Home > The Newbie Zone > Questions and Answers

---

What I have to change on stolen Landing Page (15)

---

Good day,

I using Adplexity. So, then I found few interesting landings and then clicked to Download this Landing Pages.

I using s3+CloudFront. What I have to change on stolen landings (links, scripts) to setup new campaing with few landing pages?

---

They most likely have click stealer script in there, if you aren't a coder you might have a super hard time removing the hidden code; thus your traffic can and will be stolen.

---

Thanks, and what could you recommend? For the first time I'd like to use spy tool to get some landings, and don't want to spend time to create new lp's.
I asked as different landings have different offer links to different aff.networks.

What the best way to setup campaing after you steal it from SpyTool?

---

You can get that lander cleaned up with all the crap removed you don't need for $30 now at BannersLanders, we have a promo till Dec 31st - 25% off.

That'd be the quickest and cheapest solution for you.

Alternatively, you can learn how to code, and then look at the source, and remove each line, and see if removing each lines kills the look/feel of lander, and use what's called process of elimination to clean up the lander yourself for free.

---

I have a man, who can clean up the code and make some changes on LP.
My question was - What I should do after clean up all bad codes? How can send user from stolen LP to networks offer? I start work with popups.

I use: Voluum, Amazon s3+CDN
Am I right that I have to set New Landing in Voluum, and add link from this tab into my landing?

---

The coder has to look for code that is redirecting traffic to other places than your campaign click url. It's not possible to tell you exactly what it looks like, as it's different all the time. That's why guys like Attila charge for it.

But, first you need to understand how tracking campaigns really works, so you can instruct your guy. Start with this article : http://stmforum.com/forum/showthread...-Read-This-Now

Here is an older tutorial on how to setup campaign with voluum, I think the data is still up to date from the most part : http://stmforum.com/forum/showthread...obile-Cookbook

---

Usually ripped landers on Adplexity come with custom JQuery libraries in the root LP directory where the HTML sits along with other files being part of that landing page.
Besides removing and/or replacing those files with publicly hosted versions which most probably are cached in most of the devices targeted in a campaign. Is there any specific piece of code to look for in case we want to keep those versions as a metter of time to quickly deploy the lander in a campaign? When it comes to self hosted vs. public versions, is it recommended to use publicly hosted ones?

---

i never use the jquery or any JS that is in ripped landers and you can grab from a public CDN...thats where i used to hide my surprises

---

Yes, but which version to use? For jQuery, there are dozens of versions around. Is there a way to find out which version is the currently most used (and therefore most cached) one?

---

You'll need to use the same version that the lander is designed to work with - otherwise there may be bugs. The version number will usually either be in the filename of the jquery file or at the top of the code.

---

I'd prefer the most used version, as the landing page is working with all JQuery versions I have tested. So if anyone has a tip on which JQuery version to use from Google (https://developers.google.com/speed/libraries/)...

I don't want to derail this thread, but I've done a split test with two campaigns on two different traffic sources and I've got mixed results: While CTR is highest with a new JQuery version, CVR is highest with an older one. I'm not sure if I should trust the results or if they just happened by chance. Furthermore, I remarked that I had (mistakingly) used http for 2.2.0 and https for the other two versions. So I'm going to test http vs httpS for 2.2.0.
Here are the results, comments welcome:

---

Let us know how the HTTP VS HTTPS test goes, I have noticed differences in CVR between the 2 protocols before.

---

As a follow-up, here are the results of my split-test of using the google hosted jQuery library, once linked to with http and once with https.
I've tested both a desktop and a mobile pops campaign.



So CTR was significantly higher on the http version, but conversions were (not significantly) higher on the https verision. Honestly, I don't know how to proceed with these findings, because intuitively a higher CTR should also lead to a higher CVR. So ofter 3 weeks of running the test, I still don't know which version to chose.

What is your opinion?

---

Since all is the same in the funnel, except for the http vs https ... maybe users trust it more this way, hence the higher amount of conversions? It's weird that they would click less through the LP thou. Anyways, the difference in both the CTR and amount of conversions is quite small, so it might be a coincidence too. 2% difference in CTR is pretty much nothing and a couple more conversions would also change the outcome.

---

Hi Matuloo
Thanks for joining the discussion.
The only difference was how I linked to jquery in the landing page, so
http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery vs
httpS://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery

What confuses me is that I guess that most use httpS to link to jQuery (because that's how Google suggests it), so they should rather have that version cached (I think - but I'm not sure - that the whole link including http vs https must have been accessed before to use the cached version), thus the httpS version should have a higher CTR due to lower loading time.
You are right with the conversions, that can just be a coincidence. So CTR stats would say that I should stick with http, but I'm unable to find a logical explanation why http should perform better.

---

Home > The Newbie Zone > Questions and Answers