Forum Moderators: martinibuster
roycerus: ...If the click on the adsense came from a visitor who landed through adwords. Smart price it to a value lower than the value of the click by one cent which the website owner bought. Just for that first click so that actual SERP clicks and subsequent page views are not affected. If there are more than one page views it possibly means the website is decent and not an MFA [higher probability]
I can think of another way (similar to the above) to punish MFA sites running AdWords network ads.
If a visitor to your site clicks on one of the ads and takes him/her to another site with AsSense (let's call the second site the MFA site) -- and the MFA site gets a click on one of the MFA site ads -- some (significant - say 50% or more!) percentage of the revenues for the click flow back to the original, referring (your!) site.
So, if we see this pattern:
1) User visits Site A,
2) User clicks on Site A AdSense ad, which, unfortunately, takes the user to an MFA site,
3) User clicks AdSense ad on MFA site
Then, the MFA is denied some portion of the revenue they would have received, and the referring site gets the money. I can't think of a better way to kill MFAs than by handing significant portions of their revenue to the sites that they are leaching off of.
It's only fair, since the referring site is responsible for delivering the traffic.
Now, this obviously won't work in the case where the MFA site runs YPN or other network's ads rather than AdSense.
It might be difficult to implement this in a reliable way, so I can see that this might be a major downside.
Thoughts?
Affiliates and merchants are free to bid the same bid price as MFAs. Maybe most of them do, I don't know. When delivering traffic to one of these advertisers, my work is done. I have provided the traffic, Google pays me for it.
I do not understand why you think that MFAs should pay a percentage of their profit back to my site when they receive traffic from me. Merchants may book an order of $10,000.= from a single click from one of the ads on my site. I don't expect them to pay me an extra 5% or so of this sale as compensation for the fact I hosted their ad on my site.
And, by MFAs, the problem was with 'spammy' MFAs (my bad, for using an overloaded term like MFA - after all, many sites that are not 'spammy' may be labelled as an MFA.)
Maybe it's not really a problem after all? In any case I was throwing this out for discussion, and you raise a few good points.
My experience is that it doesn't matter much in my area. MFAs appear in my ad blocks when they are created, but they are replaced by genuine ads as soon as the Google algorithm determines that they are less profitable for my site than regular ads. This happens also with low paying ads from affiliates, merchants etc. It is the normal Google earnings optimizer behaviour.
The most problematic MFAs are those changing their URLs frequently. They seem to get the benefit of the doubt by the Google targetting algorithm until there is enough statistical data available to remove them from my adblocks.
Sounds like things may have improved a bit of late (since the above-referenced thread was written)?
