Just when we thought,
we had heard it all about "fraud on the internet".
There are the "fishing" emails, enticing
(or more likely scaring) users into giving up their
bank account (or paypal) information. There is
the "multi level marketing" schemes,
the ID thefts, the spyware. The SCAM-THRU-SPAM
market is just huge.and not necessarily limited
to financial losses. Think of those "15 million
dollar waiting to be picked up from that Nigerian
bank account" scam. When the gullible follow
up and actually fly to Nigeria , they get kidnapped
and ransomed. Occasionally murdered. Makes the "cheap
Viagra" brokers look like good Samaritans!
All these abuses are reducing our trust in the
internet and e-commerce. Which is a shame, given
the efficiency and cost savings that this medium
allows, especially in terms of targeted advertisement.
One example of such advertisement is PPC,
or Pay Per Click. This is a great improvement over
the good old flashing banner ad's that we all know(and
have grown to hate). The Pay Per Click ad's
are text base, with no slow loading flashy graphics
detracting from the site. Best of all, they are
context dependent. They get displayed only when
a person searches for a certain "matching
keyword". PPC is extremely popular for one
reason with advertisers. It's simple to demonstrate
that it brings traffic to their site. For the people
searching for something it's sometimes a shortcut
to click on PPC ads rather than sift through the
clutter that search engines often display organically.
This Pay Per Click (PPC)advertising market size
exceeds $5 Billion/year and keeps growing. Often
at the expense of radio, TV and magazine advertising.
Whether it's cost effective to use such a program
or it gives you the requisite ROI is topic for
another web
analytics discussion.
Unfortunately, if you advertise your site via
Pay per Click Programs like Google Adwords & Overture,
then it's exceedingly likely that you are a Click
Fraud Victim. Click fraud, takes place when a person
or program visits a website with no intention of
browsing the site, purchasing a product or performing
any other type of conversion action. The intent
is to make the advertiser suffer losses (or make
extra income). This new type of cyber fraud is
on the rise, and estimates on the loss to the advertiser
through click fraud vary between 10-40% depending
on the keyword and the industry. A simple calculation
shows us that the advertisers are shelling out
$ 500 Million to 2 Billion per year to click fraudsters.
Google and Yahoo are among the leading providers
of advertising links, usually targeted to the audience
based on the contents of a page. The issue, to
some extent boils down to the difference between
a genuine user(sometimes referred to as a "good
faith" visitor) and a click fraud artist.
According to a Newsweek article, Google and Yahoo
are struggling to adjust the definition of "good-faith
click" and their policies, and methods of
preventing this new type of click fraud. Given
the rampant rise, it's a work in progress.
Who perpetrates the click fraud? A significant
portion is performed by the competitors who aim
to drive up the advertisement cost of their rivals,
and hence drain their rivals' marketing budget.
This is a form of digital industrial sabotage.
There are the profiteers using ad-sense fraud (see Google
AdSense Fraud Article about these shoplifters )
then there's the impression fraud guys ( Article
on Impression Fraud) who are the sneakiest.
There's always the existence of the terminated
employee getting his revenge by clicking on the
Pay Per Click ( PPC ) advertisement. The one that's
probably the hardest to nail down is the equivalent
of a drive by clicker. Someone who enjoys random
acts of click violence and other such mayhem. Anecdotally,
a person who wanted to click on PPC ads of all
the lawyers, just because he "hates" lawyers.
There was a method to his madness, since the PPC
keywords that lawyers bid for, go for as much as
$50!
To gauge the seriousness of the problem, who better
to listen to than Google's chief financial officer,
George Reyes. Click fraud is "the biggest
threat to the Internet economy," Reyes said
during a December investors conference. "Something
has to be done about this really, really quickly,
because potentially it threatens our business model." Ask
Jeeves, similarly thinks of it as a serious enough
risk to list it in it's regulatory filings. They
feel that their revenue might decline "if
advertisers come to perceive click-fraud as a widespread
and pervasive problem."
We have to agree with them. The advertiser pays
a large premium for having focused, directed traffic
to his website through the paid listing. If banks
lose their credibility, then people will stop using
them and hide their dollars in their mattresses.
If the search engines lose their credibility due
to click fraud, their customers will vote with
their dollars and move back to more traditional
forms of advertisement. Similarly, as the PPC customers
see their advertising ROI drop, often due to such
fraudulent activities they may start walking towards
the exits.
One would have thought that given such a threat
to their business model, the big search engines
would have been more forthcoming with information
pertaining to data regarding the visitor to a site
through PPC and incidence of click fraud. Such
is not the case. The big two, Google and
Overture are extremely secretive, and seldom give
out any traffic information, or details about how
they track click fraud. Their approach is not without
justification, given the possibility of people
reverse engineering their tracking mechanisms and
allowing the fraudsters to tweak their tactics.
The search engines are also accused of turning
a blind eye to click fraud. The reasoning goes
that they are likely to take a severe hit to their
earnings if all the click fraud cases are detected.
They have not been following up on anything but
the most egregious instances of click fraud. We
are inclined to believe that the search engines
make some effort to play fair, but they are hobbled
by some technological limitations to their ability
to track click fraud.
The biggest one is that the search engines
can not possibly know the overall trends
and analytics of the advertiser's site. A good
analytics package would be able to provide the
statistics which show the optimal path to conversion,
places where abandonment may happen, the average
time taken reading the "top" pages etc.
This is the "signature" may very
well include time spent on the path, conversion,
on site search etc. of a genuine client. Basically,
the serious visitor has a certain pattern which
a malicious user or a bot would not be able to
simulate. Similarly, for a certain site, the fraudsters
too have their own "signature"(i.e.
a statistical pattern). When making a decision
whether a certain visitor is a likely fraudster,
one of the techniques used is to match against
the "genuine" signature and then against
that of "fraudster". The search engines
don't have access to this data(since they
are unable to track visitors once the visitor click),
while a good click fraud detection software or
service has access and is able to do such detection.
Furthermore, the search engines can't track traffic
from multiple search engines belonging to same
network(a favorite of the "classic" competitor
click fraud). For instance, Overture network is
composed of Lycos, MSN and Alta Vista. The click
fraud artist could potentially click on an
ad using Lycos, move to MSN and then Alta Vista
clicking on the same ad. Overture/Yahoo will not
mark/catch the perpetrator. It's even worse when
the ad is displayed across Google and Overture!
It is possible that the situation will be
exacerbated when the upcoming Yahoo "Publisher" program(the
equivalent of Google Adsense) goes mainstream.
However, a dedicated click fraud detection effort,
if based on rigorous analytics, website statistics
and software pattern matching should have no problem
nailing these guys.
Lastly, some efforts need to be done with customized
reporting, when the pattern of abuse is more complicated.
The search engines don't have the resources(or
interest) to drill deep into the analytics
data and audit individual advertisers website stats.
However, they will consider refunds if presented
with detailed and convincing data. Anecdotal evidence
suggests that Google is the tightest with AdWords
fraud refunds, while Overture(Yahoo) is somewhat
more liberal. Naturally, you would want to present
yourself as a competent, organized person or organization
when applying for refund. The arguments need to
be backed up with statistics and actual events
to be credible. If you are a regular PPC customer,
you have the unfortunate task of defending
what's rightfully yours from the click fraud artists.
This can be done with the help of expertise for
auditing and reporting click-fraud developed in-house
or by outsourcing to an analytics based click fraud
detection company.
The FTC has been cracking down on the consumer
fraud and the fraudsters, by increasing
resources to track down and prosecute the "fishers",
the "investment schemes" and
the "real estate opportunity" guys.
However, Eileen Harrington, director of marketing
opportunities has declined to deem "click
fraud" as something that directly affects
the consumer. Therefore, the FTC does not want
to tackle the click fraud. The search engines
too are unable to fully detect fraud, due to
the reasons described above. One wonders who
is there to look after the best interests of
an advertiser trying to make it on the web and
getting cheated by fraudsters. Given the PPC
fraud rate, the advertiser has to really question
her conversion numbers. Is that conversion ratio
of 1% really natural, or could it be higher if
the fraudsters are excluded from the traffic,
and the money wasted on them refunded.
One option that Sofizar offers is click fraud
detection on a contingency basis. We track your
data and set click fraud alarms for you.
When the fraud alarms are triggered we manually
verify that our "click fraud case" is
strong enough to warrant a reasonable refund. We
take your case to the search engines and apply
for a refund for you. When we recover money(usually
in terms of credits), you get the lion's share,
while we get compensated in terms of "contingency
fee" when you actually spend the credit.
Where to go from here?
If
we recover Click Fraud |
Your
Click Fraud Credit |
Our Monitoring
and Recovery Fee |
Competitors
Monthly Fee |
$0 |
$0.00 |
$0.00 |
$79-$199 |
$1-$99 |
20% |
80% |
$79-$199 |
$100-$999 |
30% |
70% |
$79-$199 |
$1000-$5000 |
40% |
60% |
$79-$199 |
$5000+ |
50% |
50% |
$79-$199 |
Contact our experts to
learn more.
Lion
King Tickets
검색엔진마케팅 |