6 ms·
I don't think reputable ad networks would advertise on pirate sites. The disreputable ones don't get you $2 cpms. Period. I think he is off by at least an order
by dumbfounder 9y ago
I don't think reputable ad networks would advertise on pirate sites. The disreputable ones don't get you $2 cpms. Period. I think he is off by at least an order of magnitude, maybe more.
Source: I run twicsy.com, which major networks avoid because of nsfw content, and only get about 12 cent RPM (revenue per page per 1000).
- elorant 9y agoTry reading the story about Methbot.
- dumbfounder 9y agoDefinitely interesting stuff, but it is a different scheme that involves hundreds or thousands of sites. We are talking about a single insanely high volume site and that makes a big difference.
- raphar 9y agounrelated. Can you tell the bandwidth of your site? (or its approximate magnitude)
- dumbfounder 9y agoIt's not tremendously high because I don't host the images. It is very roughly 500gb per day. (I get a TON of bot traffic)
- raphar 9y agoWow, thats not a bandwidth to host from aws! thanx!
- ryan-c 9y agoThey absolutely do, they just don't realize. There are a lot of schemes for "laundering" where the ad ran. Aside from popunder/redirect shenanigans that were covered in the press recently, they can iframe a "legit" site (that they control or partner with) which then runs the ad. They may or may not bother to actually arrange the ad to be visible.
- dumbfounder 9y agoYeah it can happen, no doubt, but on a super high traffic site like the main video pirate site they are talking about I think they would stick out like a sore thumb if they were making millions. Or maybe I'm wrong.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- ryan-c 9y agoYou're wrong :-(
- dumbfounder 9y agoSo you think one of the highest trafficked sites out there can run this fraud scheme and continue to make money out in the open? I think that sort of stuff works spread across hundreds of sites, but not on singular high traffic sites like the one mentioned in the article.
- user5994461 9y agoFYI for both of you. The site closed their stats after 2015 and moved to google analytics. Being a shady website is rarely an obstacle to using the same thing as everyone else.
- ryan-c 9y agoThey can run the laundering scheme with a rotation of however many decoy sites as they like. Making one site look like hundreds is not hard.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- leetbulb 9y agoOne of our network's primary goals is to maintain a sizable collection of exclusive and AOR offers, including adult. Doing so successfully for 10 years, we're considered "top-tier" by our publishers and advertiser and are able to offer very competitive payouts. In order to accomplish this, we've filtered and pruned away publishers of the sort. EDIT: Just realized OP is taking about incent stuff for hosting sites. We, and most "reputable" ad networks 100% disallow incent traffic and have a zero-tolerance policy.
- Asooka 9y agoAlso, the "50% run adblocker" is probably also way too low. I really hope it's closer to 90%.
- user5994461 9y agoAuthor here. The readers from HN are around 60% last I checked and it's pretty much the most knowledgeable large audience you will come across.
- erikb 9y agoThis is really the saddest news I read today.
- mikkelam 9y agoBut also and audience that understands the need of ads, and therefore choose to not block ads
- erikb 9y agoAnd this is the most stupid thing I've read today. The only reason it isn't the most stupid thing all of humanity has read in the existence of writing is because there's also Trump. But you're a strong competitor for him, be proud.
- onlyfacts___ 9y ago7 more years tho
- user5994461 9y agoAuthor here. The estimates could go either way. Kindly note that the stats are incomplete, notably the welcome page is missing. Some ads are cheaper, some countries are cheaper. Put 3 ads per page from 3 different networks to counter balance. Then force the page to refresh once or twice. There are many ways to optimize revenues when one really care about revenues. I hate to break it up to you but your site is picture hosting, it's low engagement and low value. People will not try the wrong "download" button 3 times until they find the right one, only to do the same thing again next week for the new episode of games of thrones.
- dumbfounder 9y agoYes, agreed my site is "low value". Despite the engagement though, an obviously pirate site is also low value by nature of the networks that are willing to work with it. Quote me some actual networks they use and cite the cpm's they typically pay and I will concede. Right now we are both speculating.
- jedberg 9y agoAs someone who ran a fairly large, mostly reputable website (reddit), I agree that you are off by an order or magnitude or more. There is no way they get close to $1 CPM. They'd be lucky to get 10 cents, probably closer to 1 or 2 cents. They most likely barely break even after paying themselves a modest salary.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- ABCLAW 9y agoYour CPM estimations are in line with my experience, and I also think the profit calculations are off. That said, thinking about it raised an interesting question: are fake download button ads presented to a risk-taking demographic a special case? Even spending up to five to ten dollars per compromised machine, I could easily turn a hefty profit.
- 9y ago
- rllin 9y agoHave been working on something similar, do you mind explaining how you chose ad networks? and any other monetization hot tips?
- dumbfounder 9y agoIt's all about working with the premium ad networks. They won't touch me so I don't make squat.