-
Website
http://jangro.com/ -
Original page
http://www.jangro.com/affiliate-marketing/affiliate-marketing-get-paid-for-nothing/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
What does this portend for the rest of 2009?
I hope their extension observes the affsrc=1 tag (http://www.jangro.com/a/2005/07/28/afsrc1-frequen...
It's probably an issue of management priorites that they keep launching trivial widges like the site stripe and more graphics, even as their cookie duration is a mere 24 hours and you have to manually create tracking ids (subject to a cap of 200).
And the Miro stuff is stupid. Amazon should get out of that. There is a recent thread at ABW - http://forum.abestweb.com/showthread.php?t=115241...
where Amazon removed somebody because they had a cash back site (in this case, only part of their site did that) and if you read the reason they gave, about slim retail margins, could be a case for getting out of this.
The Miro FF plugin is just taking commission on a sale from someone who was just going to Amazon anyway. No value add.
Example, I shop at Amazon all the time. Let's say I spent $2000 a year at Amazon. If I leave this Miro FireFox plugin on my browser, they'd get $100-$200 from Amazon. And for what? Getting me to install a plugin that does nothing to add any value to the process. They're not promoting Amazon or recommending Amazon products to me. They've done nothing to earn that money.
See the difference?
Completely disagree. I've intentionally purchased things on Amazon at a higher price instead of through Buy.com or on eBay, etc in support of a group (actually did that with this Miro plugin in place last March when I dropped a ton of money on books for research to help support what they are doing since I was a heavy user of the software at the time).
We all know people who would argue that the entire affiliate channel itself is a "no value add" proposition in the current state of the web. We all know that is silly. However, it comes down to how you measure value. Whether it's direct linking and sending traffic through paid keywords or deep-linked PPC buys or encouraging people to spend within a certain platform in order to show support, it's still value. In Miro/Amazon's case, the plugin has certainly added to Amazon's bottom line at least from my wallet.
Sam
I'm sure Amazon didn't have this in mind. It will hurt their already pretty good commission rates as Jonathan (Trust) suggested. Andrew Wee is correct, though, that their associates program needs overhauling. Automation is limited and, as far as I know, sub-ID tracking is non-existent. I do like working with them, though, in spite of these limitations and I rarely work with independent programs.
http://www.revenews.com/samharrelson/affiliate-ma...
Same arguments were made against it then.
The reason I think this is interesting, and even a possible positive (though not in every instance) is that it is an attempt to combine affiliate marketing with gestures and attention rather than just pure profit motivation.
I've gone through people's links to buy books, programs, etc on Amazon when I wanted to support what they were doing or give thanks even if they had no real direct link to the actual Amazon purchase directly. However, something they said or did in the past (or future) potentially spurred a purchase.
The notion that Miro's plugin is going to dilute Amazon's rates or CTR's is pretty silly given the incredible niche here... folks who use Miro, Firefox and install a plugin. That's what? 3 of us? 4?
Kellie argued in the RN post linked above that this sort of thing is against Amazon's TOS. I read through those last year and didn't see that interpretation as valid since a person is knowingly opting in to participate and taking some pretty geeky steps to do so. I see churches, schools, friends, enthusiast blogs (like Daring Fireball), etc doing the exact same thing with Amazon and no one seems to think much of it.
I think the main problem for the affiliate community is that this is about a piece of software. If Miro were a non-profit group aimed at telling people to kill their TV's or only watch non-DRM'd programming, there wouldn't be a problem. However, the affiliate community (represented here and places such as ABW at least) has such a strong distaste (and for good reason) of software that this raises ire.
Sam
Great points Sam, and lots of people have different reasons for hating (or liking) this model.
Here's more detail on where I'm coming from with this.
Personally, I have a problem with intentionally buying through peoples links. I used to do it, but the longer I've been around this space, the more I think it is a bad idea. I guess you could justify it by saying that is the reason you're buying through that merchant. If I'm going to buy something, I'll buy it. I won't go looking for someone's link.
Same reason I won't just click on a CPC ad on a friend's website.
If someone I know has presented me with something that I then want to buy, different story.
You might argue that you're buying through Amazon over Buy.com BECAUSE you know Miro is getting something, I cannot argue with that adding some value either, but more on that later.
Lots of businesses have "buy through us and support our cause/business." And I don't really have a problem with that. In most cases there's an active decision by the consumer (and you in your examples) to go to that site and click through their links on EACH purchase. The value is that you first want to support someone, and then they present stores to you that does that. They're driving a visitor.
For 99.9% of consumers, that behavior will wear off, move onto another cause, etc. The average "lifetime take", which is the commissions earned off a referred customer's average "lifetime value" to a merchant is probably small. It''ll be the value derived from somewhere between 1 and 3 purchases, on average.
Miro's implementation takes commissions forever, or until the consumer removes the plugin. Their potential is to get a cut of every purchase a customer makes from Amazon forever. That "lifetime take" is huge, and IMO completely eliminates any initial value they may have got out of some conscious Amazon purchases made to benefit a great service like Miro.
I don't even want to guess what the lifetime take would be on my purchases. But I'm pretty sure Miro doesn't deserve all that.
Have you removed the plugin, Sam?
Here's more detail on where I'm coming from with this.
Personally, I have a problem with intentionally buying through peoples links. I used to do it, but the longer I've been around this space, the more I think it is a bad idea. I guess you could justify it by saying that is the reason you're buying through that merchant. If I'm going to buy something, I'll buy it. I won't go looking for someone's link.
Same reason I won't just click on a CPC ad on a friend's website.
If someone I know has presented me with something that I then want to buy, different story.
You might argue that you're buying through Amazon over Buy.com BECAUSE you know Miro is getting something, I cannot argue with that adding some value either, but more on that later.
Lots of businesses have "buy through us and support our cause/business." And I don't really have a problem with that. In most cases there's an active decision by the consumer (and you in your examples) to go to that site and click through their links on EACH purchase. The value is that you first want to support someone, and then they present stores to you that does that. They're driving a visitor.
For 99.9% of consumers, that behavior will wear off, move onto another cause, etc. The average "lifetime take", which is the commissions earned off a referred customer's average "lifetime value" to a merchant is probably small. It''ll be the value derived from somewhere between 1 and 3 purchases, on average.
Miro's implementation takes commissions forever, or until the consumer removes the plugin. Their potential is to get a cut of every purchase a customer makes from Amazon forever. That "lifetime take" is huge, and IMO completely eliminates any initial value they may have got out of some conscious Amazon purchases made to benefit a great service like Miro.
I don't even want to guess what the lifetime take would be on my purchases. But I'm pretty sure Miro doesn't deserve all that.
Have you removed the plugin, Sam?
I guess it's interesting that after a year, they're still able to do this.
Not for me, though I'm sure you've seen me makes posts similar to Scott's (and more vociferous) about software. For me, the issue is this... if I owned a small business (and I do) selling stiff on the Internet (again, I do), would I want this type of thing causing me to pay commissions? And that answer is a very stern NO.
The argument that it's a small effect isn't compelling at all for me Sam. Because I know that ignoring small does impact my profits as a merchant, but more importantly, ignoring it allows small to grow big. And indeed, toolbars are proliferating.
I think I addressed this below, but briefly, I'll concede value on the first purchase or two when it's on your mind and you're feeling like you want to do something for Miro.
But the value drops of significantly and quickly asymptotes (I try to use that word once a year) to zero value as time goes on and you've given enough to Miro on Amazon's wallet.
It is what amounts to an "infinite cookie" that bothers me the most.
I'm coining phrases all over the place here Sam, thanks for making us think.
Thanks for teaching me the new word, though.
Don't ever play Scrabulous against Scott on Facebook, btw.
http://www.kremtala.com
Second, I knowingly did use Firefox (on my Ubuntu laptop... how's that for open source cheerleading!) with the Miro plugin to make a couple of larger purchases last Spring to send some money their way.
When Hulu came out of private beta last summer or Fall (seems like it's been out forever!), I made the switch to using that site more and honestly haven't opened up Miro in the last two or three months (used it to watch Diggnation for a while but now just listen to the audio version of that one when I do listen). So, when I installed Ubuntu 8.10 on that laptop (and then Windows 7 a few weeks back) and upgraded the Firefox to 3.0, I didn't reinstall the plugin because I wasn't using Miro anymore.
For these sorts of campaigns to work, they really have to rely on dedicated community rather than everyone.... the value incentive for Amazon (and the user) becomes support of a business that is trying to do something without resorting to the types of advertising or monetization practices that many in the open source community simply and strongly dislike. So, for Miro, this makes sense. If Shawn and Missy came up with an Affiliate Summit Firefox plugin, it would be completely different.
I've always argued that the "infinite cookie" that Scott mentioned above was a bad thing because it lowers the overall ROI of a merchants affiliate program. Even if it's just "perceived ROI", now. Merchants have always placed an incredible premium on new customer acquisition, and I believe they specifically look at the affiliate channel to assist them in that task. So all the repeat orders that some "cookie cannons" generate run counter to the goals of the program. And that's without even discussing the implications of cookie overwriting, wasted PPC by the merchant, etc.
That said, times have changed a bit lately. I wonder if more merchants are going to treat this current down turn differently when it comes to how they measure the success of their affiliate programs. Will a bigger premium be put on simple customer retention efforts, and their effects on market share?
Perhaps the economy will sway some programs thoughts on issues like these.
In our area of business, the lack of ability to discern value is quite alarming for me. I also find it to be a rather special case in our business, which I generally attribute to both our sector's youth and diversity.
So Sam, if you were a merchant selling widgets, would you treat this affiliate with the same regard as all of your other affiliates?
To explain... Since we don't make distinctions between previous affiliates in the chain of sell and the last affiliate leading to the sell (and instead give all of a commission to that last affiliate), I'm not sure how separating out value here would be much different. Sure, (some) merchants pay differently for search or PPC or forum-led or coupon-based or co-reg leads/sales compared to those who come from traditional retail affiliate sites... but what we're dealing with are varying degrees of incentive.
If I were Amazon and looked at the numbers coming from Miro on a spreadsheet, I'm guessing the users buying through that link are the savvy types who would normally be shopping at NewEgg or some competitor with lower prices. Since customer acquisition (not retention...at least in my experience of management with large and small brands) is still the main thing merchants are looking for in their affiliate programs, that is quite valuable for Amazon.
And let's not forget that this is a Firefox browser extension, not a toolbar. The semantic distinction really does matter in this case, I think.
Thanks for spurring my thoughts!!
Sam
Spreadsheets list numbers, not value. The question isn't the nature of the people who buy through those links, it is rather the nature of what those links contributed to the merchant. Just because Tiger Woods drives on I-4 in Orlando, we can't conclude it's a highway that attracts excellent golfers. Why and How are very different questions.
And the difference between extension versus toolbar is completely irrelevant here. Whether Tiger used his physical keys to start his Buick, or his remote key fob, has nothing significant to do with why he chose to be on that highway. Focus on what he was thinking right before he left the house more, versus what tool booth he last passed through en route.
The difference between extension and toolbar is not irrelevant at all. However, if you want to focus on intent, then that's fine as well...
"The question isn't the nature of the people who buy through those links, it is rather the nature of what those links contributed to the merchant."
Exactly what I'm pointing out... people who use the Miro Firefox extension to support Miro are doing so consciously and consciously buying through a merchant (Amazon) they might not have purchased through otherwise.
Just because those folks don't click a link to get to Amazon doesn't mean Miro didn't lead them there and away from a competitor.
Links are dead, anyway :)
So, I concede that there are people like you out there and I'll back off my "No value" statement. There are more "valid" ways to get the loyal users like you to give on Miro's behalf.
Let's start with making sure that you STAY a Miro user if you're going to give them Amazon's money.
As Kevin said, it's about the delivery method.
There are people who clicked 'yes' to that plugin and immediately forgot that it is there, or worse, never use Miro again, but go to Amazon.com again and again to buy stuff. That Miro gets commissions on those users forever is not right, IMO, and devalues the channel.
By allowing this, Amazon is effectively saying, "Yes, we agree to give a percentage of every purchase by this customer to Miro. No limits. Forever. And ever. No strings attached."
(I left out "Even if another affiliate refers them later," as that just muddies the waters.)
And money will silently flow from Amazon to Miro. Sure, some people are making conscious purchases to benefit Miro (which Sam is focusing on). But some are not (which I'm focusing on).
Do you think any big brand merchant in their right mind would agree to that? Especially with no promise of another iota of branding or promotion by the affiliate?
(ball-buster)
But wait, it would then actually distinguish that consumers were being motivated to some extent to shop at Amazon to contribute to Miro..that they were actually involved in driving traffic. Oops, there goes the low lying fruit for commissions.
We considered doing this in 1999 at the ISP I was working for at the DNS level, but determined that it was cleary against the Amazon Affiliate Agreement..
Adam
We considered doing this in 1998 at the ISP I was working for at the DNS level, but determined that it was cleary against the Amazon Affiliate Agreement..
Adam
I just started affiliate program too, but it's CB, might try out Amazon one day.