Quote:
Originally Posted by Far-L
We started with 1/10,000 to 1/25,000 on the major tubes when we started working them. We split tested the clips, the creatives, the text, every single aspect of each ad zone etc. Now we are consistently under 1/1000 on most, though not all. Do I blame the tube if the ratios are not averaging better? No. We are still trying to find the "recipe" for success on those that don't do as well and feel it is our job to find what works because it is our content and our sites we are trying to sell.
There are some clips that do well across the board. There are some tubes that have great communities to tap into as well. There are some that we still do crappy numbers on although even 1/2500 is still a vast improvement over 1/25000... 
Our average retention on those is over 4 months. The type ins are even better for retention. We still juggle the high ctr/shitty conversions vs low ctr/highly branded strong conversions balls, trying always to get better ctr/great conversions - that is where tracking and A/B testing are so critical to success.
Do we have other traffic that converts way better? Sure, we are under 1/30 on the majority of review sites - but no where near the volume of traffic and therefore much less brand exposure so there is always a trade off.
Why doubt Ruseful? He has been very straightforward and it isn't like he is sucking up to anyone for affiliates, and he has been clear that his sites are merit based just like everyone else that submits as well.
Everyone is out there wondering "where are all the whale affiliates?" The major tubes are obviously where the traffic is so what is so bad about working with them as affiliates? I just don't get why people, especially people that used tgps as partners in its heydey, have an issue - people could just as easily jerk off to that content for free as well. (and still do... tgps still send sign ups too last time I looked)
The reason I never had the "they stole my content" issue with tubes is because every tube we ever saw our content on took it down with proper - meaning polite too - notice and were willing to work with us to avoid future issues. That is not "sucking up". That is called doing business. |
As I said I don't doubt Ruseful's honesty. I only doubt whether his interpretation of his stats is accurate. Saying that over 95% of the traffic hitting his sites is due to tube campaigns is an extraordinary claim as is a 3% ctr and 1:833 ratio from such tube sites which are loaded with pirated full scenes from every niche.
From the second link in my sig
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportu...ost#Evaluation At times there can be a hidden cost for a given action. If the cost seems negligible at first it might create the illusion that there is no cost to an action which appears to generate a gain. BUT there may actually be a great cost there which you are not considering and which will not become apparent until later down the road. This is a part of Business and Economics 101. I learned it in freshman year.
The first link in my sig breaks this all down ina different way but I will summarize it again. As you give out more content eiter full scene or near full scene the natural consequence is that less people who view the content will end up buying it. (Does anyone dispute this so far?)
There are two primary concerns related to this:
1.
Direct marketing effect (Non tube related). As your content becomes more saturated on the large tubes this should decrease your ctr and worsen your conversion ratios to some degree. The effect will likely compound as more of your content is given out freely and time goes on. In this way your existing non-tube campaigns now have a diminishing return. These were sales you would have had before. Now an opportunity cost.
2.
Affiliate sales effect (Non tube related, those without full scenes). Just like with #1 the same thing will happen. But in addition to this many of your affiliates will likely see the worsening ctr and conversions rates and will decide to stop promoting you in favor of your competitors who now convert better for them. They gain nothing from your tube campaign. They only lose. I know usually when I see a lot of a sponsor's content all over tubes I pull links because in almost every case their conversions became much worse for me. Worse yet some of your former affiliates will likely eventually be pushed out of business and you will lose some partners. These were people who were pushing you in the past for perhaps years and some may have been fairly reliable partners. One might be tempted to say so what. "Fuck the affiliates" but you don't know what conditions are going to be like one or two years out. Maybe the tubes you rely on will decide to push other sponsors instead. Maybe they will open their own sites and kick you out. Maybe there will be a government crackdown. Maybe as affiliates disappear they become so saturated with competitors that your campaigns will do 1/10th of what they did before. Now what will you do? Submit 10-50 times the content?
If you are smart you will want to make sure these hidden opportunity costs do not exceed any perceived gains from your tube campaigns. Make sure you are aware of and are not underestimating the possible negative effect of throwing out a significant amount of content freely in highly visible places. Ruseful by his own admission claims he basically started with nothing for direct and affiliate sales. He says 95% of the hits to his pages are due to tubes (I find that hard to believe but he seems to really believe this). That's a very different case than an established site which does over a million dollars in sales and has a large affiliate base.
