I have a fairly lucrative idea that I want to execute on, but its involving PPV and high paying affiliate programs. The concern I have is that I have heard some PPV companies show a referrer, while others dont. Can anyone verify some companies that will show a blank referrer? I guess I could always send it through a Double meta refresh, but would that traffic even make it through a double meta? Has anyone used mediatraffic for this purpose?
I have used findology & mediatraffic and still continue to do to this day. Some networks will allow PPV traffic while some won't. It is recommended that you use a double meta refresh and yes, the traffic will go through the double meta refresh and show up as clicks on the network
Ya I think that they would not allow me to use PPV if they knew about it. As long as I run it through a double meta refresh, I dont see how they would do. Basically what I want to do is cookie stuff anyone visiting the website of my affiliate so that if they purchase I always get credit. It seems like this would be a fairly common tactic.
Well I was going to tell you which ones, but when you said this : Basically you own a product and are going to steal commisisons from your own affiliate right? lol. That is the lowest level of piece of shit-ism I've ever seen in AM.
Lol no im not a piece of shit - I am an affiliate for a company that owns a product. I want to cookie stuff their keywords - Im not ripping off other IM's, I Think you have the wrong idea. I am talking about doing standard CS'ing here, nothing more, nothing less, just using PPV. Let me know if you still want to share that list with me.
Okay my bad. I misunderstood when you said "my affilliate". The one that DEFINATELY does is media*traffic. Their subsidiaries are whenu & memedia No matter what, they show up in referral stats even when you try to hide them.
Problem with using PPV is that it is not the referer passing that is the problem but rather the user agent that is being passed. Your affiliate company will be able to see that the user agent is a PPV network.
Yup^^^ And if you use a double meta, be sure to dump anything that doesn't actually clear the referrer which in my tests is somewhere between 30 and 50% of what you buy. I had a little program that would take your affilliate link and convert it into a javascript command then to hex and pass your page as the referrer about 99% of the time with some of these guys (and for example buy hits cheap) but the networks seem to have caught on to that and are looking for it now. I still haven't figured out a way around the user agent issue without building my own browser and getting a million people to download it. You'd think zango etc. would GET A CLUE and stop using themselves as useragent and spoof something else or just let the damned browser native user agent shine through. The fact that their name shows up has to be costing them a boatload of lost traffic purchases because affiliates can't use it. Oh well, back to the secret testing lab. Good luck with it D-G.
boy am I glad I found this thread. I am having this exact problem and if I can figure it out, it will be very nice. Now, I do have the ability to block certain traffic sources through some of my filtering I have set up. The question I have is what do I look for in the user agent so that I know it is adware/spam, etc. I know, zango, zedo.com, fun web products. However, I keep seeing "Trident/4.0", is that bad as well. What other places should I be filtering. Any type of list of things I should key off of or any input would be great.
Thanks for the good info. So it seems that with the user agent showing the way it does, I may be SOL for stuffing with this method, since Im not mixing in any WH traffic. I will keep looking into my options, thanks again.
Well you can cloak based on the UAs, depending on how consistent they are. If the PPV UA shows 99% of the time then this doesn't help, but if it's 50% of the time it still might be profitable. Then blend in other traffic also. Surely they are used to seeing some of the PPV UAs from normal browsing (or does that UA only show up for the popups?).
well, I do know some adware UA's show from normal browsing. So if you could keep the number low I think you would be ok. I am looking for a list of know adware UAs. Any help would be appreciated.
I'm also looking at cloaking based on the UA's but can't find a good list of UA's that are bad. Does any one know of such a list, or have any more info and I can build the list. thanks.
im buying traffic from media traffic does anyone know their referer name or url, the CS script that im using only stuffs referers that i put on the list. i asked my media traffic manager and she doesnt know shit.
I've started using meditraffic as well with a $200 required deposit ( too much damn ).Anyway,i'll test and let you know
findology does not leak, I am running some small test campaigns at the moment. I hear Zango will steal your campaigns if they are any good. GL
The reason that Zango changes the user agent is so they can control access to their content based on the user agent in the browser, I doubt they will change that anytime soon. I can't think of a more efficient way to maintain control over content, with out causing other major issues.
First of all i wudnt advice dmr with ppv traffic,bcoz there is no point in loosing traffic which you are paying for(unless dmr is 100% perfect) secondly mediatraffic let the show the referrer whereas trafficvance does not show the referrer. anyway test it before going with anyone.
Are you 100% sure they don't show USER AGENT? i.e. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; AOL 5.0; Windows 98; findology.com) http://www.botsvsbrowsers.com/listings.asp?search=findology
