Comments on: Commission Disfunction and FraudClick : A Peppered Rant

By: Jacques Snyman 4 SEO

Jacques Snyman 4 SEO — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:25:34 +0000

Unfortunately in our modern day and age it seems that cash is king and that ethics and long term sustainability fly out the window in the quest for immediate gratification / cash.

To make others aware of unethical business practise is to prevent them from feeding greedy, selfish entities by sending cash their way.

Informed customers / consumers are able to informed decisions, so sharing lessons learnt is definitely a great way to identify unscrupulous operators.

By: Mark Welch

Mark Welch — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:06:28 +0000

Pablo, I think it’s important to realize that we’ve only seen one side of this “story.” CJ hasn’t replied (and probably won’t, publicly), and no OPM or merchant has verified these claims.

Perhaps more important, PJ has deleted all “non-supportive” replies to its own blog posting — it won’t tolerate criticism nor even questions. Earlier, PJ actually shut down its forum on ABestWeb.com because it was unwilling to respond to any criticisms (even mild ones).

I am inclined to believe that CJ did contact its merchants and tell them that they must choose between CJ and PJ. Perhaps they have some good reasons; perhaps not. It’s probably legal.

I despise both companies (I think they are unethical and incompetent, for reasons I’ve posted many times elsewhere), but I do believe that it’s important to be fair.

What I find most amusing is that I believe that the most logical outcome of an “us or them” choice will be increased research by merchants and a prompt change to a different affiliate network (neither CJ nor PJ).

By: Vlad

Vlad — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:09:10 +0000

I think they might just shooting themselves in the foot. As some one said elsewhere, it will come down to good old ROI. As long as affiliate marketers stick by PJ side and advertisers realize good ROI the PJ will come out a winner.