Comments on: The death of cookies? http://www.mabailey.co.uk/the-death-of-cookies/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-death-of-cookies My thoughts about affiliate marketing and online in general Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:12:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Cookie Confusion in Europe | Fish and Clicks http://www.mabailey.co.uk/the-death-of-cookies//comment-page-1#comment-288 Cookie Confusion in Europe | Fish and Clicks Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:48:32 +0000 http://www.mabailey.co.uk/?p=317#comment-288 [...] the use of internet users’ information in a tracking context).Many industry-commentators (such as Matt Bailey) interpreted this to mean that cookies are AOK under the new law, following a statement from the [...] [...] the use of internet users’ information in a tracking context).Many industry-commentators (such as Matt Bailey) interpreted this to mean that cookies are AOK under the new law, following a statement from the [...]

]]> By: John Fraser http://www.mabailey.co.uk/the-death-of-cookies//comment-page-1#comment-286 John Fraser Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:46:15 +0000 http://www.mabailey.co.uk/?p=317#comment-286 The barrier to networks launching cookieless tracking is rarely technical. It should be trivial for a network to implement flash cookies or similar. What these solutions ignore is an important party in any affiliate transaction - the end user. They rarely get invited to the table in industry discussions and it's this void that the EU is trying to fill. By continuing to neglect and/or abuse end-users, we are inviting further intervention that may endanger our industry. It's clear under EU and UK law that we have no absolute right to store information on users, even if they are effectively anonymous - instead we need to negotiate their permission. With cookie tracking, we can do this automatically using p3p headers in the cookie request. Yes this does lead to a small amount of untracked sales, but this is the user's right. There is no similar mechanism for flash cookies or etags, so essentially any network is stepping into a very grey legal area by using them. This may result in a short term gain for affiliates, but could be very damaging in the long term. The barrier to networks launching cookieless tracking is rarely technical. It should be trivial for a network to implement flash cookies or similar. What these solutions ignore is an important party in any affiliate transaction – the end user. They rarely get invited to the table in industry discussions and it’s this void that the EU is trying to fill. By continuing to neglect and/or abuse end-users, we are inviting further intervention that may endanger our industry.
It’s clear under EU and UK law that we have no absolute right to store information on users, even if they are effectively anonymous – instead we need to negotiate their permission. With cookie tracking, we can do this automatically using p3p headers in the cookie request. Yes this does lead to a small amount of untracked sales, but this is the user’s right. There is no similar mechanism for flash cookies or etags, so essentially any network is stepping into a very grey legal area by using them. This may result in a short term gain for affiliates, but could be very damaging in the long term.

]]> By: hero http://www.mabailey.co.uk/the-death-of-cookies//comment-page-1#comment-285 hero Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:04:22 +0000 http://www.mabailey.co.uk/?p=317#comment-285 why affiliates don't favour networks offering the advanced tracking? Because they get priviledges from the networks that don't. It's a shame but there's plenty of affiliates out there who don't give a damn if they get all their sales tracked or not. In terms of cashback sites - transaction enquiries are far less with the networks that have advanced tracking. On our network, these transactions amount to 1% of the total valid sales these affiliates generate. I will happily give you stats on our network, if my word isn't good enough and I'm sure other networks will do the same. As for your suggestion that merchants should reduce rates if the tracking works as it should - well, I think you may want to rethink this, especially as you're the voice of the AMC at the moment. When did a program pay higher commission rates because they dedupe against everything? why affiliates don’t favour networks offering the advanced tracking? Because they get priviledges from the networks that don’t. It’s a shame but there’s plenty of affiliates out there who don’t give a damn if they get all their sales tracked or not.

In terms of cashback sites – transaction enquiries are far less with the networks that have advanced tracking. On our network, these transactions amount to 1% of the total valid sales these affiliates generate. I will happily give you stats on our network, if my word isn’t good enough and I’m sure other networks will do the same.

As for your suggestion that merchants should reduce rates if the tracking works as it should – well, I think you may want to rethink this, especially as you’re the voice of the AMC at the moment. When did a program pay higher commission rates because they dedupe against everything?

]]> By: KevMsutton http://www.mabailey.co.uk/the-death-of-cookies//comment-page-1#comment-283 KevMsutton Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:34:18 +0000 http://www.mabailey.co.uk/?p=317#comment-283 Like the post Matt! From what I have seen from cookieless tracking the %'s vary drastically from merchant to merchant. And without knowing the in's and out's, I believe it also varies based on whether or not 3rd party tracking providers are also involved. In terms of decreased commissions to affiliates based on the fact they will begin to see an increase in the % of sales from cookieless tracking. I don't think this is fair Is it not the case that we should look at it from the other angle. Those sales belonged to the affiliate in the first place? So it is the affiliate whom has always been losing out. Affiliates are being squeezed more and more, as are networks for that matter. For example with the introduction of various 3rd party tracking and additional de-duplication processes. The point being that the attribution of sales as a % is decreasing regardless of cookieless tracking, so to reduce them further based on the cookieless tracking should be out of the question. Like the post Matt!

From what I have seen from cookieless tracking the %’s vary drastically from merchant to merchant. And without knowing the in’s and out’s, I believe it also varies based on whether or not 3rd party tracking providers are also involved.

In terms of decreased commissions to affiliates based on the fact they will begin to see an increase in the % of sales from cookieless tracking.

I don’t think this is fair

Is it not the case that we should look at it from the other angle. Those sales belonged to the affiliate in the first place? So it is the affiliate whom has always been losing out.

Affiliates are being squeezed more and more, as are networks for that matter. For example with the introduction of various 3rd party tracking and additional de-duplication processes. The point being that the attribution of sales as a % is decreasing regardless of cookieless tracking, so to reduce them further based on the cookieless tracking should be out of the question.

]]> By: Andrew Girdwood http://www.mabailey.co.uk/the-death-of-cookies//comment-page-1#comment-281 Andrew Girdwood Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:53:50 +0000 http://www.mabailey.co.uk/?p=317#comment-281 I think the twist in the tale was that this wasn't just about cookies - it was about any form of tracking that left data behind on the client machine. This would have ruled out flash object, etc, alternative tracking techniques... in fact, these very same techniques might now be in breach of the forthcoming laws rather than cookies! I think the twist in the tale was that this wasn’t just about cookies – it was about any form of tracking that left data behind on the client machine. This would have ruled out flash object, etc, alternative tracking techniques… in fact, these very same techniques might now be in breach of the forthcoming laws rather than cookies!

]]> By: HelenMarie http://www.mabailey.co.uk/the-death-of-cookies//comment-page-1#comment-280 HelenMarie Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:06:18 +0000 http://www.mabailey.co.uk/?p=317#comment-280 Hot topic at the moment Matt. When I was in my previous role we launched cookieless tracking and it did have a significant affect on sales levels, however, like you I wouldn't say we saw a mass surge of affiliates moving to take advantage of this. There are some complications with this from a merchant perspective. As you point out above, if (as some of the networks claim) by using cookieless tracking we see a 10% increase in sales then commission rates would need to be reviewed as a lot of merchants do take into account that a certain percentage of sales are untracked / go to phone etc. The other complication is 3rd party tracking, many large campaigns use DART or Atlas to track across all channels and de-dupe, these platforms only use cookie tracking at the moment so there would be a discrepancy between the networks sales reporting vs. the third party and these sales would not be seen within the online channel view. There is definitely an argument to ensure that cookie tracking can be supported by another method of tracking however it needs to be cross channel and industry wide otherwise it won’t work on its own. Hot topic at the moment Matt. When I was in my previous role we launched cookieless tracking and it did have a significant affect on sales levels, however, like you I wouldn’t say we saw a mass surge of affiliates moving to take advantage of this.

There are some complications with this from a merchant perspective. As you point out above, if (as some of the networks claim) by using cookieless tracking we see a 10% increase in sales then commission rates would need to be reviewed as a lot of merchants do take into account that a certain percentage of sales are untracked / go to phone etc. The other complication is 3rd party tracking, many large campaigns use DART or Atlas to track across all channels and de-dupe, these platforms only use cookie tracking at the moment so there would be a discrepancy between the networks sales reporting vs. the third party and these sales would not be seen within the online channel view.

There is definitely an argument to ensure that cookie tracking can be supported by another method of tracking however it needs to be cross channel and industry wide otherwise it won’t work on its own.

]]> By: Sinead http://www.mabailey.co.uk/the-death-of-cookies//comment-page-1#comment-279 Sinead Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:31:42 +0000 http://www.mabailey.co.uk/?p=317#comment-279 Good post Matt, it will be interesting to see how the debate unfolds and what the outcome will be. Sinead Good post Matt, it will be interesting to see how the debate unfolds and what the outcome will be.

Sinead

]]>