Using Exit Splash to cookie stuff

[Jack]

Am I being too naive here or what I don't know. Someone please tell me your opinion on this.

You use exit splash to redirect someone to a product page thereby forcing your cookie on them even though they are trying to leave your site. Furthermore you are using a cloaked link that frames that product site so that the url appears to the visitor that they are still on your site.

Is this cookie stuffing and is it right or wrong? OK or not OK?

Jack

PS. I am particularly interested in Vita's and all of the rest of the forum team's view on this.

[Nik]

I don't think I can say if it right or wrong.

In my opinion, I don't think it is a problem. I think it is highly relevant to what the visitor may be looking for, since they are searching for the term.

I think this is coming down to, if doing this would be considered stealing sales from someone else. And I don't think this is the case. If its not what the visitor was looking for they can go else where until they find the information they were looking for, a different affiliate perhaps, and purchase from their link.

This is what I think
Nik

[Jack]

We still must consider that the person wanted to leave your site without clicking on your affiliate link. Do we respect that decision by the visitor? This may be relevant to what the person was looking for but the fact is, they are leaving your site for a reason. They obviously didn't find what they are looking for. Yet the affiliate makes them take the cookie.

Now, with some affiliate networks like Clickbank, it's the last link that counts so no, that would not be stealing. With the affiliate programs that use the first cookie then yes, it would be stealing.

But again, this is secondary to the main point. Do we respect the visitor's decision to leave our site without forcing our cookie on them? I think we must.

[thomas2000]

Hi Jack,

You know that I'm using it myself..

Here is a screenshot from clickbank about exit windows:



here is the link to that page, scroll down to FAQ

http://www.clickbank.com/help/affiliate-...hoplinks/#

[Jack]

Thomas I can't check that from work right now but I will later. But I can't see Clickbank being ok with forcing a cookie on someone against their will. Does this question assume that this is what is happening? What does the clickbank TOS say about it? And how does it define cookie stuffing?

And even if it is legal or not against the rules, is it right? It's legal for me to do a lot of things but that certainly does not make them right or ethical.

[Nik]

So in this argument, this would discount any use of the exit splash script, no matter where the visitor is being redirected to, since the way it gets activated is by the visitor hitting either the back button or closing the window. Hence the visitor right to leave is broken.

But I don't think the visitor's right to leave is broken. The purpose of exit splash is to recycle the visitors exiting your site, by directing them to an offer and see if they are interested in it. They can take advantage of this offer, or if not they are free to leave.

[Jack]

There is a big difference in the use of Exit Splash to get them to accept an offer and using it deceitfully for monetary gain.

That said, I think the whole idea of Exit Splash is nothing but big annoyance and turn off for the visitor, intruding his decision to leave your site. So in my opinion, yes, any use of that script is discounted.

[mudbutt]

IMO, its deceitful when you have to iframe and cloak the url. Is it ethical? Thats up to you to decide.

[Jack]

Ok, I've email Clickbank to clarify this issue. I've told them exactly how this plugin was being used and asked if this is acceptable. I will report back when I receive a reply.

[Jack]

I did find out that framing the empire formula site is against it's terms of service. Here is what it says.

Quote:...you agree not to:

8.Frame or link to the Site or any of the content or information available from the Site, unless EMPIRE FORMULA expressly consents to such linking and/or framing.

Obviously we have been give express consent to link to it.

If you would like to see it. You can follow this link http://corinzander.com/EmpireFormulaReport and click at the bottom where it says "Terms".

Yes, that's my affiliate link. I decided that if I was going to put a link to the site for reference, why not make it my aff link? I am a marketer. Besides, while you're at it you can pick up a quality free very large report by Anik Singal.

[Vita_Vee]

I don't think it's unethical, as long as it's not breaking the TOS of the merchant of course. It seems it's not against clickbank's TOS so I wouldn't have any problem doing this for a clickbank product.

If the people visiting our site are not convinced after reading our review and search for another review or bonus offer we will not get credited for the sale anyway as it's the last click that matters (wouldn't feel the same way for the few affiliate programs where it's the 1st click that counts).

But in the case the person who visited our site intentionally didn't click on our affiliate link but decided to purchase the product by going straight to the merchant site (this happens sometimes) then we would get credited no matter what.

Personally I don't use exit scripts for that, if I have not convinced the reader to purchase through my link I find it more productive to redirect him to something different.

[Jack]

I'm not so sure it's against Clickbank's TOS. What thomas quoted there was a little vague in terms of what exactly it was referring to.

Maybe I've been wrong about this whole thing though. I never wanted to come across as some kind of Saint or anything, which I'm not. Maybe it's my distaste of Exit Splash that this stems from and the way I have interpreted the way things ought to work in this business.

I will reconsider this.

---

Do you consider straight out cookie stuffing unethical? Because the end result of the two methods are exactly the same. They accomplish the same goal.

The person comes to your site and leaves with your cookie no matter what they do. They are forced to take it.

That sentence applies to any method of cookie stuffing and to the exit splash method we are referring to. So is any method of cookie stuffing ethical?

[Nik]

I think cookie stuffing is would be unethical because the visitor doesn't know that they are getting the cookie. Though technically in both ways the visitor will get cookied. With exit splash they are visiting the third party site, and so they can figure out they may have been cookied.

[Jack]

They don't know they are going to the product site if it is being framed.

But also, why would you assume they know they are being cookied even if they did know they are going to the product site?

Lots of new people know very little about cookies and how they work.

[Nik]

This is true, I don't think non-techsavvy people would know about cookies, but I would consider cookie stuffing to be a more black hat way to give them a cookie.

Anyway it is not about cooking them for me. My goal is to send them to the vendor page and have them purchase from there if they want. Unfortunately they get cookied in the process, but as Vita said if they go to a different affiliates site and purchase from their link they will get credit.

[Jack]

In my opinion this is the exact same thing as cookie stuffing. To me it is also black hat. If you want to send them to the vendor site then presell them effectively so they will want to click through to the vendor's site. If they don't do that, then they obviously the presell wasn't effective. Don't force it on them.

[Nik]

If I haven't been able to pre-sell them, the next thing I can do is to send them to the vendor page, so maybe they can do a better job.

But as far as the cookying problem, unfortunately I can't track if they are purchasing from my exit splash or leaving and purchasing from the vendor directly.

I suppose incorporating cookie stuffing and exit splash into a test, and comparing the two, would yield some results but there would be to many variables which would require a lot of trials. And I don't thinks it's a big enough problem to spend the time.

[Jack]

I know this thread hasn't been updated. But this issue has come up again so I wanted to post the reply I got from Clickbank with my very direct question about this matter. The answer? Completely dodged the question. She answered a question that I didn't ask.


This tells me they do not care.

Quote:Hi I have a question related to what is considered acceptable according to your
Terms of Service regarding placing a cookie on someone's computer.

There is a plugin called ?Exit Splash? that can be configured to redirect
anyone to any url they choose to when the visitor attempts to leave their site.


People use this in conjunction with a link cloaking plugin that has the ability
to frame the product page so that it appears that the visitor is still on their
site.

So basically it goes like this:

1) The visitor comes to the affiliate's site.
2) The visitor for whatever reason decides to leave the site (without clicking
on an affiliate link)
3) The affiliate redirects the visitor to the product site thereby ?cookie-ing?
the visitor
4) The special link cloaking plugin makes the visitor unaware that he has left
the affiliate's site.

So you can see that no matter what the visitor does, once he has gone to the
affiliate's site, there is no way he can leave the site without getting a cookie
from the affiliate. To me this is the equivalent of cookie stuffing. The visitor
decides he does not want to click on the affiliate's link so the affiliate
forces it on him.

What is your position on this?

Thanks,
Jack Partain


----------
CBCSR(Eileen H): CLOSED: 2010-10-18 07:45:30 AM
Hello Jack,

Thank you for your inquiry. Some of our vendors offer an exit pop-up that
relates to another product on their site, but are not allowed to redirect to a
different product.

Thank you,

Eileen
ClickBank Client Services

[Nik]

Hey Jack, here's the reply I got back from when I sent a support ticked to clickbank a while back regarding this. The answer is much more clearer.

me (Nik) Wrote:I have some claims by other affiliates that the use of an exit page would be
considered cookie stuffing.

I don't think this is cookie stuffing because the visitor is sent to the sales
page which is where the visitor gets the cookie.

I would really appreciate it if someone can take a look at one of my pages as
an example and tell me, if it is, or if it is not cookies stuffing.

Here is the page:
http://coenmayes.com/reviews/cpa-instrum...nts-review

Thanks
Nik

Jenny (clickbank rep) Wrote:Hello,

Thank you for your patience. I have tested the website you have provided, along with testing other HopLinks in regards to this product, and I do see that the affiliate nickname does change and credit the most recent HopLink which is clicked through. This being the case, I do not see that you are cookie stuffing. What is commonly referred to as "cookie stuffing" simply means manipulating the customer purchasing path to intentionally discredit the last true referring affiliate.

For more information on how HopLinks work, please see the following article:

http://www.clickbank.com/help/affiliate-...-hoplinks/

Thank you,

Jenny

[DarioMontesdeOca]

In my opinion it really depends on what type of sites you're utilizing Exit Splash on... I've had visitor complaints when I set up ES on one of my blogs to an affiliate offer, but I've never had a single complaint when using it on my squeeze pages or sales pages.

What I do know for a fact is the money I paid for ES was a great investment because of all the leads I gathered on the second page after they tried closing their browser.