RSS
Twitter
In Defense Of Pop Under Ads
from the it's-getting-worse dept
As more and more sites are picking up on the pop under ad bandwagon, it's a little scary to see someone write an article defending the practice, telling web users they ought to suck it up and just deal with it. Hopefully advertisers and sites that have used pop unders will realize that they're only pissing off their readership. This, generally, is not a good way to attract business.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
No Subject Given
The point that the writer seems to have missed is that ads, pop-up, pop-over, banners, skyscrapers or whatever, is not a viable business model. It doesn't work and recasting it in some new technology will not work.
I visit Dilbert.com at least once a day and have never clicked on an ad. If they turned into pop-unders I still wouldn't click on them
Sure you can put as many ads you like on a system but (this is the important part) if no one buys the product the ads have been nothing more than an additional expence for the company that bought them.
Click through is irrelevant, its sales that count!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
In Defense Of Pop Under Ads
I wouldn't mind them if the pages that used them didn't keep popping them under, I'll visit a page, jump around to other pages within that site, and then close that browser window, and i'll see 1 popunder window, okay no big deal, but then there's another one, apparently in my jumping around, each page i visited popped up a new one, thus leaving me a nice trail of 500 popunder ads.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment