<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Chitika - What went wrong?</title>
	<link>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 22:52:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: &#187; Targeting - Behavorial vs. Contextual&#160;&#187;&#160;affiliateblog.com -- Money-making insights for YOUR site</title>
		<link>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/#comment-173</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Apr 2006 03:16:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/#comment-173</guid>
					<description>[...] I think that you need look no further than one of the most popular affiliate programs on the Internet to get your own answer &amp;#8212; Chitika. In my post Chitika &amp;#8212; What Went Wrong?, I asserted that the reason Chitika had so many clicks but not many sales is that not only do you need to be on the right page, you need someone who is ready to buy the product that Chitika displays in their MiniMall ad. That is why shopping.com merchants are willing to pay for clicks from that site &amp;#8212; if you&amp;#8217;re there you&amp;#8217;re serious about buying, not looking. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] I think that you need look no further than one of the most popular affiliate programs on the Internet to get your own answer &#8212; Chitika. In my post Chitika &#8212; What Went Wrong?, I asserted that the reason Chitika had so many clicks but not many sales is that not only do you need to be on the right page, you need someone who is ready to buy the product that Chitika displays in their MiniMall ad. That is why shopping.com merchants are willing to pay for clicks from that site &#8212; if you&#8217;re there you&#8217;re serious about buying, not looking. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Matt DeAngelis</title>
		<link>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/#comment-107</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 16:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/#comment-107</guid>
					<description>I just got an email from one of the former bigwigs at Hancock who told me that he thinks Modem Media only won 2 CASIE awards for our work, not 5.  

I honestly remember 5, but what do I know?  Let's just say MORE THAN 1.

Matt</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just got an email from one of the former bigwigs at Hancock who told me that he thinks Modem Media only won 2 CASIE awards for our work, not 5.  </p>
<p>I honestly remember 5, but what do I know?  Let&#8217;s just say MORE THAN 1.</p>
<p>Matt
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Matt DeAngelis</title>
		<link>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/#comment-104</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 03:41:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/#comment-104</guid>
					<description>Bzzzzt...SORRY, wrong answer.  When you employ Pay-Per-CLICK advertising, you PAY FOR THE CLICKS.  Period.  Once the click has been made, the publisher's responsibility has ended. 

Chitika thinks they have invented a new pay scheme -- Pay Per CERTAIN Clicks -- but that already exists.  It's called PAY PER SALE.  

If that's what Chitika is trying to say, then just admit it instead of removing the product link, which is absolutely laughable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bzzzzt&#8230;SORRY, wrong answer.  When you employ Pay-Per-CLICK advertising, you PAY FOR THE CLICKS.  Period.  Once the click has been made, the publisher&#8217;s responsibility has ended. </p>
<p>Chitika thinks they have invented a new pay scheme &#8212; Pay Per CERTAIN Clicks &#8212; but that already exists.  It&#8217;s called PAY PER SALE.  </p>
<p>If that&#8217;s what Chitika is trying to say, then just admit it instead of removing the product link, which is absolutely laughable.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Chitika Affiliate</title>
		<link>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/#comment-103</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 03:12:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.affiliateblog.com/2006/02/chitika-what-went-wrong/#comment-103</guid>
					<description>&quot;Curiosity clicks&quot; explained in detail on  Chitika's blog:
http://chitika.com/blog/?p=30

&quot;Q: Regarding curiosity clicks: Last month Chitika suddenly decided to stop curiosity clicks? Every click has “branding value”, and Chitika got paid for those clicks but decided not to pay the clients. Is that true?

Since our merchant partners were not willing to pay for the clicks on product names, we decided to stop displaying links that will not earn revenue to you. Second, we are not getting paid for curiosity clicks either on the product title. In fact, the product title is not click able at all because we actually removed the link from the product name. Why introduce a non-revenue earning link when we cannot compensate the publishers for the resulting leads? If we can bring on board merchants who are interested in recognizing the “branding value” for the product title clicks, we will update the units accordingly so that you can earn more revenue. &quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Curiosity clicks&#8221; explained in detail on  Chitika&#8217;s blog:<br />
<a href='http://chitika.com/blog/?p=30' rel='nofollow'>http://chitika.com/blog/?p=30</a></p>
<p>&#8220;Q: Regarding curiosity clicks: Last month Chitika suddenly decided to stop curiosity clicks? Every click has “branding value”, and Chitika got paid for those clicks but decided not to pay the clients. Is that true?</p>
<p>Since our merchant partners were not willing to pay for the clicks on product names, we decided to stop displaying links that will not earn revenue to you. Second, we are not getting paid for curiosity clicks either on the product title. In fact, the product title is not click able at all because we actually removed the link from the product name. Why introduce a non-revenue earning link when we cannot compensate the publishers for the resulting leads? If we can bring on board merchants who are interested in recognizing the “branding value” for the product title clicks, we will update the units accordingly so that you can earn more revenue. &#8220;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
