Slashdot Mirror
Ad Network Not Paying Up
Rev. DOG. writes: "According to Lowtax at Something Awful, the now defunct GameFan Network, bought out by Express.com a while back has sent a letter to their sites saying that they won't pay them a dime, because the bulk of the banner ads served up were for GameFan/Express or hosted sites. Apparently, during Lowtax's stay there, they wouldn't let him take any non-GameFan advertising. Anyway, it's all at the 10-9-00 article on the front page at SA, especially warning others on other banner-ad networks that they may be next." I'm not knocking on Gamefan/Express as much as this is a good example of /always/ read the fine print. Read it again. Have a lawyer read it. When I was selling the ads on here, there were a couple times that people tried to screw us over - so be prepared.
Incidentally, does this letter give such sites the status of a creditor, so they can demand payment, sue for the debt ("Ha, got your car!"), and stand in line at bankruptcy court for a share of the assets?
It's not a good idea to say "Gamefan/Express.com" since Gamefan is in no way responsibile for what's happening. Gamefan is getting screwed as much as anyone else- Express.com bought Gamefan erroniously and doesn't even want it, so they're finding as many ways as possible to not pay GF and GF's hosted sites.
At least, that's how I've heard it. Express.com are the ones to blame.
Fortunately, the print magazine won't be effected.
----
ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
Okay, so SA wanted to make a few bucks to defray expenses. No fault there. But, now that lowtax got burned because he didn't read the fine print, he wants *you* to share the financial burden of recovering his losses by "contributing" to his server fund. I wonder if lowtax intended to share the profits over and above his expenses with the same people from whom he now solicits contributions. Lowtax should be placed on his own SA list for this one.
Jeepmeister
I don't need no estinkin'
Jeepmeister
I never fail to be amazed at some of the folks that post on these banner ad issues. Busy websites are expensive to run. Telcos never forget to send the bill for that T1/T3/Colo shelf the webserver is attached to. In many cases, the only revenue these sites take in, comes from banner ads. No one really enjoys looking at ads, but lets face it - they make it possible for a website to support more than just a few hundred page impressions a month. You think Slashdot would even be here if they didn't get ad revenue? How many thousand bucks a month would *you* pony up out of your own pocket to pay for bandwidth for your suddenly-popular website? No ads? Guess what - only corporations with the bucks to throw away on websites will be capable of supporting the traffic load a popular site generates. As for the guys bragging here about the various ways they have devised to prevent ads from being seen on webpages - screw you. You're doing nothing more than cheating the websites out of the ability to pay their bills, and hastening the demise of the non-big-business information scene. How clever of you. I'm sure the big business corporate types really appreciate the help you're giving them. Go ahead and map names to loopback. Download that copy of junkbuster. But when you can't log on a site anymore that isn't owned by AT&T, IBM, MCI, or whatever, just remember - you helped bring that about.
His name is Nick Fisher. He lives in Minnesota and plays with his dad's money, which he desperately wants everyone to believe is his, and that he earned it all from scratch. I swear this guy was the valedictorian of the Elmer Fudd School of Self-Esteem. "My name is Nick Fisher. I am a millionaire. I own a mansion and a yacht."
I had the misfortune of making his acquaintance about 5 years ago in the online game SubSpace. I was pretty active in the SubSpace community and was witness to countless incidents where he proved what a prick he is. He did things ranging from getting people banned from the game even when they had done nothing wrong, to ping flooding individuals during League matches so that his squad would win. He pulled the same stunt on one of the more popular Quake servers and was cold busted by the guy that ran it. He had about a 60-page ping log, all coming from Nick Fisher's IP address.
Anyway, to anyone who has ever met this jackass, this type of behavior comes as no surprise. Download SubSpace and see for yourself. Go into any zone, ask about 'trixter' (his rather fitting online name) and the Gamefan debacle. You'll get an earful. He still plays rather frequently, so you may even get the chance to tell him how you feel in person. (SubSpace only runs on Windows. Sorry.)
Talisman
"Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
Yeah, but I can't seem to get the old gif capable gd library to compile.
I did that. Once.
Too bad I didn't read his fine print.
The way I heard it is that the owner of the gamefan network (i forget his name, but he had a past of being an asshole and a shyster) sold it to Express.com but express.com didn't know what they were buying. However it happened, it turned out Express found themselves with a site network they didn't want and the rest, as they say, is recent history.
----
ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
I perodically hear about sites that get screwed over by these banner-ad companies. The reaction always seems to post a complaint letter on the web site and stop using the service.
I always thought that a better solution would be to have whatever perl/php/etc. script that serves the banners continue to show the banner, but modify the gif so it has a huge red line through it with overlaid text that says "advertiser www.banneradcompany.com does not pay out for ads". Then send e-mail to all the people whose ads you are showing and tell them to take a look at how their ad looks on your page.
Bad PR goes a long way in advertising.
This is a particularly good idea. It would serve two very useful purposes. 1 - Allow webmasters to avoid the slugs and sleazemeisters and 2 - Show webmasters the width of competition. How long do you think sleaze tactics would be around if there was a third party site vetting out the losers?
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
I sure hope that Hemos was referring to the pre-Andover setup.
Selling ads must be one of the most horrible occupations associated with running a website, and not something that most techies are any good at either. If there's a good reason for bringing in external involvement, it's got to be to give that job to somebody else.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
I feel sorry for the guy, but aparrently he has nobody to blame but himself.
Shhheeeeesh! Before you get into a business transaction, any business transaction, you don't rely on what you're told by a corporate droid.
I hope he learned a lesson without taking too much of a hit. Welcome to the world, pal
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
I run a gaming site - granted, not a popular one, but that doesn't hurt my feelings any. And advertisements is something that any site has to deal with.
The problem I see with the whole Express.com/Gamefan Network thing isn't a legal thing, but a right thing. Sure, the legal thing for them to do is to cut their losses, don't pay the sites, and keep the corporation going.
Then there's the right thing to do. In the case of Something Awful, the guy's out $3000 in server costs because he's not going to get paid. I think more about the case of VoodooExtreme.com, which was probably getting a few million hits a day - and evidently they are owed $100,000 that they're never going to see.
These are folks who had an agreement, that they would run their site, bring in traffic, and have ads up for the "parent company" - and in return they would recieve money to keep it going. In the case of some of these sites, people have probably quit their day jobs because they had enough money coming in (or promised to come in) to take care of them.
Yeah, Express.com doesn't have to pay them. But if they don't, you can bet that they're not getting another $0.02 out of me. I'll buy my anime and import stuff somewhere else. (Damn, and I had my eye on those Final Fantasy Selphie figurines).
Do the right thing, Express.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
Back on 8/23 Moto over at TechZone, wrote up a great piece on how to start a tech site. In it, he clearly talks about ad's, and how most networks pay for them only when they're not for other network sites. It seems to me, if you're going to work within and industry, and make deals with other companies within that industry, you ought to do your footwork. It's simply irresponsible, to sign a contract with a company, without reading what you're agreeing to. And if you do that, you have nobody to blame but yourself.
And I don't see fault with not being allowed to solicit outside advertising either. I would think, that part of being a network, is that the network can control it's identity. If you start working on side deals, it will dilute the brand identity that the network is trying to build. It's just part of the price you pay, for the convenience of not having to shop for your own ad's, and for the strength of co-marketing that you should get from the affiliated sites.
I'd basically chalk this whole episode up, as a sterling example of a variation of "caveat emptor". Be sure of what you are getting, before you lay out the cash to get it. I feel for the guy, but at least he'll provide an object lesson to some others by publicizing his mistakes.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke