▲ | crowcroft 6 days ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
In theory, I agree. In practice the whole system is rotten. * Google unilaterally changing bid mechanics raising costs 15% https://finance.yahoo.com/news/google-changed-ad-auctions-ra... * Conversion attribution and cookie bombing fraud from both Criteo and Steelhouse https://finance.yahoo.com/news/criteo-versus-steelhouse-clic... * Phunware click flooding fraud https://www.forbes.com/sites/augustinefou/2021/01/17/ubers-l... * A nearly unending list of different mobile ad frauds https://www.fraud0.com/resources/ad-fraud-cases-of-the-past-... * Viewability fraud https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/31/procter-gamble-chief-markete... * Session hijacking fraud https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/ad-indus... This doesn't sound like a healthy and efficient industry. Not only do vendors clip the ticket aggressively, they divert dollars that advertisers are intending to go to quality media/real publishers, and siphon it off to fraudulent sites and apps where they generally take a higher margin. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | econ 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
I was most impressed by a Google Ad that showed up if you searched for the Dutch tax office. It would only show the name "Tax office" with a free to call phone number under it. Only the hyperlink pointed at a paid number 90 cent per minute. Depending on how busy it is or how exotic your question one can easily be on hold for an hour or two. Then you get the bill and pay 54 euro per hour. Google thought this was a great way to make money. The ad ran forever. Makes you wonder which other phone numbers they highjacked. Would they provide the same service if I copy some website? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | demadog 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
[dead] |