<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Surprise!  Parked Domain Names Convert For Advertisers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/</link>
	<description>News and Views for the Domain Name Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 02:35:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; Update: Domain Parking Still Converting - The Domain Industry's News Source</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/comment-page-1/#comment-210854</link>
		<dc:creator>Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; Update: Domain Parking Still Converting - The Domain Industry's News Source</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 19:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/#comment-210854</guid>
		<description>[...] a month ago I wrote about how the domain channel at Google was converting well for me, even though a number of advertisers would tell you [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p>[...] a month ago I wrote about how the domain channel at Google was converting well for me, even though a number of advertisers would tell you [...]</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Ball</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/comment-page-1/#comment-197239</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Ball</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:45:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/#comment-197239</guid>
		<description>I haven&#039;t tested this on the content network, but this is definitely true on the search network.  The procedure for blocking parked domains is separate from standard site exclusion (which only works for the content network).  The AFD block is binary.  Here are Google&#039;s instructions:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://adwords.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=86695&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;

Before Google implemented that, you could block at the AFD partner level but not at the domain level (for most parked domains).  For example, if I saw some bad traffic from searchportal.information.com, adding that domain to the site exclusion list wouldn&#039;t block the traffic.  However, adding domainsponsor.com to the exclusion list would block.  Note what Google said in this thread:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=15494&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;

Here&#039;s a brief excerpt:  &quot;Currently, it is possible to exclude parked domain sites using the site exclusion tool. However, depending on the domain, the exclusion method will differ. While most parked domains can be excluded by adding the specific domain into the site exclusion tool, there is a fraction of domains in our network that involve a process of excluding the domains at the partner level, rather than the specific domain level, resulting in the exclusion of all domains belonging to that partner due to technical details of the implementation.&quot;

Keep in mind that that was before they implemented the AFD block when upgrading the site exclusion tool to a site *and* category exclusion tool.  Very confusing for advertisers since the rules are different for search network vs content network vs the types of parked domains that run across both of those networks.

I think it was a hack by Google to implement AFD across both AdWords networks and now it&#039;s a hack to block the traffic.  Really bad design.  I&#039;d expect better from a company like Google that espouses simplicity.  Anyway, I hope that cleared things up, a bit.  ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t tested this on the content network, but this is definitely true on the search network.  The procedure for blocking parked domains is separate from standard site exclusion (which only works for the content network).  The AFD block is binary.  Here are Google&#8217;s instructions:</p>
<p><a href="http://adwords.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=86695" rel="nofollow">link</a></p>
<p>Before Google implemented that, you could block at the AFD partner level but not at the domain level (for most parked domains).  For example, if I saw some bad traffic from searchportal.information.com, adding that domain to the site exclusion list wouldn&#8217;t block the traffic.  However, adding domainsponsor.com to the exclusion list would block.  Note what Google said in this thread:</p>
<p><a href="http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=15494" rel="nofollow">link</a></p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a brief excerpt:  &#8220;Currently, it is possible to exclude parked domain sites using the site exclusion tool. However, depending on the domain, the exclusion method will differ. While most parked domains can be excluded by adding the specific domain into the site exclusion tool, there is a fraction of domains in our network that involve a process of excluding the domains at the partner level, rather than the specific domain level, resulting in the exclusion of all domains belonging to that partner due to technical details of the implementation.&#8221;</p>
<p>Keep in mind that that was before they implemented the AFD block when upgrading the site exclusion tool to a site *and* category exclusion tool.  Very confusing for advertisers since the rules are different for search network vs content network vs the types of parked domains that run across both of those networks.</p>
<p>I think it was a hack by Google to implement AFD across both AdWords networks and now it&#8217;s a hack to block the traffic.  Really bad design.  I&#8217;d expect better from a company like Google that espouses simplicity.  Anyway, I hope that cleared things up, a bit.  <img src='http://domainnamewire.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/comment-page-1/#comment-197192</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/#comment-197192</guid>
		<description>Richard, I didn&#039;t realize that.  So in other words if there&#039;s one really bad parked domain that&#039;s not converting, and I enter that domain into the exclusion list, it will still show ads on it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Richard, I didn&#8217;t realize that.  So in other words if there&#8217;s one really bad parked domain that&#8217;s not converting, and I enter that domain into the exclusion list, it will still show ads on it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Ball</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/comment-page-1/#comment-196881</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Ball</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 02:42:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/#comment-196881</guid>
		<description>@ Andrew - Unlike content sites on the content network, you can&#039;t weed out individual domains.  That&#039;s the problem with Google&#039;s implementation.  It&#039;s binary - either AdSense for Domains is ON or it&#039;s OFF.  What advertisers need is a domain network, separate from the existing search and content networks.  Just like site exclusion works for the content network, that new network needs to have some kind of granular control.

In the meantime, it&#039;s simply safer for advertisers to simply opt out of the parked domains.  For advertisers bidding high on some competitive keywords on the search network, the risk of click fraud from parked domains is simply too high.  The only choice is to turn it off.

BTW, I&#039;ve argued that, at least in theory, domain advertising could be more effective than search advertising:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.apogee-web-consulting.com/blogger/2008/01/why-ppc-advertisers-should-prefer.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;

IOW, I recognize the value for advertisers in the potential of domain advertising.  I also see the impact on my clients of the click fraud that originates from parked domains and the lack of control advertisers have over their ads on parked domains (via either Google AdWords or Yahoo Search Marketing).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Andrew &#8211; Unlike content sites on the content network, you can&#8217;t weed out individual domains.  That&#8217;s the problem with Google&#8217;s implementation.  It&#8217;s binary &#8211; either AdSense for Domains is ON or it&#8217;s OFF.  What advertisers need is a domain network, separate from the existing search and content networks.  Just like site exclusion works for the content network, that new network needs to have some kind of granular control.</p>
<p>In the meantime, it&#8217;s simply safer for advertisers to simply opt out of the parked domains.  For advertisers bidding high on some competitive keywords on the search network, the risk of click fraud from parked domains is simply too high.  The only choice is to turn it off.</p>
<p>BTW, I&#8217;ve argued that, at least in theory, domain advertising could be more effective than search advertising:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.apogee-web-consulting.com/blogger/2008/01/why-ppc-advertisers-should-prefer.html" rel="nofollow">link</a></p>
<p>IOW, I recognize the value for advertisers in the potential of domain advertising.  I also see the impact on my clients of the click fraud that originates from parked domains and the lack of control advertisers have over their ads on parked domains (via either Google AdWords or Yahoo Search Marketing).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; Rumor Watch: Google to Restrict Domain Parking - The Domain Industry's News Source</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/comment-page-1/#comment-194386</link>
		<dc:creator>Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; Rumor Watch: Google to Restrict Domain Parking - The Domain Industry's News Source</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 01:52:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/#comment-194386</guid>
		<description>[...] the Bank&quot;Domain Name Stocks Pummeled in 2008Interview: David Kesmodel, Author of &quot;The Domain Game&quot;Surprise! Parked Domain Names Convert For AdvertisersGoogle Sued Over Parked Domain NamesLuxury.net Luxurious at $40,000  Feedjit Live Website [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p>[...] the Bank&#8221;Domain Name Stocks Pummeled in 2008Interview: David Kesmodel, Author of &#8220;The Domain Game&#8221;Surprise! Parked Domain Names Convert For AdvertisersGoogle Sued Over Parked Domain NamesLuxury.net Luxurious at $40,000  Feedjit Live Website [...]</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NameDrive Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; ND Weekly</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/comment-page-1/#comment-194223</link>
		<dc:creator>NameDrive Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; ND Weekly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:57:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/#comment-194223</guid>
		<description>[...] We have anecdotal evidence that parked domain names convert for advertisers. Efficient Frontier released a case study, and owners of large portfolios have run their own campaigns with success. I’ve even had great conversions on Dark Blue Sea’s ROAR network, which I understand is delivered via pop-ups on parked domains. More [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p>[...] We have anecdotal evidence that parked domain names convert for advertisers. Efficient Frontier released a case study, and owners of large portfolios have run their own campaigns with success. I’ve even had great conversions on Dark Blue Sea’s ROAR network, which I understand is delivered via pop-ups on parked domains. More [...]</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/comment-page-1/#comment-193608</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:15:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2008/07/16/surprise-parked-domain-names-convert-for-advertisers/#comment-193608</guid>
		<description>@ Francois - you are correct, fraud is the problem.  Parked pages that are in very competitive niches probably don&#039;t perform as well because of fraud (same goes for the content network).  But a good advertiser (or advertising manager) can just week out the domains and/or content sites that aren&#039;t working.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Francois &#8211; you are correct, fraud is the problem.  Parked pages that are in very competitive niches probably don&#8217;t perform as well because of fraud (same goes for the content network).  But a good advertiser (or advertising manager) can just week out the domains and/or content sites that aren&#8217;t working.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

