Please Stop Pigeonholing
Over the past few months, I’ve reached breaking point with merchants who continue to send me an email informing me that I’ve been suspended as they no longer wish to work with voucher code affiliates. Lets take a look at Mr Bloggs who has 20 different websites, one of which happens to tackle the voucher code arena. Mr Bloggs also has a finance website, an eco website, a portal for new mothers, seasonal websites and animal welfare sites to name a few.
Mr Bloggs (who probably represents 90% of affiliates) is active in many differnet areas of affiliate marketing, and doesn’t just have a voucher code website. Now here’s an important piece of information for merchants…
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A VOUCHER CODE AFFILIATE
Merchants are correct to think there is such a thing as a voucher code website, but thats where it ends. By suspending me, as I have a voucher code website, you are also stopping me from pushing your programme via 10’s of other sites I manage none of which are voucher code related.
With everyone jumping on the voucher code bandwagon and making use of iCodes.co.uk and Promotions.org.uk solutions, are merchants planning on banning the majority of affiliates? I suspect NO is the answer.
To look at the pigeonholing in a different light, would you call TESCO a pharmacy? Sure they sell headache tablets, but they also shift a fair number of TV’s, bottles of wine, clothes and insurance policies. I would be surprised by anyone who would therefore class Tesco as a pharmacy, or for that matter an insurance broker or even an offlicence. Merchants need to think about affiliates as being a supermarket – offering a massive range of goods to a huge range of people. If you don’t want your programme on a voucher code site, then say so and remove/suspend those that ignore your requests.
THE FLIPSIDE OF THE COIN
A recent merchant who has gone about this exercise did it, in my opinion, the correct way. Firstly an email was sent to affiliates with plenty of notice and explained fully the reasons behind their proposed actions. They requested affiliates remove ALL codes or at the very least show them as expired as there were no live codes.
Sadly some affiliate chose to ignore this request, which left the merchant in an awkward position of what to do next. They asked affiliates to follow their rules, yet some decided to ignore the request so as a result, their only option was to suspend a large number of rogue affiliates.
Sadly I was caught up in this exercise but have since been reinstated as the merchant was open to discussion. In order for merchants to work with affiliates, surely we have to be seen to work within a merchants resonable request? If you think a request by a merchant is unreasonable then leave the programme on your own accord – something many of us have done in the past.
18 Comments
Leave a Reply
Social Stuff
I agree with you to an extent Frostie, that merchants shouldn’t blanket all affiliates.
However we all have a responsibility to be more transparent in the way that we operate. From a merchants point of view, the only visibility that they have over how you promote them is in the network interface. Do all affiliates list all their valid URLs in the network interface? The answer from my experience is an overwhelming no.
So if the merchant and the network are using this as the basis to keep tabs on how affiliates are promoting them then of course there will be confusion.
Whilst communication and building a relationship with your affiliates should alleviate this issue, this is not always possible or desirable for merchants and/or networks.
So the emphasis is on networks to facilitate this and for affiliates to keep their information up to date. Whilst merchants are in the dark as to how they are being promoted, instances like this will continue.
Agree that all sides need to make an effort, but from personal experiences, even in the network interface, I specify the variety of sites I run. I even point people to my company site showing a small portfolio, however even this doesn’t stop being pigeonholed!
Certainly scope for vast improvement from merchants, networks and affiliates. It’s only agencies I can’t blame on this post
Seems they are all jupming on the bandwagon. Maybe send each merchant an email showing on your promoting across the range of sites.
Chris if you run a voucher code site then certainly you are a ‘voucher code affiliate’. (You may be other kinds of affiliate too, that’s by the by).
You’ve chosen to be quite visible on this too: that I know of you spoke at A4U, and on one of Fraser Edward’s podcasts.
Your reaction to other’s concerns on the effect on the affiliate model of voucher code sites has been (I paraphrase but I think it’s the gist) ‘it’s profitable, legal, and as business models develop I’ll take advantage of them. Tough if you don’t like it.’
I have my doubts that the overall value of voucher code sites to anyone is positive, but I think your position is fair enough actually. Biz is biz, so be it.
But now there’s a negative cropping up and you don’t like it. Some merchants are opting not to work with people they perceive to be ‘voucher code affiliates’.
If you don’t like that It seems to me the answer is simple… don’t be one.
Matt, sadly you’ve missed the point I was trying to make. In a nutshell…..
Merchant suspends me because I have a voucher site. However, I and the merchnat lose out, because I have other sites that actually provide more business than the voucher code site.
Again, from my POV, you couldn’t be further incorrect by your anology of how labelling affiliates should be. An affiliate shouldn’t be classed as 1 particular type of affiliate – that way of thinking is very narrow minded. An affiliate, more often than not, has a presence in many different markets. Thats the sensible way of looking at it.
As for other peoples concerns, I am always more than happy to hear them and more often than not, where possible help them. However in the particular example you mention, the “conerns” had been ongoing for 12 months. While certain people continued to complain, others benefited. Initially I never brushed off peoples concerns as that is not my personal. For 8 months I advised people to stop complaining and join in the game. Some people took my advice but those too busy complaining may have lost out. No business would wait around – so yeah its Tough Luck… something we all learn and no one is immune to.
As for the “dont like it” comment – cheers for your sound advice. If you read previous entries about 1 particular merchant you will see that I do this, and stand by it! Black and white with me – no gray areas! However the voucher affiliate labelling and suspending is something that we can all benefit from if handled correctly and that includes benefiting the merchants!
Oh my GOD!
I thought I was the only one!
My lingerie website occassionally displays a code below an advert, but that’s enough for merchants to pidgeon my hole and bin my other sites.
I got so frustrated with this that Ive said “Knickers” they can bin me if they like, there’s always another merchant I can replace them with.
I don’t even both replying now, it’s their loss.
Like the Tesco analogy…got to agree
I’m going through a “fine, if you don’t want my visitors I’ll send them to your competitors phase” rather than responding and arguing my case.
Stats and profits are stable so I don’t see the point making life harder for myself.
Hi Chris,
Hope all is well. Not feeling overly wordy so ill keep it short and from a merchant POV.
Merchant A sells knickers, you have a knickers site, gambling site and porn site. Merchant A wants f*ck all to do with porn, you know you can make hundreds of sales per month for them via your knickers site.
Do you:
a) Spend time talking, emailing and explaining to the merchant how you promise that their products wont feature on the porn site.
b) Set up another account for the knickers site
To me b) seem simple, merchant nows where you intend on promoting them and you know your not at risk of being pigeonholed.
There are white label cashback sites knocking about – if your doing £40k profit via Direct Line insurance each month but fancy having a whitelabel cashback site would you sign up the cashback site under the same site/network/account ID as the one turning £40k profit?
Hi Dan
Long time no speak – hope all is well with you mate! OK, I understand what you say, but look at it from another point of view…
Affiliate has 30 sites – does Knicker Merchant expect an affiliate to have 30 different accounts with 30+ networks?
Rember, the Knicker merchant isn’t the only Knicker supplier out there. If this was the case, then I would simply give the £40k of business to one of the many alternatives who take time to get to know me and work with me. Expecting the affiliate to do all the leg work, all the time, is unreasonable.
Still doesn’t detract from the pigeonholing in the first place either which is, IMHO, the source of the problem.
im good thanks, not at many events of late tough due to new found rolls at work! apparently im a tri-athlete of the online world, PPC, AM, SEO bring it on
Regarding 30 sites and 30 network accounts. No. I run affiliate sites and wouldn’t do that, no way. Maybe the networks should do something?
I wont name the network but one shows me (in my affiliate manager shoes) ‘xxxxx xxxxx’ and thats it. No sites, no email, no phone, no address – so if they send me 100 sales a day what am I to do? If they send 100 a day I ant to offer them £XXXX for 130, but at the same time I need to know where they are from and how they’re making them.
About time networks open up just a small fraction of the data they hold?
Hi Frostie,
This was discussed at the IAB Affiliate Council meeting last week. Minutes here – http://www.affiliates4u.com/forums/iab-affiliate-marketing-council-forum/104352-iab-affiliate-council-minutes-26th-march-2009-a.html#post484641
Matt
The latest one we see is Currys Partmaster. Interesting that they ALMOST made a distinction as they say they want to drop commission from Loyalty Sites… but then go on to say that as I am a Discount Affiliate….
FFS – why can’t networks actually be proactive and educate merchants that there is no such thing as a Discount Affiliate. How loud do I have to shout? And yes, I do see this as being a networks role, and sadly I see many networks shying away from it.
Hi,
I certainly agree that it is the network’s responsibility to educate the merchant. In every case we try to do this to the best of our ability.
However, it is also our responsibility to protect the interests of the merchant and the long-term future of their programme. If merchants do not see vouchercode websites as part of their affiliate strategy then I think the merchant is well within their rights to remove affiliates who generate the majority of their sales through vouchercode directories. Usually, this is an informed decision despite many accusations otherwise.
Frostie, I definitely take your point that if you run lots of websites and one happens to be a vouchercode website, the merchant is cutting off potential sales from your other sites by blanket banning you. We recognise this frustration and are in the process of developing something, due for release in June, which should go a long way to alleviating this problem.
At present, the merchant’s only way of controlling the situation is to remove affiliates it deems to operate in the voucher code area and we cannot stop this. However, we will always do everything possible to help affiliates who want to work with a programme via their other sites. This really needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis, depending on the merchant and the affiliate involved.
If an affiliate has been suspended from a programme because they operate a vouchercode site, but wish to work with the merchant via other sites, all they need to do is contact us and provide their affiliate id, the merchant name and the other websites they are using. We will then speak to the merchant about allowing the affiliate back onto the programme, providing the affiliate agrees to not put any affiliate links on their vouchercode website. As part of this process, we will also review the referring pages for the affiliate’s previous sales to see if they are indeed using other websites to promote the merchant, and will do so on an ongoing basis.
Obviously, we will provide all the advice and information necessary for the merchant to make an informed decision on whether they wish to work with the affiliate, but the final decision will be the merchant’s.
If any affiliate wishes to contact us regarding this please send an email to accountdevelopment@affiliatewindow.com or they can email me directly at aclements@affiliatewindow.com
Kind Regards
Anthony
“If merchants do not see vouchercode websites as part of their affiliate strategy….”
VOUCHER WEBSITES!!!!!!
WEBSITES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bang on! Nail on the head! Correct terminonoly!!! Not a voucher affiliate but a voucher website!
Now, can I ask… does Affiliate Window have details of every single person who has an iCodes or Promotions whitelabel site? Are they therefore treated in exactly the same way as those of us who have our own backend solution?
What about those who have “content sites”… who are allowed to promote voucher codes for merchants such as GLTC. Therefore these merchants are fast turning “content sites” into “voucher sites” that should also be liable to the same rules and regulations. Where do you draw the line?
Hi,
The lines are very much drawn by the merchants. They are the ones that will decide the value of vouchercode websites and whether or not they want to work with them. We will assist by providing the merchant with all the necessary information and advice, but ultimately it is a merchant’s decision as to whether they work with a particular affiliate.
I agree that the lines are blurred somewhat and distinctions are difficult to make. To be classed as a true content site I feel the user has to be attracted to the site for a reason other than picking up a discount code.
The ICodes example is tricky. We know many of our affiliates that take content from ICodes and I don’t really think there has been enough clarity on the subject. I have actually asked ICodes for a meeting to understand more about the platform. At the moment, ICodes has been treated as a vouchercode website in a number of policy decisions on the subject.
I think one thing we can all agree on is this is a difficult issue and one that will not be ironed out without significant input from all sides. Therefore, I welcome anyones thoughts on the subject and you are welcome to contact me on the details below.
Kind Regards
Anthony Clements
Tel: 020 7553 0353
Email: aclements@affiliatewindow.com
Thanks for clarifying and look forward to what Awin will introduce in June.
As for iCodes being treated as a voucher code website, does this decision apply to every affiliate who has a whitelabel version of iCodes and/or Promotions.co.uk? I hope the answer is Yes, so that others aren’t treated in the more favourable way, and therefore one rule that applies to all, making it a level playing field.
The icodes model lets the individual users enter their network IDs so unless affiliates open a seperate accounts ANY affiliate is potentially a code affiliate.
From the network POV it’s easy and convenient to hammer the code sites which dominate the SERPs and forget the minnows – at the end of the day they’re still contributing to the network profit margin and they can claim to have done their job.
Effectively the most successful code sites are being forced to give some of their profit away to up and coming code sites.