5 ms·
The problem with all these programs is that its arguable if this generates any value for the company's paying the affiliate fees. Usually a company is not happy
by DanBlake 17y ago
The problem with all these programs is that its arguable if this generates any value for the company's paying the affiliate fees. Usually a company is not happy with the idea of paying for a customer they already (would have) had.
However, sites like skimlinks seem to be growing (and staying in business) which I think surprised alot of people.
Lets all not forget that these programs mainly survive around 2 affiliate programs- eBay and Amazon. Getting canned from either would be disaster.
- davidu 17y agoThis.
- qeorge 17y agoI think you're dead on about eBay and Amazon being the main sources of income, but we should give them a chance to address this. You have to figure they thought of this on day 1. Specifically, I think this is not moot: "arguable if this generates any value" Making the association that buying from Amazon == donating to charity is worth money to them. Also, at least with eBay, the big money in affiliate revenue is signing up new users. You get paid about ~1.5% of the transaction price vs. $25 every time a new user places a bid (they don't even have to win). So at worst these companies are paying the big bonus once, and they're still making a profit on every sale. tl;dr: there is a value add here, unlike than cookie dropping.