Topic: [ANN] a-ads.com: Bitcoin advertising network. Advertise now! - page 34. (Read 174743 times)

To tl;dr this, uniques are counted across the entire network, not just your sites. If someone visits Coindesk first that day and they have a-ads, that's who gets the unique, even if they view 10000 pages on your site after.

Hi, this is a common question. Our metrics are different from Google's. Please see http://blog.anonymousads.com/2014/08/why-am-i-not-paid-for-clicks-what-is.html for details.

Hello,
why my views are counted not correctly? I have 1200 impressions, but only 7 unique. My traffic comes from the domain that corresponds to the URL specified and my google analytics says 250 unique visitors.
This is the unit: https://a-ads.com/ad_units/86005

Thanks

I do not want something...I just see and I analyse.
I could understand that a banner lost among other ones far down can make less money or less interest for advisters.
if you give all ads same income it will not be logic too.

I agree it's not easy.
but if I ask to miself questions about these differencies for few satoshi,I'm sure that advertisers do if they pay huge amount of money.

Well, that's true, if you have N ad units on your page, that doesn't mean you will earn N times more than if you had 1 ad unit, because amount of visitors you display ads to doesn't change. You can't multiply your income by just multiplying the number of ad units on your page.

I agree that it is a bit weird that if you have 2 ad units, the first one earns much more than the second one. Perhaps we could calculate amounts of unique impressions based on the publishers' pages, not on individual ad units, and distribute funds accordingly. That wouldn't increase the publisher's income, but would split it among publisher's ad units more evenly. So instead of getting 90% of your income from the first ad unit and 10% of your income from the second one, you would get 50% from the first one and 50% from the second one. But the total amount would be the same (100%). Is it what you want?

No I believe that unique visitor and unique impression is understood at the same level

the problematic stay the same if it is the advertiser who chose the ad space or a-ads system.
At my eyes...
I do not understand why for 2 ad spaces almost at the same place on a page the different income for the publisher and of course then so much difference for the advertising who pay.

Someone wrote me and said:
do not put more than 1 a'ads on your page because the second does not make money...
it this is in mind of many publisher,they will go to concurrance compagnies.
And if advertisers think that the banners are not wiewed by unique visitors,then they will not pay for it.

Thanks for your feedback!

Most of the time advertisers don't pick ad units manually, and their expenses are automatically being split between ad units with respect to their unique impressions. Amount of unique impressions doesn't depend on amount of ad units on your page. Perhaps the term "unique impression" is misleading and should be replaced with "unique visitors". And probably it would be better to display non-unique impressions to advertisers by default. Do you think it would solve the problem?

I'm now testing a-ads with 15 banners displaid on my sites.
I feel something wrong.
The system is certainly ok,but it is not understood by the advertisers.
(by the publishers certainly not undertand too,but I will only talk about advertisers)

The question is:
Are advertisers not manage well the a-ads system?
or
Is the a-ads system not enough  informative or do the information mislead the advertisers?

Example:(it's only an example)
I have on my site 2 banners almost at the same place.
For one a-ads say:100 unique views.
for the other close at it 10 unique views.
The advertisers are almost not interested by the 10 unuque.
All advertisers pay for the 100 unique
and almost nothing for the 10 unique.
For me if I see a page...with 2 banner spaces at the same place,the both spaces are worth the same.
But a-ads say indirectly to the advertisers that one is seeing 10 time more by unique visitors.

If I compare a-ads with other ads companies the difference is till bigger.
I have for two close spaces more advertisers and more incomes by other ads compagnies.
Why?
Certainly because if I have 5 banner spaces viewed by 100 unique visitors and a advertiser see 100 for 4 banner spaces and only 10 for one...he will pay for the 100 and not for the 10.

Banner spaces are not unlimited on a page...webmaster will go there where it is the best paid by advertisers...normal...
I believe if the difference I see on my sites is so big,it is why a-ads informations for advertisers is misunderstood and advertisers go to other compagnies...

A-ads is a transparent service, everybody can see the traffic and financial stats of any advertising campaign or ad unit (e. g. here is the public page for ad unit #1: http://a-ads.com/ad_units/1 and here is the public page for campaign #1: https://a-ads.com/campaigns/1 ).

Do you think the information about user accounts should be transparent as well (perhaps except their usernames and emails)? It could be interesting to see the list of ad units and campaigns that belong to the same user. So should we have a public page for every user as we do for ad units and campaigns?

Thanks for your feedback. We use Google's "no CAPTCHA reCAPTCHA" that is usually trivial to pass.



It may raise privacy concerns, but since the captcha is being loaded only after the visitor clicks the ad, it shouldn't be that a big problem. Ideally we'd use our own solution, but there are a lot of higher priority tasks right now.

I love the captcha change, and think this helps alleviate my original issues. It brings more transparency to how much it's affecting us as publishers, which is huge. What captcha service is being used, btw?

Thanks for kind words!

i have a very good expirience with a-ads.com..

I like your website it's really simple

Thank you, thank you, thank you! 

Implemented. When publisher adjusts the Max captcha rate, estimated percentage of budget is being displayed:



Implemented a "Reset" button in campaign's targeting section:


Thanks for helping us to improve a-ads!

That actually would suit my purposes, because funny enough I even tried to do this hoping it would remove all the individual sites in favour of the broad "all traffic", but it left all the other sites still on the list and then added in addition the "all traffic" category to the bottom. I was actually hoping it would swap the many sites for the one category like you suggested!

Hi, thanks for your suggestion, I think such a button would be useful for advertisers!

But what happens if advertiser clicks this button but for some reason fails to add the traffic sources to the campaign's targeting?

E. g. this campaign: https://a-ads.com/campaigns/4027 (binarybase.co) has some balance that is not being spent (since 2014!) because its targeting is empty. I think the advertiser occasionally removed the traffic sources, and now we should either keep these money forever, or send them to the refund address or just add "All traffic" category and let it to be spent.

Maybe we should forbid empty targeting, and provide the "Reset" button instead (that would remove all the selected traffic sources with "All traffic" category).

Would you be satisfied with this solution?

Hello again

So, I was trying some things out on one of my advertising campaigns and noticed there's no easy way to remove all selected traffic sources at once. I added quite a few sites as I was experimenting with budgets (I'm trying to find the best group of sites to advertise on matching my budget), but having to remove each site separately is very time consuming. Not sure how hard of a change it would be to add something like a "Remove all selected traffic sources" button, but it could be a helpful feature.

Thanks for listening to my suggestion!

Publishers get money from advertisers that target them. If publisher limits the captcha rate to 0%, but advertiser requires 1%, then that publisher won't fit the advertiser's targeting criteria (won't display that advertiser's ad and won't  earn from that advertiser).

Wouldn't this not affect publisher rates at all? They're paid based on unique views of the ad block itself, not based on the ad being shown. So whether there is one ad shown or another, it shouldn't matter, should it?