CPMs: Slow Trip on the Pain Train

Recently there have been a lot of articles regarding the decline in the popularity of CPM and Banner (read brand advertising) on the web. I think its obvious by now that the scarcity model that drove impression based pricing in TV, Radio, and Print doesn’t work on the web now because its a two-way channel that anyone can contribute to.
Surely this will continue to be unsettling for many publishers that are used to this model, but their inventory is still of value and usable with performance pricing, so there shouldn’t be too much panic on the train at this point. Advertising has finally evolved to what marketers have always sought (at least on the web): Pay for performance.

There is nothing wrong with this evolution for online media and there is a lot of money to be made (look at GOOG). If publishers can learn to live with the new rules of performance pricing and become experts in inventory management, they will learn lessons from this evolution in pricing and potentially apply it to older media channels.

If publishers are willing to evolve and admit that these pricing changes will dramatically change the model, then there can be a smooth transition. However, if they continue to try to foist old models on new media, then its going to be a multi-stop local with pain in every car.

Here are a few of those link referenced above:

Silicon Alley Insider: Online Display Ads Will Fall Sharply In 2009

Life2Beta: The slow death of CPM on the web

ClicketyClack: Thoughts On The Display Ad Market And Monetization

What do you all think?

RS# 24 – What is the PMA?

Over the last couple of months we’ve been hearing rumblings about the need for an organization around performance marketing. After several starts and stops, the Performance Marketing Alliance is giving it a go. We caught up with Rebecca Madigan, the Founding Organizer as well as some folks from EPage and Vertive to talk about why the PMA matters and how they are going to gain some credibility.

Download or Watch in Quicktime: iPod | Hi-Definition

RS #22 – Chris Henger of Google

With Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick Performics, many feel that they validated affiliate marketing overnight. We sat down with Chris Henger of Google Affiliate Network (formerly Performics) and asked him about Google’s culture of innovation, the state of the industry, and his his involvement in the Performance Marketing Alliance (PMA).

Download or Watch in Quicktime: iPod | Hi-Definition

You Had Me at Hello – If Jerry Maguire Were an Affiliate Marketer

By: Christopher Smith & Scott Parent

SHOW ME THE MONEY! SHOW ME THE MONEY!

Ok.. now that we got that out of the way… yes, affiliate marketing is about making money. We all work to make money to provide for the things that are required in life, and to acquire the things that we desire, whether it is a flat screen TV, a trip to Portugal, or a nice dinner out with friends. Let’s also be clear about another thing: we are just like you. We have seen the same things you’ve seen in this industry. We are not satisfied. It’s time for a change.

Before we lay out our plan for change we need to establish a few things. Many hours have been spent crafting sentences, deleting whole paragraphs (similar to balling up a sheet of paper and tossing across the room) and sitting in a hotel room in Boston recounting the previous few days. You see, we have recently attended the Affiliate Summit East in Boston and everything we thought we knew about this industry was tossed into Boston Harbor like our forefathers did decades before as if the Queen of England wanted to tax the sales of Wu-Yi Tea.

We have been to many conferences in our combined careers. The string of 3-6 letter acronyms synonymously representing technology, entertainment, consumer products, music, big pharma, porn, and yes, an occasional educational event. Our frequent flyer miles pinpoint the destinations – Austin, SF, NYC, LA, Chicago, Vegas, St. Louis, Memphis, Cleveland and of course, Boston. How fitting is it that the place that hosted one of the most notable boat parties in history was also host to our company’s boat party that ignited this manifesto.

We should also point out that we work for a company that is firmly rooted in the industry that is struggling with it’s identity, it’s soul, and for reasons to wake up every day and go out and kick some ass. Who we work for doesn’t really matter, because you can swap out one company name for the next and we believe you won’t even notice a difference. What is important is that we work in marketing. As part of our job we speak with, and listen to, hundreds of people every year about what is wanted, what is missing, what would be nice, and what needs to change in the affiliate marketing industry. As part of our job we tick and tie numbers, we graph out trends and project long tail, groundswell, and shark jumps. We believe that we’ve identified quite possibly the most important thing that needs to be recognized, acknowledged and understood in our industry.

We want credibility for the work we do every day. We want to stop lying to each other and to ourselves. We want to hold our head up high when someone asks us what we do for a living. We want to be able to say “hello”.

In order to understand what is driving this “statement” or “manifesto,” you need to understand a bit more background. When we entered this industry we were told that “all affiliates care about is revenue.” Revenue and T-shirts. From what we’ve been told ad-nauseam, potential customers don’t care what we say as long as they hear something about higher revenue, faster payouts, and exclusive deals. These things should be looked upon not as differentiators, these things should be look upon as commodities, as common and expected as out-of-date magazines in the doctors office, the crying child on an oversold airplane, or a dail-tone when you pick up a phone. This takes us back to the point we want to make.

We all want to belong. And it’s not just about money. It’s about community. It’s about validation. It’s about respect.

At no other conference have we ever had more people remember who we were. We’ve had people in the affilaite marketing industry cross the street to extend their hand and say “hello – I remember you from ad:tech SF last year” or “hey – you bought me a drink at eTail in Chicago and if you are free I would love to return the favor.” We know what you’re thinking right now; they are friendly because they are getting ready to sell us something, ply us for information or switch their draft beer order to a dirty Kettle when we insist on buying drinks. But you are wrong. We are looking for our group. We are acknowledging our own. We are reaching out and saying “hello” because we want to. Because we need to.

Now, please do not confuse this with thinking that we are saying we need friends. We all have plenty of friends. Most of our friends aren’t in this business. But we are connectors. We are deal makers. We are believers in each other or we wouldn’t be doing what we are doing.

HELP ME, HELP YOU.

Here is what we are proposing – If you want to differentiate yourself as a performance marketing network, you need to provide more personal attention to your customers. They can’t be looked at solely as a pipeline to revenue. Ask yourself, when was the last time you looked at the revenue numbers and picked up the phone and called that under-performing affiliate and offered some assistance? When is the last time you spoke to an advertiser and worked with them to make their offer unique and engaging? We spend such a large amount of time asking where the money is, but we spend very little time really trying to differentiate ourselves with relevant content and real innovation. This industry is extremely dependent on both the publisher and the advertiser, yet we rarely put the two together in the same room and the same conversation. Why? Advertisers understand their product or service better than anyone. Publishers know what their audiences want. Why not collaborate and give your campaign the best possible chance for success?

Affiliates have a wealth of knowledge about the industry, based on both their successes and failures. They are, in fact, the best teachers for success. Yet, when was the last time our industry invited them to participate in a conversation about the future of the space, where this industry should be going, and how to provide that change? When was the last time a group of publishers sat down together and discussed how they work without fear of “stealing” each others’ methods? There needs to be a better level of trust, collaboration, and cohesiveness if this industry is going to continue to grow and establish more credibility. We need a better sense of true community – one where we are willing to engage in dialogue that is helpful to each other.

So there you have it. In a nutshell, we believe that the affiliate marketing industry wants to belong, wants community and wants to be a functional group. Did anyone else see what we saw in Boston? Has anyone else felt the need or desire to change this sense of mistrust and dysfunction? Let’s make a pact to make a real effort. We can do it better. We can do it with more integrity, community, and transparency.

So in the words of Jerry Maguire – who’s coming with us?

Interview with Jeff Molander – Part I

Our own Jivan Manhas sat down with Affiliate Marketing guru, Jeff Molander to talk about the state of the pay-for-performance industry. In this first part of the interview, Jeff shares his thoughts on the lack of innovation in the industry and the perception of affiliate marketing in traditional circles.

Jivan: Why do you feel there has been a lack of innovation in the performance marketing industry in the past 5 years?

Jeff: Lack of innovation you say? Some of the industry’s most prominent names would argue that presumption. Unfortunately, I don’t think they argue it well. This worries me in that VP’s and Directors (the folks who hire affiliate managers, networks/service providers) see through it and laugh at us. They don’t take us seriously and can you blame them? Is that where we want to be as an industry? Innovation is about how companies leverage new technology to inject greater value into their customer relationship. It’s not about using technology for technology’s sake or pretending there’s value using illogical examples. It’s time we “grow up” but there are many in the industry who are very reluctant to do just that. They relish in their ability to partner with major brands, shuttle traffic and remain largely anonymous. Indeed, it’s cultural and when anyone (ie. Jason Calacanis) even approaches the subject of “maturing” there’s a landslide of backlash. My point is that this cultural backwardness doesn’t foster innovation. To mature into a serious business is actually viewed negatively.

There are other reasons why innovation hasn’t been occurring. False promises to advertisers, as an example. Infighting among all the middle-men — affiliates, affiliates of affiliates, search engines, affiliate or CPA networks. Advertisers are not to be left out, of course. Many times over-focus on hard ROI prevents risk-taking and empowerment of front-line managers. In most cases, I think affiliate managers are set up to fail. They’re given a goal of “create X revenue” but in reality that’s not the goal at all. At year’s end they find out that the goal post moved because of all the “bad actor” affiliates or commissions that were reversed for various reasons — reasons coming from the CFOs office (channel attribution, so-called “cannibalization” issues). Affiliate managers feel handcuffed in many instances. There needs to be a better balance between taking risks and maximizing revenue — one that fosters innovation.

So… considering all of this… why would we expect to see any advertiser-side innovation? There’s simply no demand for it. Or, Jivan, perhaps I should say that demand has been smothered (heh, heh) by powerful incumbents (i.e. CJ, PerformicsDoubleclick/Google, Linkshare et al). Yes… I think I should say that this may very well be the case given how innovation demands risk and risk-taking, broadly speaking, don’t flourish in large corporate environments. Incumbent networks have done “just enough” to appease advertisers in terms of some of affiliate marketing’s inherent flaws but overall they’ve not addressed the main concerns for advertisers: control, cost flexibility, scale. They’ve not innovated nor encouraged affiliates to innovate. If they did it would require some pain… some serious adjustment to things like revenue models.

I’ll be blunt. In many ways, mainstream advertisers have given up on us. It’s a real problem. Today, they’ve convinced themselves that they’re “just fine” with performance marketing being a “necessary evil” and operate it at a flat-line growth curve… or not operate it at all. Some are shutting down CPA affiliate programs or cutting them to pieces. Oh… how I long for the late 90’s when affiliate marketing was so sexy and CEO’s could be found stirring martini’s, comparing the sizes of their affiliate programs!

Ok, seriously… my point here is there’s a forced, *perceived* feel-good about the CPA/affiliate portion of performance marketing (among advertisers). It fosters the stagnation — the lack of innovation you reference, Jivan. Advertisers realize CPA affiliate programs aren’t perfect in “real life”. Yet they HAVE found comfort in the “performance-ness” of CPA affiliate programs. Sure… affiliate programs don’t scale very well (to make more you really do, as it turns out, need to spend more on program management!). Nor can advertisers get very creative when paying affiliate partners, etc. Yet they’ve learned to live with it. They’ve “settled” (for less than the initial rosy, unrealistic, promise). Hell, nobody likes to settle.

This rather “false love affair” (for lack of a better term) with CPA affiliate marketing is problematic when it comes to spurring innovation. It creates an environment that fosters a rather lax, “well, we’ll just learn to live with the deficiencies” attitude. There’s no pressure to improve upon practices, technologies.

Advertisers don’t take us seriously anymore for some fairly good reasons. First, the love affair with affiliate marketing was initiated by networks making what turned out to be false promises. You know, “free branding and pay-outs only when the desired action occurs.” All that babble. Not to mention tipping the scale toward the advertiser broadly speaking. They’ve been in total control here — it was a set-up to confrontation. The terms were too stacked and many affiliates took it as a challenge.

The other thing that’s got advertisers feeling uneasy is how opportunistic, innovative and AGGRESSIVE affiliates have been. Hence, affiliate marketing is that pain in the rear… that thing you can’t control. Also, I think advertisers feel a bit of shame in having such a hands-off attitude about launching affiliate programs that have zero stewardship (no rules) and signing deals with networks that have an incentive to drive sales at all costs — including fraud! Hence, today, it’s relegated to the Junior Leagues of online marketing. It doesn’t get much respect given the reputation it’s earned itself. Who’s fault is it? Who cares really… I’m just reporting the news. Let’s fix it!

But how do we do that? Where to start? I include Google and pay-per-click in considering the answer, Jivan. From click fraud to relatively garbage traffic (at the same premium price) emanating from parked domains and “Made for AdSense” sits (a GROWING business). Performance marketing is — when you’re forced to look at the data — a cost of doing business that advertisers can feel moderately good about… if they work hard at it. It’s still kinda… you know… kinda… eeeew. Yet it’s not so bad if they consider traditional (non-Web) media (how expensive it is). In doing so, they look past some of the pitfalls. This part has to be fixed FIRST in my opinion.

In my opinion, it’s time for a new promise for CPA affiliate marketing. A promise that involves something innovative beyond a network making a coupon distribution deal with Yahoo or MSN… or buying up successful affiliates (owning the distribution). It’s not 1998 anymore. Why are we clinging to that same, silly promise? It’s one that advertisers don’t assign value to. The affiliate shake-out is over, search arbitrage is all but dead and Google is ‘going direct’ on a bullet. So whatcha gonna do about it? What are WE going to do about it? I say, it’s time to innovate… or die.

I should point out that affiliate-side innovation has been stifled by the fact that CPA affiliate marketing really does revolve around search at the end of the day. We’re all very busy grabbing for customers in the same place — search. Back in 2000-2001 we realized that search was where we needed to be at Performics. How? By looking at what affiliates were doing in the space. We were first to convert into a search (arbitrage) company. Performics essentially became an affiliate and cut out the affiliates… cut them out completely from grabbing all the candy (brand keywords/terms). Dozens of agencies followed. Now we see similar situations where networks like Linkshare are busting up deals like the one JP Werlin (BargainBetty.com) had with MSN Shopping and buying distribution (Mezimedia+Valueclick/CJ). Is this an environment that breeds innovation? Not really.

Now what about the approach Zanox is taking with its innovation summit? Hmm… a kinder, gentler and non-competitive (to its affiliates and advertisers) affiliate network.

Jivan: Wow, so you have an opinion on this? (laughs) How do you feel the performance marketing industry is perceived by traditional marketing executives?
Jeff: Well… we’re going through growing pains. We all know it’s an issue — the “reputation problem.” First, we’ve got to consider that this “transformative” state we’re in is typical and has been happening throughout time in business. It’s just like the industrial revolution — only today we live in the Information Age.

Ok… no excuse. To answer your question: I think they look down on us and I’ll back that up.

Look at how advertisers talk about affiliate programs in the most public of settings — at the Internet Retailer show last month. Look how advertisers talk about affiliate marketing in specific terms (fair, focused on the numbers) but also in terms of how they feel about it. I’ll ask that readers please resist the temptation to over-react and over-personalize (as the affiliate community has). I’ve been talking about this for YEARS so it’s not like affiliates haven’t been warned. Also, I continue to be disappointed at the lack of critical thinking in our industry. Thankfully we have sites like RelevantlySpeaking that serve as a haven to open, honest, authentic discussion.

So — why the nagging “reputation problem?” Historically speaking, advertisers have been burned — by SEO “experts”, their affiliates, heck even by Google and Yahoo. Both send fraudulent traffic and have historically asked advertisers to trust the “black box” (their algorithm). Advertisers have watched *how* companies like Google operate… how they automatically opted advertisers into the AdSense network as a single example. Oh, and let’s not forget how Google releases an API — the very essence of which is “open” in nature — and then slaps on a relatively un-known restriction to developers that prohibits them from developing tools that foster diversification of advertisers’ ad spend. The list goes on and on. It’s a long one! My point is this: advertisers are wising up and this kind of means of doing business doesn’t help the performance marketing sector. It boils down to business ethics and the “selectiveness” of what information we share with advertisers, when and why. I call the manifestation of this entire phenomenon the Ignorance Economy.

What advertisers don’t know IS being used against them. In their rush to acquire customers they’ve adopted bright, shiny digital things. Trouble is, they’re never what they appear to be in the end. We (in the industry) have been tremendously opaque about the HOW behind what we do. From free Web analytics tools (Google Analytics) to sneaky auto-opting in to low-value/high-priced products to hiding client approval of “black hat” techniques into contracts… it all comes back to bite us. It’s a short-term wave we’re riding and some are riding it better than others.

Another example… comparison engines. Advertisers MUST work with them because their competitors are but in the end they truly HATE being price shopped! Retailers hate it so much that they sometimes hide the price itself (”click to see price”) which forces the click and tanks conversion rates. Aaargh! They can’t win. But wait — there’s more! As retailers have caught on to pay-per-click ads in Google and Yahoo they’ve found that it’s been a primary source of customers for guess who? That’s right — their CPA partners. How do they do the voodoo? Whaddayaknow, trademarks and brands! Arbitrage. Ask for them to stop out of competitive concerns all you want, they’ll just run ads at night and on weekends when you’re not looking. And the beat goes on. Then we have comparison shopping engines locking up all the performance data — not providing API and optimization tools for advertisers. Most just don’t provide them. Why? Because they can get away with it… until recently but the tone has been set.

With comparison shopping, it’s a lot like running an affiliate program in a fast-and-loose manner (where affiliates take advantage of all the low-hanging fruit without your permission). It’s a frustration point. Learning hurts and once advertisers have learned it’s too late — they’re entrenched and too scared to make change. Sometimes that fear is justified sometimes it’s not. In either case it builds this little thing we call resentment. Never good in relationships.

Not to play the blame game but let’s be honest — advertisers need to take their share of it. Those who operate affiliate programs at the trench level have no problem looking the other way at the inherent deficiencies involved with CPA affiliate programs; however, the bean counters always show up to spoil the party. They often make adjustments to tactics and this usually involves restricting affiliates… reducing their ability to compete with the advertiser in the same places for the same customer using the same bait. Look to multi-channel direct marketing companies and you’ll see the trend. Companies have all but shut down (and some HAVE shut down) their CPA affiliate programs — relegating them to a few dozen cash back and coupon sites. Of course, advertisers have a difficult time feeling good about those too given their discounting nature.

In the end, it’s not just about ethics and how advertisers feel. How we’re perceived as an industry is getting down to brass tacks. It’s about the numbers and ROI. CPA affiliate programs have undisputed effectiveness but what about efficiency? That’s where the action is lately and that’s where companies like ChannelAdvisor, Mercent, Omniture and others are aiming guns… but that’s another subject. My point is that the Web’s inherent interactivity is beginning to force internal conflicts between “artsy marketers” and “scientific finance” pros. We’re kinda stuck in the middle. In the end the performance (CPC+CPA) channel houses active buyers and in that sense it smells like a rose.

Finally, how do consumers feel about us? Or shall I call them customers? We need to consider that too… and some brilliant minds in our industry are doing so.

CHECK BACK SOON FOR PART II OF JIVAN’S DISCUSSION WITH JEFF.
——-
Jeff Molander is CEO of performance marketing advisory firm, Molander & Associates Inc. where he provides executive-level guidance on digital marketing and media to multi-channel retailers, entrepreneurs and investment firms. He’s also a principal of The Partner Maker LLC, a system used by affiliate managers to drive increased revenue through better affiliate management & communications. He is co-author of forthcoming book, Paying for Performance and helped found digital marketing services company, Performics Inc.; today a division of Google. He can be reached at jeff@jeffmolander.com.

The Design Revolution Rolls On: The Role of Design in Performance Marketing Offer Differentiation

The subject of good design has been popping up a lot recently both in our business and out on the web.

In 2007 Apple went from 0% to 27% market share in the smart phone market via the introduction of well designed hardware and intuitive software that the average person can access and utilize. Further, through both software and hardware design differentiation Apple maintains a gross margin of 33.6% versus Dell’s GM of 18.5% .

A nice visual analogy of Apple’s design approach versus Microsoft’s is depicted below:

An even more interesting stat comes from a January Reuters article:

In data provided to the New York Times, Google disclosed that it received more traffic from iPhones this Christmas than from any other mobile device, despite owning only 2 percent of the smart-phone market and less than 1 percent of the overall mobile-phone market. That means that while fewer people own iPhones, those who do possess the device use it to access the Internet much more than those with competing handsets.

Apple is essentially a design company. Their hedgehog principle is good design. They innovate and command market share by making technology simple to use by everyone. The simple fact that both of my parents are making active use of the web, web services and multiple (and synced) devices illustrates that with good design, you can teach an old dog new tricks (sorry Mom and Dad!).

As the world becomes more technically complex, design is commanding a more important role in our lives. Tech has been notoriously bad at making its amazing advances and productivity tools accessible by a mass audience. This is changing rapidly. The devices of yesterday are becoming real products before they come to market by necessity…the market is demanding it. William Davidow wrote a great book about the difference between devices and well designed products years ago…and its a worthy read for any marketer, product manager, engineer or CEO.

From a January article in the Journal:

With all the fuss, PC makers have begun hiring more people with degrees in industrial design and related disciplines — and listening to their opinions. “We found people designing from the outside in, not the inside out,” says Mooly Eden, vice president and general manager of Intel’s mobile systems group. “This was the revolution.”

So as we go about marketing our customers campaigns and offers via our Advaliant performance marketing platform, we are seeing the fruits of this ‘differentiation by design’ ethos.

Our customers come to us with a simple goal in mind: acquiring new customers. Many of them have their own creative that they wish to use and some of it is very well designed and the user experience is well thought out. Generally, we have seen these campaigns perform better than the lesser designed ones that make their way onto the platform.

Recently, we have been taking some of the offers that don’t convert well into our design studio and creating an alternative design direction and user experience (with client approval, of course). We then split-test these offers versus the original. Nine times out of ten the re-design performs better. The reason: we have taken the time and effort to make sure each campaign is designed to more simply communicate the benefit to the customer.

Not surprisingly, our expertise in the area of helping our advertisers generate more appealing campaigns has kept their loyalty and engagement with our platform. Further, because the campaigns perform better, our affiliates and publishers are happier because better designed campaigns help improve their bottom lines.

While direct response performance marketing can be a complex process, the same principals in the use of design to differentiate has enabled us to deliver our business constituents more value from our platform.

Got any other examples of good design making a “direct to bottom line” difference? Please share below!

VRM and Performance Marketing

What’s one thing that advertisers and customers can agree on? Advertising Spend?

Some control shifts that are happening in this age of customer empowerment are being classified as Vendor Relationship Management (VRM), which is basically a movement to enable customers to have more control in managing their relationships with companies who are attempting to sell them products or services. The idea is very much tied to the data portability/ownership movement and is increasingly being tied to pay-for-performance marketing. Harvard Law School is organizing initiatives to move VRM forward for a host of reasons including privacy, control and economics. These are obvious benefits for customers. Conversely, advertisers are reluctant to give up their control. But there is one thing that both Customers and Advertisers can agree on – a better way to spend $1 billion of wasted money. Here are some interesting views of the costs associated with ineffective advertising and the increasing role that pay-for-performance online marketing will play in the new world.

At least $1B of what’s spent on online advertising is completely wasted and is unsustainable. Advertisers are going to eventually wake up and recognize that unless it’s a highly visible placement, banners get you largely nowhere.

Some claim this number is actually as high as $100 billion throughout all channels.

The Cost-Per-Action/Pay-for-Performance business model of Affiliate Marketing is likely to continue to transform the ad industry, significantly reducing billions in unnecessary expenses, including the $1B wasted on unseen display ads in Rubel’s analysis.

Perhaps this money could be spent on adding value to a customer’s lives and on truly building win-win relationships. Well, customers and advertisers have long accepted advertiser money for funding enhancements to customer’s lives – so this isn’t a stretch. The question is, how do we track it to a specific customer reward level in this fragmented media environment? Just to think a bit out of the box — would there ever be a complete flip, where systems track what advertisers are doing for customers – all from a customer-centric POV? What would that performance model look like – advertising and loyalty per enhancement? How could customer-owned data models enable more effective advertising/loyalty programs and an exchange of what customers and companies both want in a relationship? Tracking is a unique feature of online media – but customers hold control over advertisers by limiting how and where they are tracked. Customers owning their own tracking/data and embracing performance exchanges is potentially much more efficient for both companies and customers.

Just food for thought.

Check out more on VRM on Harvard’s website.

Google Validates Affiliate Marketing Channel

Google announced today that they are launching the “Google Affiliate Network”. This further integrates and consolidates Performics after Google acquired DoubleClick Performics. Most importantly this is a significant validation of the effectiveness and viability of the affiliate marketing channel.

The integration marks the beginning of the next evolution in affiliate marketing through consolidation and innovation. The industry needs to evolve as performance marketing becomes a very important channel for advertisers and publishers. Additionally, current economic conditions have mandated the need for more effective spending. I think this will create a new round of industry consolidation as it moves from ad networks and exchanges into the affiliate marketing community. Accountability is king right now, and performance marketing offers the best ROI across multiple distribution channels such as email, search, display, mobile and social media.

The most important aspect of this announcement is that it moves the industry away from the “network” and closer to being platform-centric. We firmly believe the next evolution of performance marketing is about open, modular and multi dimensional platforms as we move away from one dimensional networks.

Here is the announcement from Chris Henger, group product manager for the Google Affiliate Network.

We are pleased to introduce Google Affiliate Network . Effective Monday, June 30, 2008, DoubleClick Performics Affiliate will operate as Google Affiliate Network. The integration with Google’s brand is a reflection of efforts to quickly assimilate our business and teams, as well as reinforce Google’s commitment to the Affiliate channel. Together with our new colleagues at Google we are creating new opportunities for monetization, expansion and innovation in Affiliate Marketing.

Within the next couple of weeks you will see some exciting changes to the user interface reflecting the new brand. The platform will continue to be hosted at www.ConnectCommerce.com, but will eventually migrate to a google.com product url.

As noted in earlier communications, DoubleClick Performics’ Search operations are being spun off and sold to a third party. While many advertisers have relationships with both DoubleClick Performics’ Affiliate and Search, there have always been separate account teams and product-specific specialists servicing clients’ search and affiliate programs. These teams remain intact. While the formal separation will occur when the Search business is sold, the businesses are functionally separate today.

We are proud of what we achieved as Performics and this name change signals a new milestone. Google provides world-class resources and enables us to continue to attract the best talent to support our advertisers and publishers. Now as part of Google we have an exciting and unprecedented opportunity to advance our industry. We remain committed to ensuring you receive the quality service you have come to expect from us.

We appreciate your business and look forward to doing great things together.

Sincerely,

Chris Henger

Group Product Manager
Google Affiliate Network

Things I Learned About Marketing While Watching Enter The Dragon

So last night I dusted off one of my favorite movies, the 1973 classic martial arts film Enter The Dragon. While watching it I began to see some great marketing wisdom in the dialog and found it be extremely timely and quite relevant concerning a current project I am engage in. I thought I would share with you the highlights of Enter The Dragon: Competitive Marketing.

“Do not concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory”

Too often we have tight timelines, many moving parts, multiple contributors, and general the general chaos and distraction of life surrounding us while we are getting our go to market plans ready.It is very easy to focus solely on the tasks at hand with out stepping back and looking at the big picture. Often that picture is pretty fantastic, even while the current project you are working on may be a pain in the ass. Don’t forget that you are part of a team, and a business unit, and company all striving for the same thing – success in business and a great quality of life, however that is defined by both your industry, your company, and your family. Look up from your desk, take a walk, talk with a colleague and acknowledge the goodness in your efforts.

“Boards don’t hit back”

Practice. Practice. Practice. and then practice some more. Run your presentation by a group of peers before the keynote. Double check that persona one more time before running the scenario. Go back through notes, your email, your gut checks. Because there comes a time when you will be faced with real competition and must respond in real-time, to real threats, and must fight real battles in your market space, or at a closing meeting with a new client, or with the CMO of your company about how you think that a solution based positioning isn’t really an advantage for the market pentetration of the product and wont differentiate it in an already over crowded…. anyway. I digress.

Han: “Your style is unorthodox”
WIlliams: “But effective”

Many times we have to look deeper than our established bag of tricks, especially in a market that is fast moving, constantly changing, and that requires creativity, confidence and stamina to win. And not just win once, but to win repeatedly. I have always considered myself to be a bright guy, and the smartest thing that I do is to surround myself with people smarter than me. (or is it I. Smarter than I.. have to call my wife on that.)

Anyway, the point that Williams was making is that one should strive to be effective no matter what the method of action may require. I call on those around me to shake up my snow globe of ideas and see if they find patterns or data or insights that I may have missed. The way we finally get to a result may be a little odd, but those results are not.

“Never take your eyes off your opponent, even when you bow”

You never know the exact moment of opportunity and must be ready to either strike or defend in real-time. Defensibility in the market space is a one of the primary reasons certain startups don’t get handed their lunch by the fourth week of school. Great companies are constantly looking to defend and strengthen their position at every opportunity. And its not so much the “best offense is a good defense” mentality. It’s more to the point of be aware of your surroundings. If you are looking to gain a position in the market, you are damn certain your competition is looking to do the same. Just be sure not to get caught looking. Be prepared to act.

“Provide your customers with products they need and, uh, charge a little bit to stimulate your market and before you know it customers come to depend on you, I mean really need you.

Ok, so in the flick they were talking about drug smuggling and corruption, but its the classic case of creating a need in the market, fanning it with desire, and capturing the trust of your clients. During my storied career as a tech sales guy I never really sold the product (which might be why I eventually was fired.) What I did sell though was need – need for the product or service that we could provide. And I would compare that to my competition, noble warriors all, but just not quite as good as what we had to offer. And then I would show them how they could trust me, and that I had our mutual best interest in hand. Oh, and if they bought now I would take off an additional 12% on signing. Need + desire + dependency. Its not just for romance novels anymore.

“You must attend the morning ritual in uniform.”

Come prepared. Most reasons we miss that window of opportunity is that we don’t recognize it as it is coming toward us, see it only as its passing by, or see it early but just cant get ready to anything about it. Come to work ready to work. Go to a house party ready to party. Be present and appropriate and provide both context and content for whatever you are doing. And that goes for your marketing plan as well. A key word here is ritual. Practice, reverence, and habit can be key to developing a winning marketing strategy.

Enter The Dragon is only one of many examples of films that provide nuggets of introspection and learning within the dialog. Now its up to you. I would love to hear about your movie insights and how they align with your industry. Post them in the comments. If they are especially good, I’ll send you the movie of your choice as a “thank you”.

Bonus points if you can define Market Readiness from The Big Lebowski. Have fun.

Affiliate Marketing Compromises

Who has business partners that they can’t contact and build relationships with? How many people get financial statements with the understanding that they are only 90% accurate? How many marketers want to build campaigns in one channel and not be able to leverage them in another? How many companies want to be forced into paying fees for services that ineffectively bridge gaps that are actually created by the service provider? How many companies want to be forced into silos and high switching costs as the result of a vendor’s strategy? Who wants redundancy and inefficiency due to a lack of standards?

Well, at this point – thousands of advertisers and publishers in the current affiliate marketing models. Or, at least, they are made to accept these compromises.

Why? – I think there are basically two reasons:

1. Affiliate marketing is relatively narrow and under served. It has not gotten the attention that other online channels have had in terms of standardization, technology advancement and channel integration.

2. Vendors and networks that control the market have not needed to evolve because of their clout. They’ve used this clout to create closed networks, proprietary standards and high switching costs. Some changes toward what clients are asking for now, could result in loss of control and revenue.

Are there better ways? – of course! Many networks, vendors and clients are talking about the changes that need to be made, but the industry has still not truly moved toward more accurate tracking, open communication, universal standards, more sophisticated ‘action’ metrics or integrated channel/partner models.

I think that in any industry, customer compromises flag areas from which the next generation of innovators emerge. And that’s where we need to focus as an industry ready for that next evolutionary stage.