Should you remove ads through a third party without telling the advertiser?
I wrote a post 10 days ago called ‘How to manage your blog advertising‘. In the post I mentioned how every blogger should try and do their best to look after their current advertisers but look after their potential advertisers too. It’s something I believe strongly in, bloggers should look to develop a good relationship with all of their advertisers.
Yesterday something happened which I guess you could say falls under a grey area in this topic.
I was advertising Blogging Tips via Text Link Ads on 45n5 for $15 a month. 2 days ago Mark launched his new theme for the blog and when I checked it out yesterday I noticed that my ad was no where to be seen. Mark has removed all ads from his blog. I fully support his reasons for doing so however I was less than happy finding out that my ad had been removed in this way. I did not receive any notice from Mark or TLA about it.
The discussion
I left a comment on Marks post saying
Hi Mark
I love the new design. I have to admit though I’m very disappointed you did not let me know about this. The decision to remove ads from the blog is 100% yours however being an advertiser here, at the very least I would have expected an email about it. To logon and simply find that my ad has been removed without any notice is very bad business in my opinion. Not getting at you but I’m sure you can relate to why I feel this way.
Kevin
After I left this message Mark emailed me to suggest that I was being a bit harsh however I disagree. I will explain my thoughts on this matter later in the post but at the moment I want to post the replies so far in this discussion.
Mark said
@kevin - Your ad wasn’t sold through me, but a third party. Your business relationship was with that third party and not me. Therefore it is up to the third party to notify you not me (which they did I assume).
“To logon and simply find that my ad has been removed without any notice is very bad business in my opinion.”
In hindsight I reckon I could have sent a handwritten email to everybody that purchased a $15 link through tla, but I don’t personally think it was necessary.
I have never received a note from an advertiser saying they were removing their link from my sites (and there have been many), I was simply following what I perceived to be protocol. If somehow I stepped outside of what is customary I apologize, however note that it wasn’t intentional.
I replied
As I said in my email
1) The fact it was through a third party is irrelevant in my opinion. I wanted to advertise on 45n5 and was directed to the third party. You chose to do send potential advertisers to TLA instead of selling ads directly. Also, they did not let me know my ad was removed. I only found out when I dropped by the blog.
2) I dont think it matters if I paid $15 or $100. The fact remains I paid
for one months advertising and did not get it and was not informed about it (For the record your ads were being sold way below value:) ).As I said, it’s your blog and what you do with it etc is 100% up to you however I strongly believe doing this kind of thing is a bad business practice and can lose you a lot of partners in the long run.
no hard feelings.
Mark replied
If there is any bad business practice here it’s venting your frustration in my comments thread instead of email and making a fuss over a single $15 dollar text link.
(for the record, I didn’t know kevin was upset over this until I saw his first comment and I emailed him. Also for the record tla should refund Kevin for any remaining days he paid for)
If any partners in the long run want to talk down to me over a $15 text link or make a fuss about it on my blog, then they aren’t business partners I’m looking to have.
I replied
I didnt email you about it because you did not offer me the same courtesy. Why should I have emailed about it if you didnt email me about the ad being removed?
‘If any partners in the long run want to talk down to me over a $15 text link or make a fuss about it on my blog, then they aren’t business partners I’m looking to have.’
I dont know how you can say this Mark. I emailed you about your theme and wished you the best of luck and said that you should contact me first about ads on the new design because I wanted to advertise here. I spend hundreds a month advertising Blogging Tips so to suggest you wont lose any advertisers is a huge assumption. I’m sure the other advertisers spend more than $15 a month also.
The price of $15 is irrelevant - I would have paid much more but that is what you were charging. Also, as I said before. I did not want to go through Text Link Ads, I would have been happy just sending payment directly via PayPal. I am not looking for a refund, it’s the principle of the thing however to simply pass the buck onto TLA and say they will refund me and they will let me know the ad is down is very bad business.
Im sorry Mark but I really think your wrong on this one. You had the choice of rejecting my bid for a text link here but you chose to accept it and by doing so you agreed to place my link on here for 1 month. Again, its not about the money. I make thousands a month and $15 is nothing in my advertising budget but my point remains, this was a really bad way to treat people who were supporting you and your blog.
He replied
@kevin - touting how much you make or how much you spend isn’t impressing me and I’m not assuming I won’t lose any advertisers, I’m saying i don’t want to work with advertisers that make a fuss on my blog about a $15 text link purchased through a third party.
You can read all of the above quotes in this post.
My View on the subject
I’m sure Mark didn’t think he was doing anything wrong however I believe removing ads that have been paid for without even letting the advertisers know is bad business practice. I am not trying to attack Mark by saying this nor am I trying to talk down to him as he suggested however to simply remove paid advertisements without letting the advertiser know is shooting yourself in the foot.
First off, perhaps I should have replied via email however at the time I wasn’t really thinking that far ahead and was merely replying in the post in which he mentioned ads were removed.
Marks main points were that
- The ad was through a third party
- The ad only cost $15
- If any partners in the long run want to talk down to me over a $15 text link or make a fuss about it on my blog, then they aren’t business partners I’m looking to have.
- That I was touting how much I make
(1) I contacted Mark about advertising on 45n5 a few months ago and he directed me to Text Link Ads so to say that my business was with them and not 45n5 is a weak argument in my opinion.
(2) The price of the advertisement doesn’t matter. It could have been an ad for $200 or an ad for $1,000. The fact remains, he agreed to advertise my blog on his for one month and just a little over two weeks later my ad has been removed.
(3) I emailed him specifically the other week to ask to be contacted first about the new ad positions.
(4) The only reason I mentioned that I make thousands every month was to highlight how irrelevant the price of the ad was.
For the record, TLA have never sent me an email about any of this.
As I said in my comments and in email to Mark, I have no hard feelings towards him regarding this. I think he’s a great blogger, I love his videos and I wish him the best with his blog.
I would have been a bit annoyed if my ad I paid for was removed from any blog without my knowledge however I think I was a bit more pissed off about it because I have did my best to support Mark and his blog through BloggingTips and because I have spoke with him a few times via email as well.
For the record, I will continue to link to good posts from 45n5 in the future. As I said, I enjoy Mark’s blog and I put this argument down to a difference of opinion more than anything else
Should you remove ads through a third party without telling the advertiser?
A huge part of blogging is building relationships. You build a relationship with your readers, you build a relationship with your peers and you build a relationship with your advertisers.
Does selling your advertising through a 3rd party mean that you need to lose the relationship with your blogs sponsors? Personally, I don’t belive so. For example, if you sell text links via Text Link Ads I think it’s good practice to email those who advertise with you and introduce yourself. You’ll be amazed at how much a simple gesture like introducing yourself via email can do for you in the future. Not only are they more likely to advertise with you again in the future, you might also sell some banner ads to them as well.
It’s also worth noting that not all of the people who advertise on your blog found your site via the 3rd party advertising network. If you direct advertisers to the 3rd party, does it mean you remove all any contact and liability to your sponsors?
Summary
I’m sure some of you may agree with Mark with on this and I’m sure some will see my side too. My own advice to all bloggers out there is this :-
If you sell advertising on your blog then do your utmost to give them a good deal. It doesn’t matter if they advertise through a 3rd party site, it doesn’t matter if you sell the ads for $2 a month. If you look after your sponsors from the start of your blogs life you will find they will stick with you through thick and thin.
I wasn’t 100% sure about posting about this incident on Blogging Tips but I think it raised some important questions about using an advertising network to sell your text and banner ad spaces. Does using a middle man make you a 2nd rate site sponsor?
Happy Blogging
p.s. Mark from 45n5 - I’m sure you’ll read this post at one point. As I said above, no hard feelings. Think we just have a difference of opinion on this one. 
Cash Quests | September 24th, 2007 at 10:00 am #
I’m with you here Kevin. It’s bad practice.
If that’s the way that an advertiser is treated over a mere text link, I’d be hesitant to spend hundreds of dollars advertising there.
Whether it was $15 or $1500, you deserve to get what you paid for.
45n5 | September 24th, 2007 at 10:06 am #
no hard feelings as I agree we have a difference of opinion, but that’s about all.
I’ll continue to link to much of the great content produced here also.
Bringing the issue to light is good, discussion and disagreement only leads to the evolution of ideas/thought IMO so debate away.
Kevin | September 24th, 2007 at 10:21 am #
Thanks Mark. I think I perhaps overreacted a little at the time with my responses and perhaps you overreacted by me addressing it publicly too.
Mike Olbinski | September 24th, 2007 at 12:01 pm #
I think you could have done this whole post without copying the comments entirely. Seems a bit exploitative to me and that you are trying to get Mark in trouble or make him look bad.
Granted, maybe he could have let you know, but I am new to all this. I am in the process of getting text link ads up on my site, and I had no idea if I took them down that I should notify anyone. It’s third-party and I figured Text-Link-Ads would just try to sell that ad elsewhere.
There are so many places advertising this way, that there can’t possibly be notifications going to all your advertisers that they got canceled.
Just my thoughts. I definitely think if you work with advertisers directly, that you should keep them informed on any changes to their ad.
Kevin | September 24th, 2007 at 12:06 pm #
I wasn’t trying to exploit Mark or make him look bad by posting the comments. It was necessary to post the comments to give a complete picture of how I viewed it and how Mark viewed it.
Matt Jones | September 24th, 2007 at 12:06 pm #
Technically Mark may be right, but even so I would make the effort to contact advertisers, even if the only reason was hoping they would be interested in buying advertising again.
Laura | September 24th, 2007 at 2:56 pm #
Here’s my 2cents.
I also would have contacted TLA for a return or credit toward another link.
I think it would bother me too if my paid link just disappeared after I paid for it. But I would have conducted the exchange through email and not in comments, although controversy makes for interesting reading.
Mike Olbinski | September 24th, 2007 at 3:41 pm #
I agree with Laura
I felt like I was reading someone’s personal correspondence or chat session 
Anyways, notifying via email would be a nice gesture. Although, I’m not sure where to even find that info on the text links I have up on my two blogs.
Simon | September 24th, 2007 at 4:23 pm #
I can see both points of the argument. I buy and sell links through TLA and I can see that I would expect TLA to contact any advertisers if I decided to pull my ads. On the other hand, I would probably expect an email from any site owner I advertise on if they were to pull my ads, especially if they had been paid up front.
The one aspect of this I don’t like is bringing your personal earnings into it. It stinks of the “I’m right because I earn more than you” style of argument (whether it be true or not). If the amount you paid for the link is irrelevant, then the amount you spend on advertising over the month is also irrelevant. If money is irrelevant, it’s irrelevant regardless of whether it supports your argument or not, you can’t pick and choose.
Kevin | September 24th, 2007 at 5:54 pm #
Simon - I dont recall ever talking about my earnings on this blog or any other. Infact, I have specifically said that I dont disclose my online earnings.
Obviously I didnt want to give the impression that I was saying I was right because I made more money or whatever. The only reason I mentioned money was because Mark said that it was only $15. My point was that it was not about the money, I was trying to put it into perspective that the price of the link didnt matter to me, it was the fact the ad was removed without my knowledge.
It was a throwaway comment I said at the time because Mark was implying that I shouldnt make a fuss about the ad being removed because it was only $15.
Mike - I understand people not wanting to read quote after quote but it was difficult to explain my view and Marks without repeating them in the post
Dave Starr --- ROI Guy | September 24th, 2007 at 8:59 pm #
I’ve seen the other side of this yesterday on 45n5. There are a couple issues here, several of which I consider just differences of opinion/procedure that aren’t worth much comment.
But two things stick in my mind … the first is,
Do you want to have a relationship with yur advertisers, or not? Either way would be a valid practice, but if you don’t want a one-on-one relationship and a misunderstanding flares up in your comments section, just delete the comment and refer things to the third-party. don’t make anon-personal issue personal and public.
Second, the more I re-read Mark’s uncalled for dismissive comment re: not wanting partners who only spend $15 the nastier it sounds. I have a couple hundred dollars earmarked for advertising a blog I want to build up and have been building a list of potential “spends”. I am a “samll-timer” and my individual ad buys wil be “small-time”. Can anyone guess which blogger or bloggers I probably won’t “burden” with any of these “nickel-dime” ad spends?
You really can get an education online.
Baz L | September 24th, 2007 at 9:33 pm #
It sucks but you’re both right. Mark technically has no obligation to to contact everyone. But at the same time, it did leave a bad taste in my mouth that he kept stressing how little the ad costs. Hey, some people can only afford a $15 ad yow. I know I can’t even afford $10/month.
Annie | September 25th, 2007 at 12:12 am #
Kevin,
Thanks for doing a post on this subject. I’m actually in this situation now on one of my blogs where I’d like to axe Text Link Ads as the middle man and sell links directly to advertisers.
The obvious way to go would be to contact the people who are advertising on my site now (through TLA) and see if they’d be interesting continued at a reduced rate (since I could charge less with no middle man), but TLA doesn’t make the advertiser information available to the publisher, as far as I know.
In some cases, you can just go to the website and talk to the person, but I suspect some of the links currently on my site are there through SEO companies, but who knows which ones?
Anyway, it’s a bit of a dilemma to be mulled through. I appreciate your input on the problem from the advertiser’s point of view.
Wallace | September 25th, 2007 at 12:14 am #
suck guy you must refund the money no matter $15 or $500!
Jarkko Laine | September 25th, 2007 at 12:24 am #
I think this could have been prevented really easily by Mark waiting a bit longer before taking action on dropping the TLA links.
I suppose the links were paid for the month of September so launching the new design at the beginning of the next advertisement period (in October) would have had the same effect but without making any of the advertisers feel cheated.
Chad Everett | September 25th, 2007 at 9:11 am #
Though I agree with Mark, and that he can do what he likes with advertising, I have to agree with Kevin, in that you need to tell your advertisers what’s happening (if you’d like to keep them happy, at any rate). It’s just the right thing to do.
I think this is illustrated by the fact that TLA has no idea why the ads are no longer there. Sure, they can tell that they aren’t working, but did the site go down because of a power outage, or was the blog software changed, or did the resdesign mean something was left out inadvertently? They have no way of knowing that it was an intentional removal.
While TLA is selling the ads, they are doing so at the behest of the publisher - Mark in this case - and if asked, they are going to point the finger at him. It’s best all around if he either waits to the end of the period or lets everyone know.
Kevin | September 25th, 2007 at 9:21 am #
Dave - I don’t think Mark should be viewed in a negative way here. I had a difference of opinion with him and we both reacted. I agree with you on building relationships though. It’s something which I believe a lot of bloggers forget to do.
Chad - You bring up a very good point which has not been mentioned up until now ie. the fact TLA has not informed me of this and the fact it looks like they wont either. Perhaps I would not have brought it up on Marks site had I received an email from TLA about it.
Tay | September 26th, 2007 at 1:39 am #
I agree with you, Kevin. The cost of the link is completely irrelevant. Even though through a third party, you paid for the link in the agreement it would be on the site for a month. Mark accepted those terms and should have followed through with them. It’s bad for you and it’s bad for him. You paid for it, and then you didn’t get it. When you think about it, that’s like stealing.
It was his decision, and it was a bad one on his part. Not establishing good relationships with your readers, advertisers, and everyone in contact with you does damage for your blog. By reading Mark’s comments, he portrays himself as very untrustworthy and acts as if he doesn’t care if he gives his advertisers what they pay for or not.
Just sharing my opinions here. I’m on your side, Kevin, but I won’t go against Mark even though I completely disagree with him. Hopefully he’ll learn to treat people with more respect in the future. If he doesn’t, he’ll never get that respect back in return.
SarahG | September 26th, 2007 at 8:33 am #
I can see both points of view here.
As an advertiser it must be frustrating believing you’re getting what you’ve paid for and trusting others to deliver that service for you.
From a publisher’s point of view, and using Annie’s comment above too, how are you supposed to know who to contact? You contact the company you’re dealing with, TLA. They don’t make it easy to remove a site from your inventory, so I presume you have to contact them. But that’s the best you can do.
I certainly wouldn’t be impressed to discover that a publisher had contacted my client to inform them that the link I had purchase on their behalf was now being removed. Just as I wouldn’t be impressed if my hosting company contacted my clients who I resell hosting to. Just because you have a domain purchase a link on your site doesn’t necessarily mean the domain owner is responsible for the purchase of the link. This is why Text Link Ads take 50% of your sale, to cover the admin, the service etc. and to cover dealing with issues when they arise such as this one.
The main person/people at fault here is the service provider, Text Link Ads. They failed to inform at least one if not all of the advertisers that their advert had been cancelled off the site.
Of course, in this situation Mark was aware of one of the advertisers (ie. Kevin), but clearly it’s just a difference of opinion on what to do and how to proceed. I’ve never contacted the few advertisers I have, it’s never even crossed my mind to! But as I mentioned, without definitely knowing who is responsible for the advert link purchase, perhaps simply emailing the site owner isn’t necessarily a good idea.