2 ms·
In 2008 I worked for an ad network and we dealt with a massive amount of fraudulent traffic. We did our best to shield our advertisers from the obviously bogus
by meritt 8y ago
In 2008 I worked for an ad network and we dealt with a massive amount of fraudulent traffic. We did our best to shield our advertisers from the obviously bogus traffic, as it absolutely killed traffic quality and inflated CPAs.
However some advertisers, notably one large video game/entertainment website, wanted to purchase as much traffic as possible, and they were overjoyed to get the bot traffic (which went for a CPC of about $0.001). They were buying $10-20k per day from us of fraudulent traffic. Turns out they were relying on the audience engagement platforms (alexa, hitwise, quantcast, comscore, etc) to track their audience size and those platforms incorrectly counted our bot traffic as legitimate.
As the majority of their advertisers were brand marketing (e.g. Nintendo paying for a full-site background spread for the latest Zelda) and there was no direct way to measure success, advertisers would be swayed by the third-party audience profiles and agree it was good idea to spend massive amounts of money on ad campaigns there.
- IAmGraydon 8y agoHow and why was bot traffic priced at $0.001 CPC? No ad network would price legitimate traffic that low, which means you must have known it was illegitimate. So that means you were complicit in committing fraud against the downstream advertisers, correct?
- meritt 8y ago> How and why was bot traffic priced at $0.001 CPC? Our ad server code only supported 3 decimal places. It wasn't until later that we figured out the how/why behind their desire for what we outright informed them was most likely bot traffic. And yeah, I didn't stay much longer at that company. The entire industry is incredibly sketchy and that apparently hasn't changed much.