Comments on: Dan Rua of PayPerPost Bought Me a Beer

By: LIMEWIRE

LIMEWIRE — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 11:37:02 +0000

Hi, there!..999895bf1e9fec26e62f82530f2b7b34

By: eve

eve — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:27:40 +0000

congrats on the beer!

By: Bob Buskirk

Bob Buskirk — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:00:54 +0000

nice beer selection!

By: Kumiko

Kumiko — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 00:14:11 +0000

I like your style Dan and I feel bad that I’ve spent a lot of time being less than positive about your investment. I’ll tell you what would work for me:

If an advertiser finds my site through the PPP Directory – charge a 20% service fee. You did the work and deserve it. You’re still undercutting RM and would be the marketplace of choice for me. Furthermore, it gives you a great incentive to promote and market my site to advertisers!

If an advertiser orders on a site directly – 0% service fee as I did all the work. But the widget will always have the PPPDirect logo to compensate for processing fees and that level of advertising on my site is worth a lot more than what would be made through a review commission! 10% and your logo appearing (widget or popup) is just too much in my mind.

By: VC Dan

VC Dan — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:02:50 +0000

This is great feedback on how you think about various tradeoffs Kumiko.

Given your decision to go badge-less, I’m guessing you figured any potential affiliate income didn’t compensate for RM’s 100% markup. I won’t debate that choice.

PPP Direct’s 10% markup offers a very different tradeoff. You are betting that 10 times as many advertisers will prefer using home-grown email negotiation and manual tracking vs. PPP Direct’s negotiation/tracking widget. We may disagree on that bet, but it’s not necessary in a data vacuum. Running with the PPP Direct widget AND a homegrown badge allows you to see if your 10X bet is sound.

Thanks for all the insight Kumiko — it suggests that PPP Direct widget adopters deserve as much marketing and advertisers as PPP can throw at them…very interesting

By: Kumiko

Kumiko — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:54:22 +0000

Andy makes some valid points but it all relies on a large advertiser visiting the site in the first place. If a large advertiser is surfing around for smaller blogs to promote on they’d have to be prepared for some manual work just to find the sites.

Isn’t that the point of the PPPDirect directory – to make it easier for large advertisers? I’ve got no problem with PPP charging 10% if the advertiser finds me through the directory but if I’ve had to put the hard work in getting the advertiser to my site in the first place I don’t think PPP deserves a commission for my work.

I’m sure with ReviewMe and PPP running side by side PPP would get a lot more action – but don’t forget that I can make $25 affiliate income if a new advertiser purchases through the ReviewMe button! With both buttons showing $40, I’d make more with ReviewMe!

By: Super Affiliate

Super Affiliate — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 12:02:48 +0000

I also like the idea of listing both on the site, or at least using both as an option. While I’ve been listed in the ReviewMe directory for two months now, it hasn’t sent me any new orders. Yet, if it did they would take their 50% cut. The one review I did have was direct from the user visiting the blog. Should I have used PayPerPost I would have earned more as they take less.

By: Vijay

Vijay — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 05:14:34 +0000

I do agree with Kumiko at this point. When a blog such has yours has gained enough trust, most advertisers will be willing to do business directly with you. Thus, by cutting out the middleman, you are able to get more money and also the advertiser can negotiate directly with you for anything regarding the review.

With a reliable blog, the only reason such a service like reviewme exists is to help advertisers who have not visited your site, to find it.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 04:13:50 +0000

Interesting…

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 04:13:20 +0000

I doubt many people would be voting in that Poll…