Comments on: Friday Podcast: The State of Affiliate Marketing with Haiko De Poel

By: Milan Jara

Milan Jara — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 01:56:43 +0000

Heiko,

I loved the podcast.

What has changed since a18 months ago with the parasites?

By: Navaid I Syed

Navaid I Syed — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 03:12:12 +0000

Hello,
It is really amzing and sad, how legislation regarding this multi-billion dollars industry is virtually lacking. I totally agree that we need to organize for effective and powerfull legislation.
Thank you.

By: Ed Byerly

Ed Byerly — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 08:09:11 +0000

The state of affiliate marketing is sad indeed. We’ve recently seen a significant increase in the activities of “cause” parasites working to snatch the rightful commissions of unaware affiliates. And they have become aggressive and relentless in their pursuit of adding merchants and new users.

I applaud Haiko for his persistence in speaking out against these methods, despite brutal criticism by those who would steal in the name of a “good cause”.

See more about BHOs and parasitic marketing activities, and what you can do about it at .

By: Ron Haines

Ron Haines — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 23:00:19 +0000

It’s a shame that so many people have tried so hard to get something going and so many others have attempted to ruin it in order to get something for nothing.
When we decided to market to members of our social sites we launched the internet mall, just another addition service like our email flyer services and spam free email accounts. It was constructed with quality in mind and as a convenience to our members. It is not our bread and butter and our main focus is on visitor experience. If we continue to be the victims of parasite-ware or any other form of dishonesty it is the merchants that lose out on the traffic, we’ll merely discontinue it and divert the resources to other projects.

By: Haiko de Poel Jr

Haiko de Poel Jr — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 03:59:44 +0000

1. It was replicated, and acknowledged by the parties. No improper behavior from me, sorry to disappoint.

2. Let’s leave that to the experts at the proper authorities to decide.

3.PMA isn’t even formed yet, what can they do? LMAO

4.I’m here talking with an anonymous troll aren’t I?

I see your theme, personal attacks and misinformation – that’s not paranoia – that’s “transparency”.

Haiko

By: Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 02:18:35 +0000

It’s NOT fair to say it’s simply sour grapes.

It’s more about how we should look at the value of the channel, and what it’s supposed to mean to merchants.

Even if you try to find a completely imaginary middle ground, you find a slippery slope that neither benefits merchants, nor does it benefit any of the true value added affiliates that DESERVE to promote top tier merchants.

Who would you find to replace Target? Who does more flower business than 800-Flowers? Why should my loyal visitors see ads for secondary merchants?

So if you’re a REAL value added affiliate, and not simply SEOing to the brand, or passing shoppers through that really have no use for your site (or toolbar), you WILL lose money. Target will convert better than will a mom and pop. Sad but true.

I would encourage anonymous to read Brian Littleton’s post at the SAS blog http://blog.shareasale.com/2008/12/18/how-to-bring-in-new-customers/ on how to bring in new customers, and what real value is.

Real affiliates have value to the big brands, if they have loyal traffic they can push to merchants. Being forced to find replacement merchants is bad business.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:56:50 +0000

I followed this at ABW but it turned wierd very quickly and I think that turned off a lot of people.
1. Suddenly, no one could answer why the videos could not be replicated (was the improper behavior fixed?).
2. The admin went into the depths of paranoia and began implying that OneCause was hacking his home network to try and silence him and spy on his activities (was he off his meds that day?)
3. The admin also made a paranoid implication that the Performance Marketing Alliance was quiet because it is spending its time and energy conspiring against him personally.
4. The admin only wishes the discussion to take place where he can ban and lock threads (which he has a history of doing to anyone whose views differ from his.)

I’m starting to see a theme here.

By: Haiko de Poel Jr

Haiko de Poel Jr — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:08:09 +0000

Anonymous,

No Sour grapes here, the problem is that your answer is to use fly paper when you have a RAT problem … the underling issues of theft, non compliance, collusion and willful misconduct is not to be left to market adaption or a handful of super affiliates … that’s for the FTC and other regulatory bodies.

Haiko

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:23:47 +0000

Free market forces eliminate almost all of the problems except for the idiocy in NY.
If you split test, then the merchants who have parasites in their programs don’t convert as well as their competition for you. Thus you change to the competition. Then the network gets caught with its pants down when the merchant realizes that they have thousands of affiliates who make peanuts and only one super affiliate(the parasite). I’ve seen this happen at least a dozen times over the years and I’m sure that more will try. The market always adapts.

I think that this is not getting the attention that Mr Poet is expecting because the affiliates that really make money for merchants know what I said above to be true. The market adapts.
Sounds like a lot of sour grapes to me.
Someone call the Waaaaaaaah-mbulance.

By: Kathy

Kathy — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 22:53:55 +0000

Enjoyed very much your interview with Haiko. Very informative and interesting. Look forward to learning what his thoughts will be in the new year.:)