a few cents more.

When i was an affiliate I worked with Copeac almost exclusively cause Mike always treated me well. I understood I could have made a few bucks more but I felt I benefited by working with him. He'd let me know what was working well and give me a lot of information I might not have gotten if I moved for a little bit more.

Another reason is caps. Especially with Edu offers the caps can be tight and sub-networks get allocation that you might not be able to get if you go to the parent network because they've already assigned it.

There's a lot more that goes on to this stuff then meets the eye. It's not always about a couple bucks but more about long term relationships with your affiliate network team. :)
 
Angel of Wealth said:
What gets me is when a network brokering an offer has a HIGHER payout than the original network.. Once I trace the link, I quickly spit out a msg on AIM and ask the original network hey network X is offer YOUR offer at a HIGHER payout how can that be (I'm talking about 40-50% higher)? When I usually tell them the brokered payout they usually laugh and tell me there is no way they are supported that payout without scrubbing your balls out...most of the time the brokered payout is HIGHER than what the original network gets it at....
Click to expand...

This happens way too often, which is why bigger networks tend not to broker their offers to smaller networks just for the heck of it. We've given out some of our exclusive offers (true exclusives that we are the agency of record for, not white labels with a color change on the LP) to some networks that put their street price for higher than our allowable. There is no question that they fired up their scrub dial to 50-75%.

It's been said in this thread before, but this is why you should be split testing offers from 2-3 sources to see which source has the best conversion rate and EPCs.
 
Another reason that networks broker to other networks is quality. If a particular network is closed/ invite only and is known to have high quality traffic across the board it's worth it for the originating network to take a major hit on their margin. The higher quality traffic will help keep their overall quality score high with the advertiser, especially if they are purposely blending soft incent traffic in to increase the volume they are sending.

While they may make 1% margin on the "quality" traffic, they are able to keep the soft incent/ subpar traffic at a 30+% margin and add a lot of volume to the mix so they more than make up for the minimal margin. It's all a numbers game at the end of the day.
 
Sorry I need to make a correction to some of the posts in this thread (including my own).

These sub-networks are not scrubbing to give out a higher payout they are SHAVING!

Scrubbing can be legitimate, shaving never is!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airin
Scrubbing is BS no matter how you look at... it's the same as stealing as far as I am concerned. =/

You're right scrubbing is BS too, but shaving is criminal and fucked up
Click to expand...


Derrr...too early on a Monday morning. I meant shaving!

Scrubbing can definitely be legit as long as the payout makes up for it and it's done in real time. If it's not real time then it definitely has to be disclosed up front... I typically won't work with advertisers that don't get the concept that the stricter their acceptable lead qualifications are the more they have to pay...and especially won't work with them if they can't scrub in real time and refuse to build the "bad" leads into their metrics or cap the scrub at a max of 2 - 10% depending on the payout and lead type.

Publisher's shouldn't have to risk running a bunch of traffic to a profitable campaign only to find out later that the advertiser rejected a bunch of their leads and the campaign has now lost them money. Now if a publisher is purposely sending fraud or BS traffic, that's a whole different story and doesn't fall under scrubbing IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom