Are you a Cookie Stuffer?
Where do you stand on cookie stuffing?
Hello there and welcome to another weeks newsletter, this week I am heading over to “the darkside†to look at an un-ethical technique that was brought to my attention a couple of days ago.
The technique is known as “Cookie Stuffing†and is used by affiliates (and some adware applications) to plant affiliate cookies on a users PC without them actually clicking on an affiliate link.
The technique is outlawed by a lot of major affiliate companies such as Commission Junction and Linkshare, however there are still lot’s of very successful affiliates using the methods on the two networks.
Why do CJ and Linkshare allow this?
Simple, because it makes them more money! For every affiliate transaction that occurs the affiliate management company (CJ, Linkshare, etc.) take a percentage of the sale. Cookie stuffing means that more sales will be credited to affiliates, which equates to more money for the affiliate companies but less profit for the vendor.
For example, let’s say that I used cookie stuffing on this very page. I could stuff this page with an eBay or Amazon affiliate cookie. If I got 500 visitors to the page, that would mean 500 “clicks†on my Amazon/ebay affiliate link.
All of this would be done in the background without you knowing. So why is this so bad – let’s take a look.
The main complaint from affiliates that don’t use the cookie stuffing method if that there commissions are being stolen by these “stuffing†techniques. The cookie stuffers cookie would overwrite any genuine cookie that had been created by a legitimate click on an affiliate link. Meaning if the cookied user was to make a purchase, the cookie stuffer would get the commission instead of the legitimate click!
Earlier I also mentioned adware. You may have heard of “Zango†and “180 Solutionsâ€, these applications will install on your PC, usually without your knowledge and will plant affiliate cookies on your PC when you visit a certain website or “hit†a particular subject.
These companies have been reported in the past for cookie stuffing but again it is still widely believed that the applications are stuffing cookies illegally on your PC! (Do a search for Zango/180 solutions cookie stuffing and see what you can find!) Whilst they are still making the affiliate companies’ money (CJ, Linksahre, CB, etc.) the trend looks set to continue.
I fear that this worrying and lets be honest – unethical to the extreme, method of making affiliate sales could result in a vendor backlash! If a vendor is offering 50% commission on a product to affiliates, how long will it take them to lower the commission percentage to make up for the amount of money they are losing from cookie stuffers?
Where do you all stand on the cookie stuffing debate? Should you use un-ethical methods if it brings you results or is it really not worth risking your affiliate account to make a quick buck?
Let me know your thoughts!
Thanks for reading,
Dan
Receive Free Email Updates When A New Entry Is Posted. Join Them! |
Comments
16 Responses to “Are you a Cookie Stuffer?”Receive FREE Email Updates, according to one reader it's....
"Better Than A Poke In
The Eye With A Sharp Stick"
Currently Enjoy This Blog More Than Christmas.
Follow Me Via RSS!
Subscribe to this site's RSS feed.
I would also just like to point out that there is no cookie stufing being used on this, or any of my sites before any of you ask! 🙂
I am totally against it and I think it should be punishable by law, like spam.
I had no idea about the adware programs, although I generally stay away from anything like that and check my computer regularly for things that I didn’t install, so I just wanted to say thanks for ‘yet again’ good and informative information.
The adware app’s are a real pain. I tend to check my add/remove programs list quite often and the amount of times I find “Zango” sitting at the bottom of the list is amazing.
I had a problem with 180 solutions in the past as well, from memory I believe it slowed my PC down to a hault and had to do a big spyware removal session 🙁
I am dead against this and installing anything with the users knowledge should be illegal also is some debate going on wheather cookies are an invasion of privacy i reckon they will still be allowed but will be a message that a cookie needs to be installed and the reason why.
Hi Dan,
Interesting topic. I have one question though…
What if it is the vendor that is doing the cookie stuffing to protect his affiliates from having their commission stolen?
This sounds like a real problem in the making! Personally, I am not
doing any affiliate marketing at this time but I don’t like anyone
putting cookies on my computer. I feel that it is wrong, period. I consider it an invasion of my privacy and space.
The problem is, how do you control or stop it?
A vendor couldnt do the cookie stuffing as they wouldn’t have access to the sites to do the stuffing, for example ebay couldnt stuff this blog with an affiliate cookie as they dont have access to it.
The only way to control or stop this would be to increase your browser security to disallow cookies, however this would stop genuine affiliate clicks and other things that use cookies such as password reminders.
I agree with everything that has been said, something should be done to make this illegal. I am not currently doing any affiliate work, but I have done in the past and as I didn’t earn badly at this was thinking of doing in the future.
Is it known exactly what sites allow this?
Hi Jean,
If you take a look through the T&C’s, most affiliate sites will contain something like:
“You will be credited for clicks that are made through a user clicking on a link in a browser based environment”
Which is implying that the user must actively click on an affiliate link, not have it stuffed onto their PC without their knowledge.
Unfortunately these stuffers do make companies like DJ and Linkshare a lot of money so thats maybe why they dont take a tougher stance on the matter. I have seen affiliates reported to CJ and Linkshare for this yet their accounts are still active 🙁
Cookie stuffing doesn’t make the vendors more money. In fact the opposite is the only possibility. If a cookie stuffer sets a new cookie on someone who will buy from the vendor anyway, then the vendor has lost money because they then have to pay out a commission. If the cookie stuffer has replaced a legitimate cookie, then the amount of money changing hands doesn’t change, but they have still done wrong to the affiliate.
Hi Brandon,
You are 100% correct, I think my terminology is wrong.
By vendor I could have been referring to the affiliate networks such as CJ and Linkshare, rather than the company selling the product.
My point was that the companies (CJ, Linkshare etc.) bring in extra reveune from the cokkie stuffers. As you said above the vendors will be the one’s to lose out as direct sales (that weren’t initiated by an affiliate) would become an affiliate sale for the cookie stuffer.
What about this scenario….An Affiliate stuffs cookies for every product he advertises on his site on a visitors computer. If the visitor bypasses his links and goes directly to the vendor, (which we all know they do) the affiliate gets credit for the sale. If the visitor clicks through another site, a new cookie repleces the 1st affiliates cookie and the 2nd affiliate gets the credit. Seems like a win win when it is done in this fashion.
I have never heard of a vendor complain of making a sale when a visitor bypasses the affiliate link and go directly to his site when he didn’t earn the sale in the 1st place. You can’t have it both ways as a vendor…. free advertising and no commissions.
I don’t agree with stuffing cookies for products not on your sites.
“Simple, because it makes them more money! For every affiliate transaction that occurs the affiliate management company (CJ, Linkshare, etc.) take a percentage of the sale. Cookie stuffing means that more sales will be credited to affiliates, which equates to more money for the affiliate companies but less profit for the vendor”
Correct me if iam wrong, but i think that the only person that loses in this case is the affiliate with the legitimate sale and not the vendor, and thats why the affiliate companies may not care anyway because they don’t give a hoot which affiliate gets the money as long as they get paid.
I am not sure how ebay and Cj affiliate networks work, but its my understanding that they are CPA networks where the Vendor pays for every action performed and not Per every click. So if a customer visited a site A that is cookie stuffed and leaves without making a purchase, but then Goes To Site B which doesn’t have cookies and makes a purchase, the owner of site A will get the commission for that sale, in which case the vendor pays Ebay for that one sale and Ebay pays the affiliate that generated the sale, in which case that would be Owner of site A Instead On Site B.
So unless the owner of site B, can prove to ebay that the sale was supposed to go to him, and that Site A used cookies to steal the sale, Ebay Will Just not care.
Very informative. I never knew this!
Well how do we know that this person would have ever bought anything if the cookie hadn’t been pre-stuffed? 🙂 This user may likely have already been pre-sold at this point! 🙂
i see..so this is how CS means. Thanks for the info…no wonder the forum that I always goes to has banned CS being discussed in any thread and anyone who discussed abt it will be banned…thanks for clearing the air for me.