Promoting paysite with puchased content upsets sponsor?
 

Hey everyone,

I've been building/submitting galleries for a few months now and have had some success promoting some of the larger sponsors with purchased content, so I thought I'd try out a couple of the smaller programs to see what kind of difference it would make. So I bought some pretty nice niche content to promote a smaller paysite in the same niche and I got an email (it sounded kind of angry, but I don't know) this morning from the paysite owner asking me what the heck I was doing promoting his site using content that was not his... Is this a common faux pas in the industry? I thought most sponsors encouraged using fresh, semi-exclusive content to promote their sites rather than the stuff any affiliate can use for free... I'm a little confused, should I be contacting sponsors and asking if I can use purchased content?
It's not that they're bad pics, either, I thought it was a good gallery...

Please enlighten me!

Thanks!!

Danielle

Does this paysite feature one specific girl, or are there multiple models? If it's a single girl site I can understand the owner's reaction, if not, then it really doesn't make much sense.

No, there are several girls featured on his website. That's why I'm so confused |dizzy|

The problem is sometimes the surfer expects to see more of the model you are using on the paysite, when they don't find it they complain or even charge back. We help solve that problem at lotzadollars by giving trusted affiliates access to the members are to get content. Another way to help is to use terms like "find girls like this at..." etc etc don't say "see more of me" if she is not there.

That makes more sense... I did use that kind of terminology "I'm waiting for you..." type thing, I didn't realize that could result in a chargeback... Yikes!

This is an issue that has always concerned me and was raised rather recently on the board.

If you are promoting a paysite, and the content you are using is not within the site, the surfer gets there and might have an expectation that the particular content they saw was in there. I have seen more than a few chargebacks and credits issued as a result where someone has seen some photo-set and it contained a model that they wanted to see only to find the paysite didn't have it -- or was so convoluted that it couldn't be found.

Most sponsors won't/can't give out content -- especially now with 2257. So, it does leave a website promotor in a difficult situation. With 2257, any promo content they give you, you would have to have full identification of the models.

While I admire resourceful affiliates, I think that purchased content can often mislead the surfer.
We realize that our affiliates sometimes have special needs, and we do our best to work with them one on one. We often shoot sets specifically for particular partners. In fact, right now, we're working on some new stuff that Toby is gonna love!

|thumb |bananna| |pink

In my ever-changing and fairly unreliable opinion, the content that sponsors give out is often 100 times better than much of the crap content that smaller webmasters can afford to purchase. I prefer vid caps over bad wallpaper any day. Good builder/submitters can do outstanding things with sponsor content. They get to it when it's first released and they build appealing sites/galleries.

I've always used purchased content and have never had any problems with sponsors (large or small) but I've always written my ads in such a way that it was clear to the surfer they would be going to a new web site.

If I was advertising a single model web site I would more than likely use a banner which showed the model and use text that made it clear to the surfer what they could expect to find if they clicked on the ad.

As long as the advertising isn't misleading and it's made clear to the surfer that they are going to a different web site, it shouldn't make any real difference. If, however, you design a gallery as if it's part of the sponsors site and imply that the content of the gallery is a free sample of what is to be found in the sponsors site, then yes, there's a problem.

Just my thoughts...:)

Regards,
SF

I had a discussion with one of the larger sponsors one night about using paid content to promote their niche sites, and I can understand the C/B issues, etc.

They just didn't seem to get the concept that not all WMs own a major TGP they can just throw a banner on, or that not all WMs work with PPC. They seem to miss the point that most WMs need to use paid content for free sites and galleries to promote a program.

There just will never be enough exclusive content available for solo girl sites, and reality sites to promote without it becoming over-exposed extremely fast.

Those are my thoughts exactly.. and no matter how much of a kickass gallery/freesite you can build, overused content is overused content and it gets boring VERY fast for the surfer, regardless of what fancy shmancy gallery it's posted on.

But I do agree with the terminology bit - I should have said something more along the lines of "see more girls like this at..." instead of "I'm waiting for you.." etc.

Well, i know for next time |rock| |duff|

Thanks,

Danielle

Think you hit the nail on the head there DirtyDani (love the name btw :D ).

I've used paid content for years and never had a problem. But, I'm always concious of not implying that particular girl is in the site...unless she actually is. Which has happened with purchased content! Take the tour and sure enough...hey, I have that set! Then, and only then do I push that point. Usually works well too...when they see the same chick in the tour |thumb

In the world of sales you promote a product that you are going to sale. If you went to the grocery store and looked in the butcher case and saw a nice fresh porterhouse and asked for one and they gave you some ground turkey, you would be pretty upset. Obviously many webmasters don't care what content you use to promote their sites since people making galleries/free sites have been buying content to promote sponsors for a long time. It's false advertising though; it's not fair to the customer.
I'm not saying anyone here is doing anything wrong, I am just surprised that more sponsors aren't concerned about what content people are using to promote them. That's why you should always get your content directly from the sponsor. If they won't give any to you, more on to the next sponsor.

So, if you buy content you can only promote sites that actually have the same girl/boy/tranny/chimpansee on their site? Doesn't makes much sense to me...

Its ok to use purchased content, just have to be careful about how you market the model. Its much more of an issue now than it used to be because of Visa and the charge back issue.

|waves|

good point ;-)

If you purchase content and it's getting paying customers to me then I'll probably the content and make sure the surfer can find it :) My main conern is with charge backs as now and then I'll get emails like "Where are the 4,387,692 days of video of ..... like it said in your ad?"

it makes sense, especially if the site is a reality site with episodes of specific models. the only galleries created should be of those specific models.

I think there a few posters in this thread who haven't surfed a link list...

If free site and gallery builders were only allowed to use sponsor content to promote with, it would seriously limit the amount of submissions accepted each day. You know what would happen if every sponsor suddenly added that clause to their TOS? It would be more devastating than 2257. Sites built with sponsor content are accepted on a first come/ first serve basis, so you'd constantly see rejections for over used content. Wouldn't that be grand?

There are obvious exceptions. You can't promote single girl sites with purchased content - duh. But otherwise, if one can find buy content with the same theme as the site being promoted - have at it.

How many of you have even seen the gallery in question; the one which spawned this debate? I have - and let me tell you, it's a fucking shoe fetish gallery in which you hardly ever even saw the model's face, but lots of her high-heeled feet. And the sponsor was concerned that that was misrepresenting his/her site? FUBAR.

The thing that I generally find amazing is just how out of the loop most paysite / sponsors are with other avenues of the business.

Daily I see smaller paysites submitting the same gallery template day in and day out. How are these twit paysite owners that get blacklisted expected to help their affiliates out?

Purchased content is necessary if you want to get listed on tgp's and ll's...if a sponsor bitches about it...move to another sponsor as they obviously are clueless when it comes to TGP submitting and LL submitting.

My own opinion on this issue is that you have to discuss TGP galleries and link list style free sites separately as they are two different modes of advertising.

With TGPs over the years as tgp owners became more and more restrictive on the amount of advertising on each gallery the pics themselves by necessity had to become a key part of your marketing. In this case if it is a reality site or amateur girl site I can see the sponsor getting upset with bought content.

With link list style free sites you get usually two pages of advertising before the surfer even sees any pics. The free site webmaster's job is to design two pages of advertising so compelling that the surfer doesn't even see the pics. He is off to your sponsor. In fact using sponsor content on a free site is counter productive in that you can usually only promote one site. So as an advertiser with sponsor content if a surfer clicks to your sponsor on your index page and then returns to your free site you have nothing else to show him.

I think purchased content is ok. I don't like when my own free content is used to promote another sponsors! Or if a partner downloads content for his sites from members zone without permission.

Or even the submission rules for a linklist, there's so many of them out there that say that sponsor content is not accepted due to being overused.

I miss the good old days where you had to buy your own content to promote programs, none of the programs gave good content away, only the crappy stuff.....