India's Secret Army of Ad Clickers - Rupees for Clicks

infosys · Site Admin Joined: 12 Dec 2002 Posts: 1371

Tee hee... I hate to say ' I told you so... " ... but... well... I told you so...

Since the introduction of Google Ads and various other 'pay for click' advertising schemes, I have been saying that it was open to abuse and that advertisers that 'pay for clicks' are probably 'paying to support some family in India and not attracting real clients or potential customers...'.

Here is a nice little story out of The Times of India that helps explain why advertisers are getting RIPPED OFF by these ' pay for click schemes '.

Spanky · Grand Wizard of all beneath Joined: 07 Feb 2003 Posts: 656

It will be sad to be honest when the ad market dies again and affects the smaller news and comic sites. I really hope companies, epsecially google start putting in some safeguards because all it will do is hurt their bottom line in the long run. Afterall even if you get a high click through on an ad if you get almost no business then its not worth much at all.

Although Marq you could increase your beer budget for a bit if you joined the dark side. heh

infosys · Site Admin Joined: 12 Dec 2002 Posts: 1371

Tee hee... yeah an increase in the old beer budget would be a handy thing... but I have done my best over the years to avoid falling into the 'dark side' of Internet advertising.

I have always hated POP UP ads... and so I never would put one on my sites.

I always hated web sites that serve more as 'paid advertising news' type sites ( where the company pays you to post THEIR news stories ). So I have never accepted paid news stories. I hate 'info-mercials' on television and I don't think Internet based 'infomercials' are any different.

I always hated web sites that seem intent on using their user list to create mailing list that they could sell to third party companies. So I have never sold or even used e-mail addresses to make money or to send junk mail to users.

I always hated HUGE banner ads that took up more than 1/3 of the page... and so I avoided them like the plague. For some reasons advertisers felt that BIGGER IS BETTER - and so they were only buying ad space that took up one third of the web page, basically the 'web page' became a huge ad' and the 'content' basically was squashed off the page. So I tend to stick to the simple 200 X 200 pixel square ads or the 468 X 60 standard horizontal ads.

I always hated where web sites created 'intermediary' web pages or 'teaser' web pages where you would click on a link... it would take you to a half-way page with ads... and a 'tiny' bit of content... and you had to then click again on the article to get to the real page where the content was... with the intent being to force the visitor to view three or four pages in order to finally get to the article. It does wonders to boost up the apparent number of page clicks or page views that the web site can claim... but it is just another example of how some webmasters don't really care about the inconvenience they inflict on their visitors in order to boost their 'counts'.

Another example like that is where the web site will spread a tiny bit of content over four or five pages.... when that tiny bit of content could have ALL been placed on one web page instead. It is so annoying and blatantly insulting to the visitors who have to click through multiple pages ( and all those ad impressions ) in order to read a simple article or vulnerability report.

I always hated POINTLESS newsletters... and so I never bothered to create a pointless newsletter. But advertisers LOVE newsletters and pay big bucks to put ads in focused newsletters. So there are some web sites out there that have created newsletters for no other purpose then to place advertisements in. Many companies have asked SNP to create a newsletter and were willing to pay big bucks to place an ad in it... but I really couldn't justify creating a newsletter just to carry advertising. In fact, over the years I have subscribed and quickly unsubscribed to various newsletters when I saw that their content was usually one week or one month old and that it really didn't provide any USEFUL value to me... In the fast changing world of computer security news that is one week old is of no value to anyone. If you intend to keep ahead of the info-curve you need the latest breaking news - the fresher the better...

There are so many 'ways' for a web site to 'try' to make money. But unfortunately most of them really are not worth the effort and inconvenience they inflict on the users.

Over the years this may have been one of the reasons SNP and InfoSysSec continued to grow a larger viewership. I hope and believe that over time our users have seen that we don't try to take advantage of the folks that come to visit our sites.

And other sites that do take advantage of their users eventually end up losing their visitors or losing the trust of their viewership because people are not stupid and they don't appreciate receiving a ton of SPAM simply because they 'registered' on some site to gain access to its 'members only' features etc...

But you are right... I could probably increase the old SNP beer budget if I drifted over to the advertising 'dark side'... but it would feel very odd doing things on my sites that I find objectional or obnoxious on other web sites.

Hehehhehe... so I guess I am destined to remain poor forever... since I have some moral ethics... Wink

.

.

infosys · Site Admin Joined: 12 Dec 2002 Posts: 1371

Well... the latest figures are in and online ad sales are booming according to this news article. HOWEVER.... it appears that the 'pay for click' type ads are the vehicle of choice for advertising agencies and advertisers.

Spanky · Grand Wizard of all beneath Joined: 07 Feb 2003 Posts: 656

Maybe I would make more in clicking for rupees then actually working pretty soon. Afterall I could just have a script to click through everything for me on various sites and use proxies to hit the same ones over and over. Hmm... I probably could have sold a more elaborate plan to the click schemers if they didn't think of it already. Oh well too bad I could never do it, so hopefully the companies will put some safeguards in place or i really feel it will hurt the ad industry as a whole in the long run pretty quick.

mquibell · Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 10:55 am Post subject:

Spanky · Grand Wizard of all beneath Joined: 07 Feb 2003 Posts: 656

mairu · User Joined: 27 May 2004 Posts: 7

Myself, being an Indian, i will confirm what Infosys said.
That was happpening in India bigtime, and the people who click inadvertently don't know why they are clicking or if there is something fundamentally flawed with the fact that one can get money clicking an ad.
However, this has come down drastically after the IT laws passed in India, but it definitely explains why low conversion rates occur for people who are investing in PPC. Sad.

infosys · Site Admin Joined: 12 Dec 2002 Posts: 1371

I thank you for your confirmation on some of the points I raise. And I hope that you will know that I am not blaming India in particular for the 'click for pay' stunts.

It is happening in every country where an extra $100 US a month represents a significant amount of money. And there are quite a few countries where $100 a month in US dollars would enable you to live like a King.

In Cuba the average monthly wage for MOST professions ( whether in IT, or a Doctor or an Engineer ) is about $35 PER MONTH. To receive a monthly bonus in your pay check of $5 is something that is greeted with great excitement by employees in that country. So you can imagine how many Cuban's would fight for an opportunity to earn $100 per month in US dollars. Fortunately the tight control over the Internet in Cuba stops most of these potential 'pay for click' candidates from doing it.

And of the 130 different countries that visit our web site, I would suspect that there are at least 20 or 30 countries where that $100 or more would be extremely attractive to someone.

I know that Google and the other 'pay for click' advertisers do their best to ferret out the most blatant or obvious abuses of their system. But it is simply a battle that is too large, too global and has extremely clever adversaries line up to counter any measure that might be put in place to thwart it.

My original reason for hating pay for clicks is that webmasters gave up space on their web sites to display these text based adverts. And the honest webmasters will not like see sufficient revenue earned from the 'pay for click' space they are dedicating to that feature. The advertisers on the other hand are getting 'free advertising' of their name on those sites and do not have to pay if no one bothers to click their link. In the end the advertiser has gained free exposure at the expense of the webmaster who thought they would make money or generate some revenue.

I suspect that the Google clicks will eventually fall out of favor as the webmasters start receiving notifications that their quarterly 'clicks' did not add up to a hill of beans and so no check will be sent to them for that quarter because they fell short of the minimum.

But as I have heard more about this pay for click nonsense, I have come to realize how the abusers of the system are syphoning off real and significant amounts of money from legitimate advertisers, who in many cases are operating with very limited advertising budgets.

But when advertisers are willingly or obligingly paying .10 cents, .25 cents or more PER CLICK... you can see how organized 'crimesters' ( a new word I just invented ) will work to take advantage of such a system for their own profit.

And my only other 'observance' on the 'pay for click' thing is that I have been noticing a number of 'non-profit' or 'hobbyist' web sites that are using those 'pay for click' systems to try to generate traffic to their sites. It always leaves me wondering if they are secretly wealthy to be able to pay chunks of chump change just to bolster the number of visitors to their sites. I suspect many of them will drop out of it once they get their first bill and the dollar figure they owe freaks them out. I really would like to know how some BLOG can pay to attract viewers... when their web site host no advertisements. I guess I am tooooo old to understand today's economics and ways of doing business by spending money you don't have in order to not make any money.

.

mairu · User Joined: 27 May 2004 Posts: 7

pippin · Beginner Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 2

I'm missing something here. If I place a Google AdWord for my company, how is someone clicking on that ad in India diverting money to an intermediary, if I've contracted with Google directly?

infosys · Site Admin Joined: 12 Dec 2002 Posts: 1371

There are various flavors of ad generation available from Google... but in particular there are two types :

a ) ads that are contracted ONLY for display on GOOGLE, or
b ) ads that are contracted for display on GOOGLE 'partner sites' - which basically could be any one page web site on the Internet...

In the case of Group B type advertisers the scam is simple :

a ) advertiser contracts directly with Google
b ) Google SHARES that money it generates with the 'pay for clicks' with the web sites that actually host the text ad / link and from which the actual click originates...
c ) Evil web site that is hosting the Google links on its web pages has an army of link clickers or 'zombied computers' clicking the links on the evil web site
d ) Google records all the links being clicked at the evil web site
e ) Google bills the advertiser for all the wonderful clicks that were generated
f ) Google pays the evil web site its share for all the clicks generated.
g ) Evil web site then pays a 'per click' fee to its army of link clickers.

So in this example the advertiser's money goes down the path like this :

advertiser -- > Google ----> Evil Webmaster ----> Army of Link Clickers

So although an advertiser is paying money directly to Google.... Google is in turn is paying those web sites that host their adwords or GoogleAds....

In the case where the advertiser's ad is ONLY posted on the Google web site, then there is no intermediary and the money goes and stays directly into Googles pocket and there is no intermediary.

Hope that clarifies that...

Marq

Maybe I should post a story on how 'pay for clicks' are being abused in order to financially punish advertisers. In short... if there is a company that is paying for clicks then they are open to having an army of clickers deliberately target their link in order to drive up their bill with Google. It is sort of like a Denial of Service attack... but with targeted ad clickers you face a ramped up financial cost to the 'clicker attack'. I know of a limousine company that was using the Google adwords that ended up getting socked with a HELLUVA bill with Google.. because
a) an army of clickers targeted their ad, and
b) an army of zombied computers were directed to connect to that link by their zombie master. Basically the limo company spent their year's budget for 'pay for clicks' in one week.... and had to stop advertising.

And even funnier are the number of 'link farms' that exist out there solely for the purpose of generating 'clicks' that will pour money in to the evil webmaster's pocket. My personal favorite is the link farm owned by

http://www.ultrasearch.com/
WARNING : Before clicking on the above link to spy on his site, just be aware that this scum bag forces open extra windows and does every low life trick once you click on one of the domain names that he owns. But a visit to his primary domain name is a good experience for potential advertisers because it shows them exactly what kind of low life sites their ads appear on... and for which they are paying for. Since this guy is also making money off 'pay per impression' type ads that he stacks up his sites along with a the 'pay for click' links

This guy is based in Hong Kong and he owns and controls approximately 70,000 DOMAIN NAMES. What he does is buy up ANY expiring domain that expires and previously had traffic going to it. He then plants his 'link farm' on that domain name and crosses his fingers that some of the 'old traffic' that 'use' to go to that domain name will click on his links ( which he tries to disguise as being a valid 'search directory'. Problem is that there is NOTHING linked on that site EXCEPT 'pay for click' links. I would suggest that this chap is a millionaire several times over and it was the advertisers who fattened his pockets by using this extreme example of abusing or using the 'pay for click' advertising to his advantage.

I only became aware of his operation when he snapped up a number of security specific domain names that I was interested in purchasing. He converted all of those domains into 'pay for click' link traps ( errmm link farms ). And now people looking for those 'security specific' topics now land on a 'link farm' that is inhabited ONLY by 'pay for click' links.

.
.

Spanky · Grand Wizard of all beneath Joined: 07 Feb 2003 Posts: 656

You made the perfect flowchart for a scammer lol. The sad part is with the current system its too easy for the scammers to exploit the system and burn the advertiser.

pippin · Beginner Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 2

The clarification is appreciated. Thanks all.

SSP · Beginner Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 1

I suspect the problem is overstated.

1) Google actively monitors for fraudulent clicks and doesn't charge for them (or, so I've been told).

2) When you set up a Google AdWords account, you specify which countries you want it to appear in.

3) The admin page shows "natural search" ad performance separate from "relevant content" ads (i.e., the kind that are supposedly being abused). If "relevant content" ads are showing lots of clicks but very few sales or conversions, you can turn off those ads with a single click in your admin page.

infosys · Site Admin Joined: 12 Dec 2002 Posts: 1371

As I mentioned before, I believe Google is actively trying its best to protect the integrity of its 'adwords' and 'GoogleAds'....

BUT....

Over the years... the PORN industry... who literally blazed a path in the field of innovative and incentive advertising have never been able to fully stop the abuse of their 'pay for click' or 'pay for performance' advertising.

The reason I mention this is that it would be silly to think that Google has solved a problem that has plagued the porn industry for years. It would be equivalent to saying that in a year or two Microsoft products would be 100% or even 95% fault free... it just can't happen.

Yes... there are some safeguards built into the Google administration controls... but in a similar vain those who wish to beat Google have found the ways and means to do so... and they have honed their ninja skills abusing the porn industry for years... so they have their 'methods, technology and science' pretty down pat and perfected.

Now I am sure that Google will monitor unusually high numbers of 'clicks' that are originating from certain IP's. That is one way they can narrow down where potential abusers may be hiding.

And similarly I am sure that Google will certainly be taking a real close look each month at WHO they are sending their 'partner pay for click' checks to. After all, if I had some 'partner' that was drawing monthly payments that were 'out of the ordinary' compared to the majority then I too would look at them closely to figure out 'why they are so successful'.

But take a look at this stat from Google for 2003 on how much money they paid out to their 'partner sites'

zebrahost · Beginner Joined: 29 May 2004 Posts: 1

The Indian Clicksters could be a problem for some PPC buyers but not if they would take the time to monitor their traffic. I have been using PPC advertising on many of my websites for a couple of years with great success.

I carefully monitor ROI and am currently getting a better than 60% net return on my adspend. I have tried most of the better known networks.

It has taken some effort to weed out the PPC engines that do not have adequate filters and fraud protection. I don't think you can totally eliminate the problem but if it is minimized it becomes a cost of doing business much the same as shoplifting is a cost to retailers. From my perspective PPC is the most important component of my marketing plan. Due to the massive volumes of spam I have totally eliminated email marketing from my budget.

Have Fun!

umesh · Beginner Joined: 31 May 2004 Posts: 1

1) I am from India
2) I work for one of the top Internet companies in India
3) We are customers of Google and Overture since 2 years now.
4) We also do Adsense on one of our websites.

I read the article of The Times Of India - India's Secret Army of Ad Clickers. Well, have you ever read a local newspaper talking about new media and Internet technologies, they try to make a hype of it, half of the things are just writer's imagination. Its happens everywhere - India or US.

I don't even know if the writer of this article has ever used PC in his whole life. (BTW, if you get a chance to use Indiatimes.com a portal by the the newspaper The Times Of India - do let me know, half of the things don't even work on that website.)

Back to topic, if you travel in local trains in metros, or browse through those 10 cents (Rs.30) classifieds ads in the newspapers you will see thousands of these ads:

INTERNET Job
Work 2 hrs a Day Earn upto Rs. 10,000 (2000 USD) Per month
Internet connection required. Contact: 98xxxxxxxx

Well the real thing behind this no one knows, everyone make their own story. There is what really goes on behind (I tried this out just out of curiously). You will contact that no. given in the ad - a lady will answer your call- she will ask your details and then call you at a office.

It will be a office run in a small shop somewhere downtown. You will be given a software in a CD (62 mb with no un-installer) and ask they will ask upfront payment (Upto Rs.5000 to Rs.10,000 â€“ USD 1-2K). Then only your name will be enrolled. You go home install the software, put the details as told to you and then your started:

10-50 paise per click.
5-10 rupees her hour to see a ad (just keep refreshing.
5 ruppees to sign-up a form.

The companies which come on your screen are not Google/Overure. But from the following industries:
Low cost PPC search engine â€“ of which you must have not heard about.
Multi-level marketing schemes.
Lose weight/ gain weight programs â€“ keep filling forms.
Download search bars, gator type programs and some weird type of cursors.
Also keep watching â€“ home shoppe, casino, get rich quick etc. types of banners.

These are simply brokers who distribute these programs to Indian people in name of Internet jobs. You will find these brokers gone in three four months. Of course these brokers are Indians â€“ which means US (shady) online Ads firms are one who are giving these guys financial support in return of FAKE TRAFFIC - NOT GOOGLE NOT OVERTURE.

If I advertise on Google and get fake traffic â€“ its only my competition who will profit from it OR Google themselves (any doubts?) not an Indian ad clicker.

These online criminals are every where in the world not only in India â€“ they are in US and UK. I get 50 emails from US IPs everyday selling me V*gra and P*nis e*large formula. 10 emails from those who send me â€œre: your documentâ€ type emails with viruses. I don't make stupid stories about it.

You guys need to understand - India is home of various multinational profiting IT and Internet companies â€“ IBM, Oracle, Google, Yahoo, MSN, Wipro, Infosys, Rediff etc. etc. Ranked 11th in Internet usage of world - people here using Internet on everyday basis.

Thanks.

mairu · User Joined: 27 May 2004 Posts: 7

Umesh, no one is ridiculing India here.
It just happens that the article in question was Indian-based.

Bruhah · Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2004 3:08 pm Post subject: