After reading an article about ad metrics I realized this is ad fraud.
What is going on is a business buys ads and pays one rate for ads shown but pays a higher rate if the ads resulted in a conversion (a sale). But the ad contracts are monthly or longer. So a business buys ads for their product and the ad company after noticing you bought it, stuffs your feeds with ads for what you just bought so they can bill those ads at the higher conversion rate.
It’s just lies and deceit all the way down it seems… Every corner of almost every aspect of our lives, these kind of things keep cropping up. Kinda makes me feel like there might be an underlying reason to it all… Hmm…
Yes but ads shown that result in a conversion are paid higher than ones that don’t. If you pay for 1000 ads in a month and it results in a conversion you pay more for those all ads in the block because you got that conversion. You don’t pay just for the one ad that resulted in a sale. You say “I only got one sale.” They say, “It was those 999 ads that the consumer saw that generated the sale.”
Right, but to know the ad resulted in a conversation the customer would need to click on the ad before purchasing. Showing you the ad after you bought the product without clicking on an ad wouldn’t count.
A company isn’t going to pay more without the platform providing evidence that the conversion happened on their platform. If a company runs ads on Google, Instagram, and TikTok, Google can’t just claim that every sale was because of ads on their platform.
How is there proof of a sale due to an ad on a platform if the customer never interacted with the ad?
I can guarantee you that no one is going to sign an advertisement contract if they have to pay more solely because the company sold something within that timeframe.
The platform they advertise on is the one tracking the customer through the purchase, but that can’t happen if the customer buys a product before they’re shown an ad.
I can guarantee you that no one is going to sign an advertisement contract if they have to pay more solely because the company sold something within that timeframe.
I used to spend a million a year on TV ads without ever knowing if I got a sale from those ads.
If they sold a package “X ads for X dollars depending on proof of conversion.” it might have been something I signed up for. Realistically if they could have done it, they wouldn’t have offered any other option.
“Do you want to run ads? This is our package. You pay $X and if you get sales from those ads you pay $X + $Y because we proved the ads made you money. Take it or leave it. We own 85% of the ad market.”
I think you overestimate how much time the companies buying ads spend on analyzing the data, or if they even get that data.
The company selling the ad also doesn’t have much interest in transparent reporting.
The end result is that neither the company selling the ads or the company buying the ads have any interest in the ads.
They both only care about their own sales numbers. Fuck the consumers, fuck the product, fuck the ads. Only sales.
After reading an article about ad metrics I realized this is ad fraud.
What is going on is a business buys ads and pays one rate for ads shown but pays a higher rate if the ads resulted in a conversion (a sale). But the ad contracts are monthly or longer. So a business buys ads for their product and the ad company after noticing you bought it, stuffs your feeds with ads for what you just bought so they can bill those ads at the higher conversion rate.
It’s just lies and deceit all the way down it seems… Every corner of almost every aspect of our lives, these kind of things keep cropping up. Kinda makes me feel like there might be an underlying reason to it all… Hmm…
I remember reading or hearing about this too, but i forget where. Do you know?
I can’t remember. My doom scrolling of Lemmy and YouTube is so fast I can’t find posts from 12 hours ago.
But that doesn’t make sense. The way they know it’s a conversion is the ad url you click on tracks you through the purchase process.
Yes but ads shown that result in a conversion are paid higher than ones that don’t. If you pay for 1000 ads in a month and it results in a conversion you pay more for those all ads in the block because you got that conversion. You don’t pay just for the one ad that resulted in a sale. You say “I only got one sale.” They say, “It was those 999 ads that the consumer saw that generated the sale.”
Right, but to know the ad resulted in a conversation the customer would need to click on the ad before purchasing. Showing you the ad after you bought the product without clicking on an ad wouldn’t count.
A company isn’t going to pay more without the platform providing evidence that the conversion happened on their platform. If a company runs ads on Google, Instagram, and TikTok, Google can’t just claim that every sale was because of ads on their platform.
The proof is the sale. What isn’t shared is exactly which ads ran when because they purchased a block.
How is there proof of a sale due to an ad on a platform if the customer never interacted with the ad?
I can guarantee you that no one is going to sign an advertisement contract if they have to pay more solely because the company sold something within that timeframe.
The platform they advertise on is the one tracking the customer through the purchase, but that can’t happen if the customer buys a product before they’re shown an ad.
You vastly overestimate the nuance in ad spend.
No I don’t. I’m saying that a company isn’t going to pay an advertising platform more money just because.
I used to spend a million a year on TV ads without ever knowing if I got a sale from those ads.
And did you have to pay extra just because you made a sale in the time span the ad was running?
If they sold a package “X ads for X dollars depending on proof of conversion.” it might have been something I signed up for. Realistically if they could have done it, they wouldn’t have offered any other option.
“Do you want to run ads? This is our package. You pay $X and if you get sales from those ads you pay $X + $Y because we proved the ads made you money. Take it or leave it. We own 85% of the ad market.”
I think you overestimate how much time the companies buying ads spend on analyzing the data, or if they even get that data.
The company selling the ad also doesn’t have much interest in transparent reporting.
The end result is that neither the company selling the ads or the company buying the ads have any interest in the ads. They both only care about their own sales numbers. Fuck the consumers, fuck the product, fuck the ads. Only sales.
Right, but the company buying ad space isn’t going to pay extra because they sold a product during the time period the ad ran.