I guess bandwidth and time are cheaper than people commonly think 
-
Who thinks this?Originally posted by webmaster x
I guess bandwidth and time are cheaper than people commonly think
-
Mostly high volume low quality traffic pushersOriginally posted by Kristian
Who thinks this?Comment
-
So if 1 in 300 is not a good ratio what is???PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic
AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online!
TChicks.com | Angeles Cid | Mariana Cordoba | MAILERS WELCOME!Comment
-
Because it feels a heck of a lot better than 1 in 3000.
Comment
-
True, but wouldn't the low income be incentive enough to look for better conversions......or at the most basic, fine tune one's existing marketing in order to convert his traffic better?Originally posted by evildick
Because it feels a heck of a lot better than 1 in 3000.
Comment
-
All traffic is Good.
1:30 with SE traffic
1:300 with TGP traffic
TGP traffic 10x easier to get. So no real difference7Comment
-
The more traffic numbers you are playing with, statistically you will require more hits to maintain the same ratiors.. 1:300 when you are pushing large volumes of traffic actually IS good.. anything over 1:150 with large traffic, and you have a phenom.Comment
-
For tgp traffic I'd say it's acceptable ... but we are wasting so much traffic anywaysOriginally posted by rayadp05Comment
-
blah blah blahComment
-
i like to see under 1:500 first page uniques, but a lot of programs don't report 1st page so their ratios are worthless.Originally posted by webmaster x
I guess bandwidth and time are cheaper than people commonly think
Comment
-
Fri Oct 01 1,530 1:38 40
Sat Oct 02 1,142 1:39 29
Sun Oct 03 1,134 1:32 35
Mon Oct 04 1,293 1:35 37
Tue Oct 05 1,077 1:20 53
Wed Oct 06 1,283 1:44 29
Thu Oct 07 1,415 1:29 49
Fri Oct 08 1,482 1:37 40
Sat Oct 09 1,326 1:32 41
Sun Oct 10 1,354 1:28 48
Mon Oct 11 1,367 1:35 39
I got no time for shithole tgp traffic
Comment
-
Based on your server log and compared with actual signups.Originally posted by FlyingIguana
i like to see under 1:500 first page uniques, but a lot of programs don't report 1st page so their ratios are worthless.Comment
-
dating/community/personal info traffic rulez, ehOriginally posted by 80smetal
Fri Oct 01 1,530 1:38 40
Sat Oct 02 1,142 1:39 29
Sun Oct 03 1,134 1:32 35
Mon Oct 04 1,293 1:35 37
Tue Oct 05 1,077 1:20 53
Wed Oct 06 1,283 1:44 29
Thu Oct 07 1,415 1:29 49
Fri Oct 08 1,482 1:37 40
Sat Oct 09 1,326 1:32 41
Sun Oct 10 1,354 1:28 48
Mon Oct 11 1,367 1:35 39
I got no time for shithole tgp traffic
Comment
-
google and yahoo ruleOriginally posted by webmaster x
dating/community/personal info traffic rulez, eh
Comment
-
On average I convert at 1:600, and Im over the moon.
Hosting is under $100/month
I spend no more than $200/month on content
I send 2500-5000 hits clicks to sponsors/day, doing about 15hours of solid work/week
now... tell me what isnt GOOD about that ?I dont need a sig.
Comment
-
yeah, YAHOO mail, chat, profiles, biz boards, etc rules. Google using that russian script rules too (but not as reliably)Originally posted by 80smetal
google and yahoo rule
Comment
-
Originally posted by webmaster x
yeah, YAHOO mail, chat, profiles, biz boards, etc rules. Google using that russian script rules too (but not as reliably)
Comment
-
Yeah... My second page uniques convertion is always better than that.... Who are you trying to impress here?? Show us first page raw hits and then we'll talk...Originally posted by 80smetal
Fri Oct 01 1,530 1:38 40
Sat Oct 02 1,142 1:39 29
Sun Oct 03 1,134 1:32 35
Mon Oct 04 1,293 1:35 37
Tue Oct 05 1,077 1:20 53
Wed Oct 06 1,283 1:44 29
Thu Oct 07 1,415 1:29 49
Fri Oct 08 1,482 1:37 40
Sat Oct 09 1,326 1:32 41
Sun Oct 10 1,354 1:28 48
Mon Oct 11 1,367 1:35 39
I got no time for shithole tgp traffic
Playa....
I'm just a newbie.Comment
-
server logs don't track clicks to sponsors. i typically go by sales per unique impressions. some sponsors have fairly accurate click counts.Originally posted by webmaster x
Based on your server log and compared with actual signups.Comment
-
sent to my own site shitface, not sponsorOriginally posted by tranza
Yeah... My second page uniques convertion is always better than that.... Who are you trying to impress here?? Show us first page raw hits and then we'll talk...
Playa....
Its a google yahoo mix
Comment
-
1:300 is very goodI don't use ICQ anymore.Comment
-
who cares about ratio? 1:300 can suck or be amazing...Comment
-
Originally posted by 80smetal
sent to my own site shitface, not sponsor Its a google yahoo mix
Comment
-
There is a lot of BULLSHIT in this thread.Comment
-
well 300 as base ratio is better than 30000Comment
-
Translation: Is it quitting time at Taco Bell yet?Originally posted by pussyluver
There is a lot of BULLSHIT in this thread.
Comment
-
Why do people think ratio means anything when it don't?Comment
-
I think 1:300 is a good ratio for TGP traffic
<-- Post 2000!Last edited by More Booze; 10-12-2004, 03:06 AM.Comment
-
its good for tgp. depends on way too many different things though. if you have more/better links on a tgp gallery you can get twice as many clicks.I host with VacaresComment
-
trueOriginally posted by beemk
its good for tgp. depends on way too many different things though. if you have more/better links on a tgp gallery you can get twice as many clicks.Comment
-
Everyone can do 1:300 from even the worst TGP traffic .. just make your ad say "BUY EXPENSIVE PORN HERE, $50 FOR A FULL MONTH, ONLY RICH PEOPLE CLICK HERE"Originally posted by More Booze
I think 1:300 is a good ratio for TGP traffic
<-- Post 2000!
Ratio means shit!Comment
-
there's nothing wrong with 1:300 ratio's
it all depends on volume....I rather sent 100k hits a day with 1:300 than 10k hits a day with 1:50
it's the amount of money you'll make in the end.Comment
-
yeah, you cant compare ratio, depends on your CTR if its 1% or 15%, depends if the sponsor count 1st or 2nd page uniques. You even cant compare sales to different sponsors, because mostly they have different prices, some have cheap trial, some dont. $$$ is what matters in the end, but if you know your stats, ratio can be important. If you know you do 1:500 on 1st page uniques with a 5% CTR and then have a worse ratio, you know smt is wrong.
Comment
-
I dont know how to classify my sites, but out of the sponsors that i get sales for, my ratios are usually between 1:60 - 1:100ICQ 434221575Comment
-
If you can get that for TGP traffic, then it's GOOD. But I don't really care about ratios it's all about how much you make at the end of the period.Comment
-
what if:
sponsor A has a conversion ratio of 1:100 with a payout of $20
sponsor B has a conversion ratio of 1:300 with a payout of $60
same to me.
And...
It's easy to get a 1:10 conversion ratio with Google and Yahoo. The problem is, how much traffic are you getting?
If you want more traffic from Google and/or Yahoo, either add less targetted keywords or increase your CPC. Meaning, either your conversion ratio or your costs go up.
Conversion ratios are different for everyone.
The right question shoud be: How much money did you make in the end?Comment
-
We do, acutally all the NATS affiliates count clicks and we still see TGP traffic under 1:100. So, I can see why he would move to another affiliate if he was only doing 1:300. But it's too hard to judge without knowing traffic sources, sites promoted, etc.Originally posted by FlyingIguana
i like to see under 1:500 first page uniques, but a lot of programs don't report 1st page so their ratios are worthless.Comment
-
heh, 1:300 is a good ratio if you are pushing tgp traffic, its a VERY good ratio IMOOriginally posted by webmaster x
I guess bandwidth and time are cheaper than people commonly think
gfynicky @ gmail.comComment
-
Ratios don't mean anything. When I buy e.g. 10,000 hits a day for let's say 5 cent per click and send this traffic directly to a sponsor that pays $40 per signup I make enough profit with a ratio of 1:300, i.e. $25 per signup and about $800 a day.
Of course I could try to get better ratios but some traffic just doesn't convert better. I rather spend that time to get another traffic deal with above profit
Comment
Comment