New Stats

[slavdogg]

is it me or is there a new trend in affiliate stats program.
making the stats as useless as possible by providing less info and making them harder to use.


not to mention that click counts in most programs have been as useless as shit for a long time.






Last edited by slavdogg at Nov 12 2002, 10:03 PM

[Mike AI]

Slav you are absolutely right!

I send some mailers to people, and the people who run them ICQ me telling how great to conversions are. Like 1 in 40 and such. The thing is they are counting SOOOO poorly that the number is USELESS. That is why I only look at total $$ made for mailers. That is the only number that counts.

But these people come to be telling how great they are conveting, and by their stats they are - but it is BULLSHIT. I will convert 1 in 40 and only make $400 when the mailer averages $3,000. IT REALLY PISSES ME OFF when they haev the nerve to tell me how "Great my conversions are!"

They must think I am stupid....

Needless to say, I so not send these people anymore traffic!

[slavdogg]

mike, its almost like dubming down of webmasters time.

most of the time i no longer care about the hit counts, but fuck some cant even offer good daily stats or combined daily stats and offer hourly stats. What the fuck do i need hourly stats for ? does anyone really care about hourly stats ?

i never ask for much, but decent stats is probably the most important aspect of this biz that many affiliate programs cant provide. I have a feeling programmers write these stats interfaces without knowing what webmasters need and program operators dont take their time to see things from outside the box.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Nov 12 2002, 07:22 PM
Slav you are absolutely right!

I send some mailers to people, and the people who run them ICQ me telling how great to conversions are. Like 1 in 40 and such. The thing is they are counting SOOOO poorly that the number is USELESS. That is why I only look at total $$ made for mailers. That is the only number that counts.

But these people come to be telling how great they are conveting, and by their stats they are - but it is BULLSHIT. I will convert 1 in 40 and only make $400 when the mailer averages $3,000. IT REALLY PISSES ME OFF when they haev the nerve to tell me how "Great my conversions are!"

They must think I am stupid....

Needless to say, I so not send these people anymore traffic!
Send me some more traffic! I swear your conversions will be 1:20 or lower!

:rolleyes:

--edit: hit post without adding my thoughts!--

I agree, I harp on it when I create/run affiliate programs. My last program had a great stats interface (in my humble opinion) so it sort of spoiled me for future ventures. Now I just say 'I want it to look like THAT' when building new affiliate areas, and you're absolutely right most over-the-counter stats are awful. Even most BIG PROGRAM stats are awful! I remember checking riskymail stats and wondering which program I was even in, which links to click, etc. Webmasters get fooled by the outsides of these programs and assume their admin areas will be functional. Not so!

I could write a 10 page book (at most) on how to build an effective stats area, and I'm sure others on here could contribute some wisdom. Now if only programmers would listen...

C.



Last edited by Cal at Nov 12 2002, 08:48 PM

[RawAlex]

My personal favorite is programs that have refering stats, signup stats, but don't match the two together... you have no way to know WHICH approach is selling the site, just which one is sending alot of traffic.

Come on, people, match sales to referals, and we will be able to better market your sites!

Alex <_<

[art]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Nov 12 2002, 10:22 PM
... how great to conversions are. Like 1 in 40 and such. The thing is they are counting SOOOO poorly that the number is USELESS.
If you look around on the boards you see many people quoting their ratio's and comparing different programs based on that (= the sponsor's counts). Telling the truth may not always be in the sponsor's advantage. It's marketing, and many webmasters will fall for it.

I started counting my own clicks years ago. All I need is the number of signups from the sponsors to match my own click counts.

And indeed some don't even give easy daily stats. I wrote a script to fetch Maxcash' stats every day and calculate the difference with the day before, just to get easy access to daily signup counts. (Their news stats system give that number directly now, BTW).

Greetings,

Art

[cj]

Originally posted by slavdogg@Nov 12 2002, 11:40 PM
mike, its almost like dubming down of webmasters time.

most of the time i no longer care about the hit counts, but fuck some cant even offer good daily stats or combined daily stats and offer hourly stats. What the fuck do i need hourly stats for ? does anyone really care about hourly stats ?

i never ask for much, but decent stats is probably the most important aspect of this biz that many affiliate programs cant provide. I have a feeling programmers write these stats interfaces without knowing what webmasters need and program operators dont take their time to see things from outside the box.
>>What the fuck do i need hourly stats for ? does anyone really care about hourly stats ?
---

Well ... you'd be surprised ;-)

I received regular requests for more stats breakdowns .... some people like to see everything broken down hit by hit, minute by minute ;-)

---
I have a feeling programmers write these stats interfaces without knowing what webmasters need and program operators dont take their time to see things from outside the box.
---

you've got that right!
very few programmers have ever worked as webmasters ... and its a hard process of communication between marketing and technical.
And the problem is, what's good for 1 webmaster sucks for another.

I'd regularly have someone ask me for something one day, only to have someone else complain about it the next day. you can't please all the people all the time ;-)

Unless, you use statsremote ;-)

[Mike AI]

Come on, people, match sales to referals, and we will be able to better market your sites!

I think this would be a major innovation. We have the technology to make it happen, so lets get some program people over here or get out the word.



Art, you are right to track all internal traffic, and then as it leaves your network.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by slavdogg@Nov 12 2002, 11:40 PM
mike, its almost like dubming down of webmasters time.

most of the time i no longer care about the hit counts, but fuck some cant even offer good daily stats or combined daily stats and offer hourly stats. What the fuck do i need hourly stats for ? does anyone really care about hourly stats ?

i never ask for much, but decent stats is probably the most important aspect of this biz that many affiliate programs cant provide. I have a feeling programmers write these stats interfaces without knowing what webmasters need and program operators dont take their time to see things from outside the box.
Slav,
FINALLY! everybody realize that the BEST stats EVER were provided by...
SergesCash! (back in a day, when they were e-mailed on the daily basis)

I am glad that FINALLY the Industry sees the light we saw back in 1996 and slowly but surelly adheses to that standard!

nice..............
;-)))

[cj]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Nov 13 2002, 04:04 AM
Come on, people, match sales to referals, and we will be able to better market your sites!

I think this would be a major innovation. We have the technology to make it happen, so lets get some program people over here or get out the word.
consider this request noted ;-)

[art]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Nov 13 2002, 04:08 AM
I am glad that FINALLY the Industry sees the light we saw back in 1996 and slowly but surelly adheses to that standard!
All we have to do now, is wait for a program that stops calling their counts "uniques", and then use the correct term for them: OVUVUNs! :rokk:

Greetings,

Art

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by art+Nov 13 2002, 04:59 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (art @ Nov 13 2002, 04:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Nov 13 2002, 04:08 AM
I am glad that FINALLY the Industry sees the light we saw back in 1996 and slowly but surelly adheses to that standard!
All we have to do now, is wait for a program that stops calling their counts "uniques", and then use the correct term for them: OVUVUNs! :rokk:

Greetings,

Art[/b][/quote]
Art,
this will never happen...everybody are way too cheap to pay me royalties for using my copyrighted materials
;-))

[Almighty Colin]

You can go far in this world by asking people what they want and giving it to them.

One thing I remember about companies like Max Cash and CEN in the early days is that they asked their affiliates what they wanted and then supplied it. I remember quite a few times suggestions would become reality in just a few weeks time. I don't see that so much in companies today.

It seems that today many adult companies have a barrier up between themselves and their affiliates. No doubt an Us vs. Them mentality exists between sponsors and affiliates that has arisen as a result of sponsors having to spend so much time stopping cheaters and program abusers. I've definitely noticed an attitude change in sponsors in the past five years regarding their affiliates.

[art]

Originally posted by Colin@Nov 13 2002, 05:49 AM
It seems that today many adult companies have a barrier up between themselves and their affiliates.
Colin,

I think you are right.

But that is also due to size. Back in the old days, RB would email me asking me to add their banners to my site (and I would refuse, after all he only paid $5 per signup back then, I think! :-)

Maxcash now is so big, and has so many affiliates, it would be impossible to do what they want.

Not to mention that I get the feeling many webmasters nowadays want the sponsor to do everything. They want free hosting, free content, pre-built galleries, weekly overnight payments. I'm surprised they are still willing to go to the bank to cash their checks! :P

Greetings,

Art

[slavdogg]

Serge, if you can believe one of the olderest programs sends me stats by email one or few times a week with only total sign ups # and some some worthless click counts.

based on my own #s it does well

[slavdogg]

>> All we have to do now, is wait for a program that stops calling their counts "uniques", and then use the correct term for them:

Art, fuck uniques,
my favorite programs are the ones that quote RAW #'s
but in reality their raw #'s are about 25% of real RAW.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by slavdogg@Nov 13 2002, 06:44 AM
Serge, if you can believe one of the olderest programs sends me stats by email one or few times a week with only total sign ups # and some some worthless click counts.

based on my own #s it does well
Slav,
I always suspected to be a a visionary myself,
glad you have a confirmation
;-)))

[Almighty Colin]

Art - I think the big programs are doing just fine.

What I'm saying is that I think newer and smaller affiliate programs would stand to gain by asking their affiliates what they need and providing it - as companies like CEN and MaxCash did when they were going through their massive growth.

The real question to ask is this though:

If I were an affiliate, what would make me send more traffic? The big programs already asked that and already do. Many realized that counting the uniques in a manner that reduces the uniques counts (i.e. clicks shaving) therefore increasing signup ratios was better overall for business and not worse.

[slavdogg]

Originally posted by Colin@Nov 13 2002, 07:09 AM
Many realized that counting the uniques in a manner that reduces the uniques counts (i.e. clicks shaving) therefore increasing signup ratios was better overall for business and not worse.


Colin, well the apposite works just as well.
ARS for example, their raw clicks are pretty much right on the money
less than 5% error from my raw #s.

[slavdogg]

Slav,
I always suspected to be a a visionary myself,
glad you have a confirmation
;-)))


Serge, wanna buy some traffic ? :)

i have more traffic now than i can chew

[art]

Originally posted by slavdogg@Nov 13 2002, 07:14 AM
Colin, well the apposite works just as well.
ARS for example, their raw clicks are pretty much right on the money
less than 5% error from my raw #s.
But do you think that is better for "overall business" as Colin said?

What if they shaved off 30% of the clicks and showed better ratios as a result? How many webmasters would actually think ARS is now suddenly converting better?

ARS click counts are indeed very close to the truth, my click counts show similar results to yours. But I've seen webmasters compare their ARS ratios to Topbucks ratios, and Topbucks only counts about one third (!) of my raw clicks.

I don't know how many webmasters can be fooled that way. It might well be better overall to just shave clicks..

Greetings,

Art

[sarettah]

Good Afternoon Oprano...

saw this thread and figured I would jump in....

I am a programmer by trade and have just in the last year or so started setting up free sites and tgps...

What you guys are saying about the programmers is right....

We do not have the webmastering experience to write the stats you want... Unless you define what you want for us.

I worked for one of the big boys in adult for several years... My primary job was writing up stats report programs... These were not for affiliates, they were for the New York office... They defined what they wanted, we gave it to them, no clue as to what they wanted it for, no clue as to the significance of what we were reporting for the most part.

One of the projects I worked on, right before the layoffs, was a dialer affiliate reporting program. Someone in New York defined what the database should look like... Someone from the marketing branch of the company decided what the reports would look like and decided that they would be in excel.

Someone in our branch decided who all would be involved writing it....

One meeting of just our branch to talk about it, given a deadline of two weeks and we were off..

Needless to say, it was a piece of crap. Took forever to compile the data from the extremely over-normalized database (I think it was like 54 tables total that had to be read to get a check amount)... But they went live with it, that was two years ago... I was poking around two weeks ago, and it looked to me like the fucking dinosaur was still being used.....

Now, if instead of that, if we had instead had a meeting of several of the affiliates, then had meetings with the New York boys and the marketing department and had gotten a clear pisture of what everyone needed, then we would have been able to produce a decent piece of software....

Unfortunately this is the trend....

Back in the day, when I first got in to the computer business (1974...damn I'm old...eeek) If someone asked me to design an app for them, I insisted on coming in and watching them do there job for a while... That way, I ahd an idea of what the app would be used for, what efficiencies could be gained, etc....

anymore, it is... "Hey, I need an affiliates stst report"...programmer answer: "whats that"... management answer: "numbers for the affiliates....can I have it tomorrow".. Programmers answer: "sure (aint nothing takes over 24hrs to write).."but first...um...what's an affiliate?"

[Hooper]

Not to toot my own horn but i think quickbuck offers all the features you guys are commenting on/requesting.. including matching referrals directly to sales yada yada.

done tooting :D

[slavdogg]

Hooper, i agree your stats do kick ass dude.
I would say they are as good as ARS's, but are actually better formated.


now if you would only fix the payout issue i have ( you know what i'm reffering to) than i would say you have a top of the line proggy thats easy to use.