Re:Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone
by jefftk on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @11:08AM
(#25431523)
As I wrote in my response to rndgermandude [1], only some advertisers work this way. If you put up pictures of standing desks, people click through those ads, land on your site, and purchase desks, then it does not matter how scummy the publisher is because you can accurately measure the quality of traffic you are getting from them. On the other hand, if your ads aren't expected to lead to an online purchase (beverages, cars, political ads) this model doesn't work.
Re:Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone
by briandear on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @11:45AM
(#25431966)
Exactly this. When I advertise, I don’t care if a million users see it. I just care that Ad Spend < CAC.
Getting the initial price is going to be hard, but over time, rates will start to become known.
Couldn't the price just be based on the actual payoff the advertiser gets (aka increased product sales)? The publisher is incentivized to set the maximum price that the advertiser will pay, and the advertiser is incentivized to get the most bang for their buck, so at the very least they would never pay more than what the ad brings them in terms of revenue.
Over time, this should reach an equilibrium. Niche publications may have to charge low prices at the start as they build their reputation among advertisers, but I think that's a worthwhile price to pay if it means better privacy and eliminating a problematic advertising model of CPM/CPC (where fraud is possible and tracking is required to battle it).