Quote:
|
He should have asked. Overwriting the cookie made us no money. None. Zango had (and has) no incentive to overwrite the cookie. The campaign in question was being run on a cost per visitor (CPV) basis, not on a cost per action (CPA) basis. The cookie was placed by the advertiser.
|
To me, this is the most bald faced piece of bullshit you will ever read.
The VALUE of a CPV program is based on how well the buyer can convert the traffic. If the buyer cannot make money with the traffic, he will not purchase it or will want to pay less for it. Allowing (and some might suggest permitting or even turning a blind eye to) cookie "overwriting", they are creating value for the buyer, who can in turn pay higher rates for the CPV program.
Without end income, the clicks are worthless. By triggering the popup on a very slight delay (1 second or so) they assure that the popped window will be the last one opened. I am certain that this wasn't their original intent with their software, but rather an unintended feature that made their traffic significantly more valuable to the purchasers. Zango clearly would benefit from this financial windfall for it's CPV buyers, who would bid more for the keywords to keep others out or to overtake the most profitable terms based on their abilities to generate income.
To claim that they are not profiting from this situation seems to be telling less than all of the truth as far as I am concerned.
Alex