Home > Paid Traffic Sources > Mobile

Has the hammer come down on AV offers? Couple serious questions about AV. (13)

07-22-2014 02:17 AM #1 sanjeevan (Member)
Has the hammer come down on AV offers? Couple serious questions about AV.

Hey Guys,

Been spending the last few days setting up some AV campaigns on mobile. Had the pleasure of getting ads rejected on BuzzCity, and having some traffic sources tell me "We no longer accept AV banners period". Had a few questions for the STM community that I was curious about and i'm sure other affiliates are curious to know regarding AV mobile offers. So here are my burning questions

a) Is there self serve networks that still allow "(3) Viruses detected" type banners. I'm not going to ask what networks (no one wants to tell you this - rightfully so). But my question is are there still networks with looser approval restrictions? I am more than happy to search them out / test traffic sources. I just want to know that I am not on a fools quest searching for something that no longer exists.

b) Do AV offers still making good money or is that vertical basically done after the Google ad restrictions and new policies about misleading ads on most self serve networks? Without scare tactic installs, is it still possible to make AV vertical profitable?

c) Is the only way to run AV offers by cloaking on self serve networks?

I have about 3 AV offers I am setting up to run and these were questions i felt were worth asking. Look forward to the communities response, thanks in advance guys!

07-22-2014 03:27 AM #2 vidivo (Member)

If you want to make big bucks I suggest learning to cloak or choosing another offer. Its not really that these virus offers are not accepted, but more so that what you are doing is in fact completely misleading the user. More than likely they dont have 3 viruses on their cell phone... I think if you were to say Download New Security App, most networks would approve this sort of text copy.. but you wont make any money because no one would click on that... so my advice is just to be creative

07-22-2014 03:30 AM #3 sanjeevan (Member)

Quote Originally Posted by vidivo View Post
If you want to make big bucks I suggest learning to cloak or choosing another offer. Its not really that these virus offers are not accepted, but more so that what you are doing is in fact completely misleading the user. More than likely they dont have 3 viruses on their cell phone... I think if you were to say Download New Security App, most networks would approve this sort of text copy.. but you wont make any money because no one would click on that... so my advice is just to be creative
Any suggestions on cloaking solutions? Your feedback was very helpful

07-22-2014 08:25 AM #4 dongle132 (Member)

Take a look in your inbox ^^

07-22-2014 02:37 PM #5 ringpartner (Member)

We're definitely seeing pay per call antivirus campaigns being highly scrutinized by ad networks, especially on Google.

However, we are seeing better results for the more compliant and less "scary" landing pages. Better results for the publishers and advertisers.

07-22-2014 02:49 PM #6 groomez (Veteran Member)

Whatever happened to good old, compliant "review style" landing pages ? We used to use those for installs and antivirus offers on web back in the day - when we drank Cheerwine and ate moonpies on the porch of the country store down the road yonder with our laptops. No reason they wouldn't work now, especially when compared against the heavily downloaded offers on Google Play.

07-23-2014 08:24 PM #7 keepthecar (Member)

a) Is there self serve networks that still allow "(3) Viruses detected" type banners. I'm not going to ask what networks (no one wants to tell you this - rightfully so). But my question is are there still networks with looser approval restrictions? I am more than happy to search them out / test traffic sources. I just want to know that I am not on a fools quest searching for something that no longer exists.
Buzz City has been the easiest with creative approval out of all the networks I've tried.
b) Do AV offers still making good money or is that vertical basically done after the Google ad restrictions and new policies about misleading ads on most self serve networks? Without scare tactic installs, is it still possible to make AV vertical profitable?
There are carrier billed or APK offer which have nothing to do with Google. Those advertisers are also not happy with "(3) Viruses detected" banners but they can approve things a bit less aggressive like "You may have a virus" or "Your phone can be at risk".

07-24-2014 12:02 AM #8 mykeyfocus (Member)

There are networks out there which will accept pretty much anything
Think networks based far away in 3rd world countries?

07-24-2014 07:19 PM #9 bbrock32 (Administrator)

There are still a few networks accepting them but it's a dying trend.

If you want to keep up better adapt to something less aggressive because these promotions won't last long.

07-25-2014 10:19 AM #10 sanjeevan (Member)

Hey Guys,

Thanks so much for the feedback! I decided the best route to take is to use angles that walk the line but do not mislead the user. These seem to be what networks will allow and this way i'm not at risk of getting booted by the network / advertiser / traffic source. So instead of ads like "You have (3) viruses" I will try stuff like "Your Android Device is at Risk! Scan & Protect Now". I appreciate everyones feedback, I got the answer I was looking for, I learned quite a bit about how to create an effective yet ad network friendly angle from this thread.

07-28-2014 02:33 AM #11 stackman (Administrator)

Virus is a dying trend.. it was going strong for 8+ months but definitely is spiraling downward.

Decide if your interested in doing some shady stuff to make it work, and milk it for the months that are left... or focusing your time on a new niche/area in mobile.

07-28-2014 05:22 PM #12 cooperoil (Member)

If virus us on the way out, what would you recommend to replace it?!

07-30-2014 03:22 PM #13 iwarrior (Member)

You can try with app installs.

Home > Paid Traffic Sources > Mobile