Hi, on this forum I have heard a lot of things said about PPP - Pay Per Play. Some people have negative views towards it or maybe just negative views towards the people who post about it. From the start I will say I am at this stage neutral. To me it seems like a good idea - It's free - It has many large companies signed up for it already and it has partnered with Google. I will admit that many ventures like this folder in the first year (Agloco is in the throws of going under before it really got started). People come to your site, hears a 5 sec audio ad and that's it - no clicking or leaving your site so you are paid 100% of the time for every visitor and the visitor remains on your site. What is wrong with that??? Sure, time will tell if they actually pay the publishers (those that place the code on their pages the play the ads). Please share your thoughts about PPP - Pay Per Play - either good or bad, all is welcome. If you want to know more just click the link below Happy to hear from everyone Have a great 2008
Well if every visitor has to pay -> I say no, it is not a good idea. But, I haven't tried so my answer is not based on experience.
Do you have a site that could serve as an example, I haven't heard of PPP ads before and would like to take a look.
Visitors don't have to pay any money. The publisher get paid for making the visitor listen to 5 sec audio advertisement. That is why it is called Pay Per Play.
Are these like the "You've won a free iPod Nano" ads that I hear? I've noticed in the past week that Digg.com has started using them, and I've got to say that they are very annoying. I bet Digg's owners make a bundle of $$$ on them though.
I can see the benefit of it for the webmaster but if it goes global and every websites uses this, customers will just have to mute their computer. Also think about usability? How many of us surf listening to music at the same time. Wouldn't that be annoying? It will definitely change the surfers behavior if it goes global... They will just make sure the Mute is on! How will companies track the effectiveness of each ads? There will be some kind of support text on the page for sure otherwise the customers hears the ad then what? They will be a link to click so there might be two sets of payment, one for the ad to be heard and one where the customers takes actions and click the support link. Guess which one will pay the most? It is a bit early but I think there will also be a hack that will disable this and kill the whole concept. Verdict: Doomed to fail!
Yes you may be right, it may be doomed to fail but then.... what if it doesn't and you missed the open door , ground floor opportunity.... Oh, I don't think I mentioned, Google have partnered with this concept - I will repeat PARTNERED (not taken over/bought out). So google thinks it is a concept work being involved in. But , of course that doesn't guarantee it's success. As for live sites, all there is is a demo site, if you click my link below you will go to a site that has the demo (just click the get paid on 3 tiers - llearn more link). I am only new to it but I thought it was a reasonable idea and just wanted a little feed back. Thanks everyone, Great forum
I think pay per play adds are going to cross the line from adds being tolerable, to adds being too invasive. I think it's going to be the new popup really. The single, most annoying this about PPP though is the sheer number of forum posters who try to give it a positive spin and get people to click their link wihtout saying it's pay per play, when you know that it has to be. It was new the first time, not the fifteenth time. I'm not accusing ou of doing this, but there are quite a few people who have done this, even signing up to new forums to make just that post.
2 problems: 1) annoying as anything - already been discussed in this thread 2) easy to fake - just like CPM ads, bots can be set up to view the PPP ads causing problems for advertisers and legitimate publishers alike. The world is moving to CPA advertising, learn to embrace it!
I am in two minds about this concept. Firstly I think it will be good for novice webmasters who can capitalise on all traffic, targeted or not. On the other hand, for browsers, I think it could get rather annoying. Also the benefit for large corporations could be huge, as they are getting their brand name out there. I think that this is an advertising space more for corporate giants, i.e. coke, who want brand awareness out of their adds rather than sales.
Why worry about Pay these jerks?.....be original and start your own business. New idea's and concepts are what make people rich. If their idea works good for them. But I rather be creative and find my own goldmine, well I guess I already have made my money. I think I'll retire soon at 35.....well C ya all at the beach surfing. Heather48DD http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZtop_secret_money http://heather48dd.bravejournal.com/entry/20870
I'm not too found of the idea, because eventually when your competition catches up and creates a website without pay per play, you'll be left with the remains of something that could have potentially been bigger. I think it's a greedy way of doing things, and isn't really worth it in the long run.
I think it's interesting idea, although I'd rather have fewer visitors that get me more, than trying to get massive amount of users that pay little. Naturally if you have HUGE (and I mean really millions visitors HUGE) amount of traffic then it could be interesting to see how it goes.
Sure I hear what you all are saying. I'm just looking at PPP as an alternative to adsense/bidvertiser or whatever PPC you use. There are a heap of professional sites now that play well over 1 min of audio adds on there landing page so in my mind a 5 second add that play once isn't that bad. I do make most of my money from affiliate sales and around $120/month from adsense. I have tried bidvertiser but the click rate was not up to the amounts that adsense ads get eventhou adsense pay sucks. Anyway, Cool forum guy. Keep up the good work.