Home > Paid Traffic Sources > Mobile

approval vs non approval (11)


08-01-2014 03:09 AM #1 supeyrio (Member)
approval vs non approval

so theres 1 same exact offer on two adnetworks. on one adnetwork my creatives are approved, on another they rejected the same exact creatives.

why the difference in standards? what cld possibly be going on? sry another noob qn!

edit: i said adnetworks but actually i meant aff network... 16hrs of work must have gotten to me..


08-01-2014 04:21 AM #2 snacks (Member)

All adnetworks regulate creatives with varying policies in order to maintain agreements with their publishers in hope to create a environment where both parties (pubs and advertisers) are happy.


08-01-2014 04:26 AM #3 ziyiteh (Member)

what's the reason given? in this case most probably the 2 ad reviewers are from 2 different countries. One of them accessed your creatives from your targeted geo, and another one was not. The latter got redirected to another offer in your offer network which is prohibited in his ad network, and so he rejected your creatives.

just contact him and explain. things will turn out ok.

alternatively, just set up a landing page telling the viewer that this program is only for xxx geo. And then redirect the non-targeted traffic (geo) to this landing page.


08-01-2014 07:28 AM #4 zeno (Administrator)

Is it the banners they approved or banners + destination?

I would hope you don't have geo-redirection problems - this is something that should be conquered at the very beginning of an AM career!

In any case, different networks, different policies, and different reviewers with different opinions.


08-01-2014 08:48 AM #5 redrummr (Member)

Everyone should probably develop a matrix that shows the policy variations between networks they use.


08-01-2014 12:43 PM #6 supeyrio (Member)

no geo redirection, banners approved, landers approved on one end another disapproved. its for an app and they wanna be google playstore compliant. so by right they should have pretty standard set of rules but i dont understand the discrepency. mmmmmm


08-01-2014 01:10 PM #7 bbrock32 (Administrator)

That is very common. Different networks have different rules regarding approvals.

Networks such as buzzcity tend to be very relaxed for example while MMedia can get very strict.

All depends on their publisher base and internal policies.


08-01-2014 04:37 PM #8 supeyrio (Member)

@bbrock: sorry i actually meant aff network. just looked at this thread again after i woke up!


08-02-2014 12:04 AM #9 deondup (Member)

so you mean that you sent your banners to you AM's at the affiliate network for approval ?

In theory they should get it approved by the campaign owner but in some cases your AM will make a call to not even sent it in for approval while some networks just decide for themselves


08-02-2014 10:05 AM #10 supeyrio (Member)

Quote Originally Posted by deondup View Post
so you mean that you sent your banners to you AM's at the affiliate network for approval ?

In theory they should get it approved by the campaign owner but in some cases your AM will make a call to not even sent it in for approval while some networks just decide for themselves
for certain offers they are stricter so dont really have a choice there. but what suprised me was there was actually a discrepency in standards. i wonder what happens if the more "lenient" aff network actually did some slipshot approval? i actually double check twice on skype, maybe i should do it by way of email so that i get evidence to protect myself?


08-02-2014 10:22 PM #11 zeno (Administrator)

If you have Skype or Email history this does cover your ass a bit since you can show that your AM, who was responsible for vetting your creatives, said they were OK.

In some cases ads will be checked by AMs rather than the advertiser... and they are only human + may have slightly different info to work with, different communications from the advertiser, etc.

In any case as long as you get written/spoken approval then you can shift any blame away from you.


Home > Paid Traffic Sources > Mobile