Rants: Bidding Noobs on PPV Traffic
- Thread starter Jaz74
- Start date
A lot of the times the other person will give up leaving you with the #1 spot, but yeah sometimes not. I agree with it kinda going to shit. I was on TV/MT/zango a year and a half ago and life was a lot easier for ppv. There is only that finite volume and once a good portion of the converting targets are found and maxed out the only ones laughing to the bank are the platforms.
It's annoying to have to set bids 10% from your eCpm when you used to get 50-200% roi but profit is profit and I'd rather have that then a new bidder who just came in.
so you'll take 80% of your previous traffic and cut your earnings down to 10% roi instead of 50-150% roi as opposed to the option of taking 50% of your traffic and keeping the same previous roi, which is 5 - 15 times more than your new roi
Gotcha.
only prob is, the "other noob" will see you "sharing" number 1 with them and raise their bid to .001 more then you, causing you to bid up again too to same spot. I fucking hate when noobs dont get it.
cant we all just share a bid? haha
cant we all just share a bid? haha
It's not a static situation where you would go from 150% to 10% roi everytime, in many cases I've changed my bid $0.001 and the roi is 3% less. And yeah I'll take 80% of the traffic and 10% roi or negative roi for a few days to try and get rid of someone who doesn't know what the fuck they're doing. Sometimes it works, sometimes you are going against an autobidder, and then sometimes thousands of the refined longtail targets you dug up are suddenly being outbid all at once(the platform itself). It's not outside the realm of futility.
There may be other bidders in between you as well, so it's not like every time you can just opt to get 50% of the traffic on the 2nd bid and the same roi, you may go down to 10% of the volume or less with little margin.
On trafficvance you are still staggered if you bid the same as other people. The first person to bid that amt gets #1 and the bulk of the traffic, 2nd person to bid the same amt is 2nd, and so on. You wouldn't all get the same volume.
One of the ways to get volume without worrying much about bidding is to monetize the top volume urls which is what I've been trying to work on lately. It's harder but it also weeds out the majority of people who aren't creative enough to monetize them.
This is not true at all, if both people bid the same they both appear in position 2 but they are evenly splitting the traffic. If what you're saying is true then the other person (the person who was "first" to number 1) would never raise their bid and there would be no bidding war, since there would be no need. It would still apear to them that they are in position 1 and that they have the highest bid.
Haven't you ever been in position 1, had someone match your bid, and suddenly you were in position 2? If you were first to 1, wouldn't that then not happen to you?
I think this misunderstanding leads to most of the bid wars, which works out in trafficvance's favor. The big problem is people don't test things. They just make assumptions and pass off info to others.
This applies across the board, from paid to organic traffic. It is almost a full time job trying to correct bad info.
Going negative roi just to outbid someone is so fucking dumb. If I know an url is profitable at 0.015 and i got outbided by you to a point that is not profitable. Lets say 0.03, I'll stop bidding and you drop your bid back down to 0.015, and I'll bid 0.016 again. Mission FAIL.
You people just assume others will stop playing once you outbid them. But not think that once you dropped bid back down, he'll bid again.
this is where bots come in. But then you have bot vs bot and people are still making a lot less money then if they just split traffic some number of ways.
bot vs bot is OK, if you have a better bot.. most people on TV have 1 of 3 bots.. 2 of which are easily bought out of the box ( but not really customizable.. those people are easy to beat ).. the 3rd kind is the custom made bots which are very flexible and can adapt to bidding pattern with some user input.
Almost need a bot now days because so many have them.
Almost need a bot now days because so many have them.
Why is it "so fucking dumb" to try and protect a traffic source if you can? I've done it across a few different platforms, on ppc as well and in a lot of cases got the naggers to give up and then I resume profiting. eliquid made a few good posts about it the other day. Construction firms underbid projects by millions just to get the work and put their competition out of business. You can't share everything.
If they don't "stop playing" or it's an autobidder and it's not worth my time then eventually I leave it. It has been worth it in a lot of cases to lose money for a few days though, it's control over a percentage of the volume, which is sometimes needed. Not everyone who buys traffic is restricted to the 1 time cpa payout, there are funnels, upsells, optins, customer retention, and a world of other ways it's worth it to initially have a negative roi.
Conv3rsion, you are right on the stagger. Luckily I haven't passed that disinformation along until now but I was wrong.
I'm thinking of releasing my PPV bot for free, just to frustrate everyone :music06:
I'd say most people rolled their own. From what i can tell the for sale ones are garbage.
Most people think there is a stagger because of how the interface appears. I definitely did for awhile.
And you're right, there are much better ways to monetize ppv then straight to CPA offers. Most people won't go that far though because they are lazy.
Does anyone know a way to find out information about demographics of users who have the adware installed for specific networks? I mean, if trafficvance uses gaming related adware, then won't their audience be primarily composed of younger males? I mean, is there some sort of tool the ppv networks have internally that allows you to do some research on this? Part of my concern is that some of my offers won't hit the audiences because the audience I want has no interest in gaming toolbars, or many of the other types of adware PPV networks use... any general thoughts on this? Perhaps some of the zwinky/mywebface would hit a broader spectrum of people, but still, I'd like to see just what volume and what demographic I have access to, especially when bidding on certain URLs... quantcast and google insights and all the normal tools are worthwhile but they don't tell me how many users and what kind of users have the adware, just the demographics of all visitors to sites. Are certain PPV networks inherently better for certain ages and demographics, solely based on the nature of the adware they use?
