Comments on: Super Affiliates vs The Networks http://www.onelittleduck.co.uk/networks/super-affiliates-vs-the-networks-220.htm Online blog of Jason Dale, co-director of Loquax. My views on affiliate marketing, running a website and anything else that seems appropriate! Mon, 05 Sep 2011 14:55:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Should A Network Compete With Their Affiliates? - Fraser’s Affiliate Marketing Blog http://www.onelittleduck.co.uk/networks/super-affiliates-vs-the-networks-220.htm/comment-page-1/#comment-7416 Should A Network Compete With Their Affiliates? - Fraser’s Affiliate Marketing Blog Fri, 02 Mar 2007 10:31:17 +0000 http://www.onelittleduck.co.uk/2007/02/super-affiliates-vs-the-networks.html#comment-7416 [...] from affiliates? In some ways it’s not a surprise because if certain affiliates are becoming bigger than the networks then it’s not a shock that the networks want their slice of the pie [...] [...] from affiliates? In some ways it’s not a surprise because if certain affiliates are becoming bigger than the networks then it’s not a shock that the networks want their slice of the pie [...]

]]> By: Jeff Molander http://www.onelittleduck.co.uk/networks/super-affiliates-vs-the-networks-220.htm/comment-page-1/#comment-7098 Jeff Molander Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:20:14 +0000 http://www.onelittleduck.co.uk/2007/02/super-affiliates-vs-the-networks.html#comment-7098 Jason: Great observation that few (if any) have made although it stares us in the face. Indeed, the battle is in many ways OVER. In some ways affiliates that are now CPA networks have beaten the networks that helped create them. They maintain much higher profit margins and are flush with cash to the point where they pay their affiliates in advance. My take on it <a href="http://www.thoughtshapers.com/index.php/affiliate-marketing-dirty-little-secret-cpa-network-azoogle-commission-junc/" title="here" rel="nofollow">here</a>. Jason:
Great observation that few (if any) have made although it stares us in the face. Indeed, the battle is in many ways OVER. In some ways affiliates that are now CPA networks have beaten the networks that helped create them. They maintain much higher profit margins and are flush with cash to the point where they pay their affiliates in advance.

My take on it here.

]]> By: Clarke http://www.onelittleduck.co.uk/networks/super-affiliates-vs-the-networks-220.htm/comment-page-1/#comment-7076 Clarke Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:17:15 +0000 http://www.onelittleduck.co.uk/2007/02/super-affiliates-vs-the-networks.html#comment-7076 If a Merchant wants to cut off PPC as part of there over all Affiliate program strategy in favour of one Affiliate, they will soon find the other PPC Affiliates will be promoting there competition to ensure there decision is proven a wrong and costly one. PPC is part of the picture, the issue is that SEO Affiliates due to the nature of the beast take a lot longer to kick in and generally there are little rewards or encouragement for SEO guys as the PPC “instant kick-in” get many of the bonuses. PPC and SEO are a part of your over all Affiliate strategy, and today’s top Affiliate is not the guy who will necessary be your top Affiliate in 3 months, 6 months or a years time. One thing many an article overlooks is that would the Affiliates now pimping direct deals to squeeze out fellow Affiliate competition have known about, been able to contact and be working with the Merchants that they are now conspiring to remove Networks from the deal they initially setup. Networks are not a free introduction agency, would any of these companies hire a management consultancy service who place a person in there company to do a job then offer the guy a job direct to cut the company that placed them out of the deal? Of course they would not as they know they need to pay a finders and release fee, so maybe more Networks may need to introduce a finder’s fee element for the Affiliate going direct scenario to make it less attractive to Merchant fly-by-nights. It is not so great that a few guys are getting to cream off the money in direct deals, it is after all at the expense of the Network and the other Affiliates promoting that Merchant and believe me if that starts in full swing it will see the end of many small to medium Affiliates who add value both in more brand exposure and money, collectively as a group, 10 medium Affiliates could match the sales of one super Affiliate so why cut them out. Please note I am not against Affiliate freedom of movement, if you want to change the Network your working with in favour of another then so be it. But the argument Networks do nothing for the override I am afraid is not true, as I recently point out to an Affiliate would you be making £70k a year commission from a Merchant if I never told you about the hot product, to this they replied, yeah I see you point. I am dead against the Merchant prostitute who simply slags themselves about Networks to find out who all the good Affiliates are in order to invite them in to there own private deal, these people are the scum of the industry and are only out to damage it, and if you support them then well done, you just put another nail in the coffin and be ready to pat yourself in the back when you can no longer find other Merchants to make an income from. If a Merchant wants to cut off PPC as part of there over all Affiliate program strategy in favour of one Affiliate, they will soon find the other PPC Affiliates will be promoting there competition to ensure there decision is proven a wrong and costly one.

PPC is part of the picture, the issue is that SEO Affiliates due to the nature of the beast take a lot longer to kick in and generally there are little rewards or encouragement for SEO guys as the PPC “instant kick-in” get many of the bonuses.

PPC and SEO are a part of your over all Affiliate strategy, and today’s top Affiliate is not the guy who will necessary be your top Affiliate in 3 months, 6 months or a years time.

One thing many an article overlooks is that would the Affiliates now pimping direct deals to squeeze out fellow Affiliate competition have known about, been able to contact and be working with the Merchants that they are now conspiring to remove Networks from the deal they initially setup. Networks are not a free introduction agency, would any of these companies hire a management consultancy service who place a person in there company to do a job then offer the guy a job direct to cut the company that placed them out of the deal? Of course they would not as they know they need to pay a finders and release fee, so maybe more Networks may need to introduce a finder’s fee element for the Affiliate going direct scenario to make it less attractive to Merchant fly-by-nights.

It is not so great that a few guys are getting to cream off the money in direct deals, it is after all at the expense of the Network and the other Affiliates promoting that Merchant and believe me if that starts in full swing it will see the end of many small to medium Affiliates who add value both in more brand exposure and money, collectively as a group, 10 medium Affiliates could match the sales of one super Affiliate so why cut them out.

Please note I am not against Affiliate freedom of movement, if you want to change the Network your working with in favour of another then so be it. But the argument Networks do nothing for the override I am afraid is not true, as I recently point out to an Affiliate would you be making £70k a year commission from a Merchant if I never told you about the hot product, to this they replied, yeah I see you point.

I am dead against the Merchant prostitute who simply slags themselves about Networks to find out who all the good Affiliates are in order to invite them in to there own private deal, these people are the scum of the industry and are only out to damage it, and if you support them then well done, you just put another nail in the coffin and be ready to pat yourself in the back when you can no longer find other Merchants to make an income from.

]]>