Publishers Not Content With A4UAward Publisher Nominations?
5 Comments May 8, 2008 / Posted in AwardsOne thing the A4UAwards throws up each year is a bit of discontent and discussion regarding the nominations (actually it’s throws up discontent and discussion about the type of awards, the voting process, the nominations, the winners etc etc so should it’s not really a surprise). There are though one or two surprises in each category, but it’s the Publisher of the Year award that has sparked the most amount of debate on Affiliates4U and on various blogs including Moose on the Loose and 3WDL.
First off, well done to the nominations for Publisher of the Year 2008, who are: Click Angel, Net Media Planet, Quidco, Spear, UK Web Media, eConversions.
The group apparently comprises 5 PPC affiliates and one cashback site. There’s no place for what many affiliates would regard as a pure “content affiliate” - but is that really a surprise? We all know good, honest, hardworking content affiliates, but that often doesn’t stand out in a world of money making for networks and merchants alike. For example, Loquax is a content site, but it’s built primarily to earn it’s owners a living and then for it’s users - in terms of revenue generation it would barely get on radar compared to the nominations.
Now if we assume that the nomination process is made with a “these guys earn a fair bit of wedge we’ll vote for them” attitude, then it’s inevitable that content affiliates are going to struggle to secure sufficient nominations. In fact, I’d suggest that it was impossible for ‘old school’ style affiliates to ever pique enough interest amongst sufficient numbers of merchants, networks and agencies to get noticed above the PPCers, however they earn their corn, and the UK’s biggest cashback site.
The nominations possibly reflect affiliate marketing as it currently stands in 2008!
Perhaps for 2009, things will be different?
For example, Matt & the A4UAwards Gang could change the blurb for the nomination process?
For 2008 the information offered was simply “You are invited to nominate who you feel deserves this prestigious title in 2008. The top 5 will go through to a final round of multiple choice voting before the winner is announced at the a4uAwards ceremony” - perhaps including additional advice like “consider all your affiliates not just those who have earnt the most commissions. Think about how an affiliate has added value to your brand and added innovation to generate sales” may help?
Alternatively there could be “Best Publisher (Content)”, “Best Publisher (PPC)”, “Best Publisher (Cashback)” etc, however this could get confusing. By 2015 there could even be “Best Publisher (with Latin Name Beginning with L and ending in X combining Use of Aquatic Bird in Logo”) - at least I might have a chance with that one!
Just out of interest, are there any merchants, agencies or networks willing to reveal their choice of nomination and why?
Hi Jason,
My choice was based on two things: the professionalism of this affiliate and how well they serve the industry. In both cases they excel, being both a consultative and honest partner (crucially important to me as I look to build strong relationships with potentially nervous/cautious advertisers) and a great ambassador the CPA model having presented to both Affiliate Window staff as well as at a number of industry events. My nomination wasn’t based on their turnover or financial worth to Affiliate Window.
I would have liked to have seen other affiliates nominated who have served the industry well and a wider spread of affiliate types but I would guess there were a significant amount of nominations and the split of votes was relatively evenly split rather than massively weighted towards a chosen few.
Hi Jason
Good post and I can also relate to what affiliates are saying, as most of you know I come from the background in affiliate marketing as a content affiliate.
I remember back in the day of my affiliate hat on I was speaking to one network about a campaign for a free offer and was working for NetFreeStuff (Big Idea Media) and was told by the network that “we hadn’t been added to a specific campaign as we were not a freebie site”, Response “but we run NFS which is one of the biggest Freebie sites in UK” Answer ” which one is this”.
But I digress the above was just proof that some networks really don’t take notice of what affiliates do and just look at the overall figure, however there are also some very good networks that do (just see post from Kevin and Hero on the forum).
As far as me voting for an affiliate I must admit that the affiliate that I voted for the early stage has not got through to this round which is a shame as it was a good Voucher Code site that when I speak to them they put our codes and offers live on the site within 10 minutes.
I was looking for an affiliate that was willing to work with me on campaigns and we will do a lot for our affiliates if they will give us the time to speak to us, I am sure most people who read this will know the hours I spend making sure we do all we can to help.
I just hope that this issue doesn’t take away from the effort that the networks, agencies and account managers have put in to be short listed.
Cheers
Mark
I agree with Jason again (It almost goes without saying because it’s quite rare we disagree about affiliate marketing). One thought that struck me when voting today was it’s a shame we can only vote for one candidate in each category. For example in one of the categories I couldn’t choose between Zak and Graham, it’d certainly be 49% versus 51% either way around and it would have been nice to be able to rank each candidate in order 1 to 5 then a PR system could be used to tot up the totals.
Proportional representation in the a4u awards! For that suggestion alone I’m voting for you next year Joe
[...] do also run content sites, however they probably wouldn’t get a mention if there was a pure content category? So where are the Kings of Content? Shouldn’t we be shouting their praises and raising their [...]