4 ms·

Pretty horrible outcome for anyone who got in on their IPO ($21/share) just 4 years ago. It's kind of a fitting end for mostly a sham company. The business mod

Pretty horrible outcome for anyone who got in on their IPO ($21/share) just 4 years ago. It's kind of a fitting end for mostly a sham company. The business model was shaky at best, mostly just milking first page rankings all over google. The argument that coupon codes incent buying activity is valid, but literally all this company did was be the first on google. If the actual retailer ranked ahead of RTMN for coupon searches, RTMN wouldn't be anywhere near where it is today, and retailers sales would be exactly the same.

nabraham 10y ago
It's not easy to be first on google, especially on brands where you don't own the brand. If you can do this consistently please immediately set up a company, charge, and go eventually go public.
paulcole 10y ago
>Pretty horrible outcome for anyone who got in on their IPO ($21/share) just 4 years ago. Anyone who got in at 21 and didn't sell at 42? They have all my sympathy.
qeternity 10y ago
Retailers sales would be the same, but they wouldn't be paying unnecessary commission to RMN. Sales commissions make sense when someone is directing new customers to a business. But as has been said in this thread, they were simply better at SEO. The customer was already a) aware of said product and b) showing intention to purchase. These are precisely the value propositions that affiliate marketing was designed for.
- rcarrigan87 10y ago
  I was with you until that last sentence. Are you saying RTMN's model is the same value proposition as all affiliate marketers? Sites like Expedia, Wirecutter, and hundreds of other review or aggregator websites that monetize through affiliate marketing add way more value to the user than RTMN.
  - qeternity 10y ago
    No, that was my point. The exact value that affiliate marketers are supposed to provide, RTMN does very little, and probably none at all. They are a complete failure in delivering on the affiliate value proposition.
colinbartlett 10y ago
I think that's what this company is trying to do: http://thrivecommerce.com/ http://thrivecommerce.com/ white label coupon code sites and get them ranked above.

nabraham 10y ago

It's not easy to be first on google, especially on brands where you don't own the brand. If you can do this consistently please immediately set up a company, charge, and go eventually go public.

paulcole 10y ago

>Pretty horrible outcome for anyone who got in on their IPO ($21/share) just 4 years ago. Anyone who got in at 21 and didn't sell at 42? They have all my sympathy.

qeternity 10y ago

Retailers sales would be the same, but they wouldn't be paying unnecessary commission to RMN. Sales commissions make sense when someone is directing new customers to a business. But as has been said in this thread, they were simply better at SEO. The customer was already a) aware of said product and b) showing intention to purchase. These are precisely the value propositions that affiliate marketing was designed for.

rcarrigan87 10y ago
I was with you until that last sentence. Are you saying RTMN's model is the same value proposition as all affiliate marketers? Sites like Expedia, Wirecutter, and hundreds of other review or aggregator websites that monetize through affiliate marketing add way more value to the user than RTMN.
- qeternity 10y ago
  No, that was my point. The exact value that affiliate marketers are supposed to provide, RTMN does very little, and probably none at all. They are a complete failure in delivering on the affiliate value proposition.

colinbartlett 10y ago

I think that's what this company is trying to do: http://thrivecommerce.com/ http://thrivecommerce.com/ white label coupon code sites and get them ranked above.