Home > Paid Traffic Sources > Mobile

Should I be revealing lander URL's to my AM? (10)

05-05-2016 09:33 PM #1 bradh_ ()
Should I be revealing lander URL's to my AM?

Hi guys,

I've read in a bunch of places and been told by other affiliate marketers I know - NEVER REVEAL YOUR LANDER URLs

Thus far it hasn't been an issue. Whenever approval has been required by an affiliate network, my AM has requested and I've provided a screenshot of my lander.

However, I'm working with a new network where the AM insists that I send through the landing page URL before they can approve anything.

Is this standard practice? Should I sharing the domains I'm running traffic to?

Thanks!

05-05-2016 09:43 PM #2 bobliu (Member)

It's certainly not standard practice, no.

It may be because an advertiser explicitly ask the network to do this - to address legal issues etc..

At any rate, just setup a ghost domain and send them that and make sure you're blanking the refer on your actual lander.
It's bad practice - knowing your landing page domain will give them the ability to steal your entire campaign. All it takes is typing the domain into a spy tool.

What's the network?

05-05-2016 09:48 PM #3 bradh_ ()

Interesting... Yeah I thought it was strange. Initially, was for a new offer in the UK so figured it may be the advertiser. But now I'm getting asked for lander URL's for every approval - different advertisers across tier 2/3 geos.

Network is Mpire.

05-05-2016 09:51 PM #4 kepe95 (Moderator)

From my experience it's pretty common for them to ask for an URL.

You can just setup a separate domain like bobliu recommends , and setup some random good looking lander that could work for the offer.

Then send that for approval and run whatever you want ...

It's risky of course, and if you get caught running something else than what was approved you have to live with the consequences.

But that's how it usually works.

If you have a working lander you don't want them to steal it (which either the network or the advertiser will if your lander is your only advantage) , or it's too aggressive to show them , and the workflow is too slow to get approval every time you want to do a new split-test ...

That's why I guess most do it like this. Be more careful when just starting out though.

05-05-2016 10:02 PM #5 ysekse (Member)

Same thing here! I've been asked for live-links, and have received landing pages (live-links I think) from AM, makes me think what if my landers are linked to other pubs in the same manner? Especially with pops it's so easy to steal a campaign, have NOT noticed any of my campaigns dying or taking a sudden ROI-hit though so I'm not super suspicious, but a tiny bit, yes...

Ever applied for an offer at multiple networks and only had a few of them ask for live-links? Would this be obviously shady business or can the advertiser be more strict with some networks than with others?

05-05-2016 10:04 PM #6 jamesc (Member)

Provide a screenshot. I'd never provide my URL though, it doesn't seem standard. They just want reassurance your rebills won't be bad.. and all that, but, I wouldn't give out too much info.

05-05-2016 10:10 PM #7 bradh_ ()

Quote Originally Posted by kepe95 View Post
From my experience it's pretty common for them to ask for an URL.

You can just setup a separate domain like bobliu recommends , and setup some random good looking lander that could work for the offer.

Then send that for approval and run whatever you want ...

It's risky of course, and if you get caught running something else than what was approved you have to live with the consequences.

But that's how it usually works.

If you have a working lander you don't want them to steal it (which either the network or the advertiser will if your lander is your only advantage) , or it's too aggressive to show them , and the workflow is too slow to get approval every time you want to do a new split-test ...

That's why I guess most do it like this. Be more careful when just starting out though.
Interesting... I keep hearing that that's how it usually works. I guess it's part of the industry and if you want to compete it's a risk to manage. And I guess then the networks are OK with it happening.

I'm OK with doing this sort of thing with a traffic source, however misleading the network when they're the guys that pay you has worried me more as a newbie...

PS Kepe - I read your follow along end to end yesterday. It's really inspirational! Shame you left Sydney, let me know if you're ever back in this part of the world.

05-05-2016 10:17 PM #8 kepe95 (Moderator)

I'm OK with doing this sort of thing with a traffic source, however misleading the network when they're the guys that pay you has worried me more as a newbie...
It's a complicated situation ... maybe talk it over a bit with your AMs , it's definitely not misleading them they usually know how this works. Just communicate well over what's naughty but okay and what's a no-go.


Shame you left Sydney, let me know if you're ever back in this part of the world.
Planning to be back for sure , no specific plans yet though. Very nice memories

05-06-2016 06:08 AM #9 johnaff (AMC Alumnus)

Pass the lander.id and the trafficsource.id to all your nets bc its an important layer of optimization for the advertisers.

A screenshot of the lander suffices, but if you try too hard to hide stuff youll get a bad reputation if ur sending bad traffic quality.

2/3rds of advertisers have internal traffic team now exactly bc affiliates work very hard to send bad quality traffic, and thats a bad thing for the industry overall.

Not trying to be a debbie downer but its a fact.

05-06-2016 07:15 AM #10 cbrughmans (Member)

If they request it, yes.
If they don't request it, there's no need to show it. AMs are just executing advertiser' requests so if they ask it its because the advertiser wants to see it. Most campaigns/advertisers won't care though what materials you use.

Also, if you want to get rid of the feeling you can't trust your network and you're afraid they'll cut you out, then only work with networks that do don't any media buying themselves. Then there's no conflict of interest for them.

Home > Paid Traffic Sources > Mobile