Comments on: Tis The Season To (Not) Be Jolly

By: John Gilbert-Jupp

John Gilbert-Jupp — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:41:26 +0000

Ah the plot thickens. Identify the top 100 affiliates according to turnover. Publish the list. Mr Merchant sees published list and decides “I want those people promoting”. Special commission deals increase. Networks earn more override. Merchant gets fleeced. Agencies get pat on head for recruiting top 100 members to programs plus enhanced bonus structure. Cynical? Moi?

By: Joe Connor

Joe Connor — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:15:42 +0000

Why am I (not) surprised you’re still grumpy, me too, no surprises there.
The top 100 list will only ever be a partial list of people who want to be on lists and I’ll be able to see where I would have ranked on the list if the turnover figures are published – and it wouldn’t be hard to find them out if they’re not.
As others have pointed out it’s easy to increase vanity turnover by running lots of PPC so turnover isn’t proof any anything useful.
I can’t think of any reason I’d want to be ranked and displayed on such a list and for that reason I’m out, even before I was in, or not.

By: HelenMarie

HelenMarie — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:10:46 +0000

I’ve just caught up on this. I really don’t like the idea of this list, I see what the guys at A4U are trying to do but i don’t think it can work in the affiliate sector like it does in the agency world. I agree with a lot of the comments above that it seems like a bit of an ego boost, I also suspect that many affiliate companies would not want to be published here anyway. As a client this would not affect who I decided to work with or how I work with affiliates so not really sure what the point is. I would also be concerned it could have a negative affect on the way clients perceive affiliates, I can see the “well if they earn that much then I’ll pay them less” creeping in as there will be a lack of understanding around the significant difference between turnover and profit.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:07:49 +0000

Ray if you choose to believe every official line in this world, then I better keep an eye on you in Vegas. They have signs saying stuff like “You can hit the jackpot here!”… and hand out cards saying “She’s alone and waiting for your call”

I understand why these lists would be beneficial to agencies, however, I’d expect networks already have this information to hand? I’m not really interested in the top x affiliates as it doesn’t cloud my judgement or feeling towards them. I’m friendly and respectful of people in the top and bottom 100, selected for who they are, and not on what they can do for me.

As has also been pointed out, anyone can increase turnover (therefore getting into the top 100) by creating a load of PPC’s where the profit margin is below 5%. But whats the point of that? Give me a 50% return and I’ll create my own award cermony complete with trophy!

By: Paul Davighi-Edwards

Paul Davighi-Edwards — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:36:19 +0000

From what I can see it’s not based on financial return but on turnover, what use is that? We can all increase turnover using adwords. I would much rather see the top 100 affiliates ranked by profit. The only people interested in turnover will be the merchants and networks because they make money based on this whether you make a profit or not.

Apart from bragging rights, the only reason I see for submitting your details is for better recognition with merchants.

By: Matt Sweet

Matt Sweet — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:25:47 +0000

It’s about the cash not popularity: “The annual survey uniquely identifies the leading Affiliates operating in the space each year, ranked by financial return”

Its optional though. They’re are a lot of big affiliates who don’t shout about it (not saying either way is right or wrong) and probably won’t enter. then there are lots of smaller affiliates like me who don’t want to be embarrassed

I think these lists work for agencies because they need to show they are large and influencial in order to win clients. A lot of affiliates don’t need to win clients, they get to choose them.

Anyway, I’m just following the Jason Dale grumpiness advice. I should really wait until its published before judging!

By: Raymond Theakston

Raymond Theakston — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:13:54 +0000

It’s about the cash not popularity: “The annual survey uniquely identifies the leading Affiliates operating in the space each year, ranked by financial return”

By: Matt Sweet

Matt Sweet — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:39:54 +0000

Spot on Frostie and Matt.

It’s like me and my mates dishing out awards to each other every year over a beer, and then asking each other how much we earn.

Interesting but ultimately unneccessary.

By: Matt Bailey

Matt Bailey — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:28:18 +0000

I agree with you Frostie. The opinion of a few people who read the A4U Forum is no basis to hold a subjective view of the great and good of affiliate marketing.

If there is desire for this kind of information (and I don’t see much reason for it) then could we not hold a quantitative study taking into account factors such as turnover, no. merchants they work with and what sectors they operate in?

Like you Frostie, I suspect this will just be another popularity contest (a charge levelled at many of the A4U Awards) and will just polish a few already inflated egos.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:43:45 +0000

Call me cynical but I suspect the 100AMC will be a list of who is popular, or who gets the most “RTs” and not necessarily who is the most respected or influential individual in the industry, nor do I see what benefit this list will add to the industry either?

… and yes, my memory is freakin fantastic!