http://blogs.business2.com/sloan/200...s_test_co.html

Relevant Quote: "The change, which is the model embraced by new ad networks like Turn, would have an even bigger effect on domainers whose pages are filled with ads relevant to their domain name. Plenty of these names are straight generic names, some clearly are piggybacking on a company or product's trademark, others are typos. The searcher gets there by typing directly into the address bar. Now, a fraction of those people will see a relevant ad and click, making Google and the domainer money. But it seems the entire economics would have to change if this were on a pay-per-action basis. Advertisers would need to be convinced that it's worth them paying far more for a transaction. In short, they'd receive far fewer hits that converted to sales, but those hits would be far more valuable. And without boosting what advertisers pay, the domainers will be left in a pinch. Say what you want about domainers--they often deserve the sleazy label they get -- but they do provide a ton of traffic matching customers with advertisers."

This should have started with the last statement which is said with sarcasm.

I don't follow the logic in that - at the end of the day, if a domainer has a domain that receives parties able and willing to make a purchase then the value is there.

Domainers don't have to just accept the return given by one specific channel and if the return isn't strong enough new models will evolve to fill the void.

The author seems to be implying t/m typo stuff doesn't convert to sales, I think that is probably a myth more than anything.

i agree completely. moreover, im tired of the "sleazy" which always seem to work its way into mainstream media when they seek to define direct navigation.

Originally posted by hookups
im tired of the "sleazy" which always seem to work its way into mainstream media when they seek to define direct navigation.

Well probably half of the direct navigation domain area probably is t/m typos so I think it is accurate and can only be expected. The industry is what it is.

Seems to me this just allows the prices of the "action" to be priced higher than a "click". Thus driving up the bids and in turn the perceived value of a qualified lead which is allways what is wanted by the advertisor.

Seems to me this just allows the prices of the "action" to be priced higher than a "click".

logic says it'd have to be as clicks are averaged downward by all the non-actioned clicks. the market will drive up prices to the point where the price paid more closely equates to the value derived just as bid prices alter under ppc.

the idea this would have a negative impact on domainers is based on the false premise that they account for the inactions not the actions. if the reverse is true it'd actually be a positive thing for domainers.

In reality, I could see a deep and broad bidded transparent CPA model helping ratify the value in legitimate domain traffic which could be a very positive thing for domain values ongoing.

Agreed.

All that's going on now is the refinement of the lead and to further distinguish the benefits of advertising on the internet.

All that's going on is advertisors asking the question "How do I *KNOW* I derived a benefit for a print ad when, unlike the internet, I have *ZERO* proof that anybody read it and cared, that it actually generated a sale". Thus the value of the internet lead model sells itself.

The downside for advertisers is that all of a sudden publishers will start caring about the advertisers ability to convert the traffic that is sent to them - publishers aren't going to want to waste traffic with company B who can't convert it when company A can.

Seems to me that raises prices even more who have no choice but to pay to survive.

Seems to me that raises prices even more who have no choice but to pay to survive.

yeah, advertisers who think this will mean they only need to pay what each visitor is worth *to them* to get the traffic could be in for a rude awakening when the traffic tap stops flowing to them.

the same relative cost penalties that are incurred by inefficient companies who compete on ppc will be carried over to cpa.

Originally posted by safesys
The downside for advertisers is that all of a sudden publishers will start caring about the advertisers ability to convert the traffic that is sent to them - publishers aren't going to want to waste traffic with company B who can't convert it when company A can.

Got that right !

Also posted the actual program links the other day http://domainstate.com/showthread.ph...threadid=75254

CPA is a scary game, and even scarier with google at the helm.

this gives google more power to sweep stuff under the rug, which puts the domainer in the dark. Clicks can be tracked by the domainer, sales in CPA are a little tougher.

There will always be advertisers willing to pay only for eyeballs. That's part of the branding process.

Any PPC company that moves fully to a CPA system only leaves room for a new PPC company to sprout up.

If things ever got really bad for domainers I sense there would be (at least one) domain company starting its own PPC company and having all domainers move over to it.

I would guess google will likely have a ranking system for CPA advertisers, ie you have a block of three ads on your site and only the best converting CPA ads shows.

The ones who just want eyeballs and can't convert have their ads get deactivated just like advertisers with low CTR's get deactivated now.