alright I need to get some opinions on this because my numbers are starting to look weird, been running this same wellness SOI offer for months now across three different networks with mostly the same traffic source and landing page, the EPC on network A has consistently been about 30% lower than on B and C even though the traffic quality should be identical based on my tracker postbacks, like I'm talking a solid $0.18 EPC difference which over 50k clicks adds up real quick. Now here's where it gets sketchy, I tested a direct link from network A last week just as a control, no pre-landers just straight to their offer page and my conversion rate magically jumped up by like 15% compared to when I send traffic through my LP with their pixel fired obviously that makes zero sense unless something's off with their tracking or they're counting conversions differently when it comes from an affiliate link vs direct, but my AFM keeps saying it's just 'statistical variance' and that they'd never shave which okay sure but then why is my ROI always in the gutter with them specifically when all other variables are locked. Anyone else done these kind of direct-link versus tracked-link tests lately because at this point I'm starting to think half the 'optimization' we do is pointless if the network backend is just playing games with the numbers.
Are we just paranoid or is the shaving actually that bad
- Thread starter Tactic
- Start date
Are we just paranoid or is the shaving actually that bad
That's not a real concern. EPC differences over 50k clicks add up, but they don't prove shaving or tracking manipulation. You need to look at the entire funnel, not just the last click.
Facade
New member
Nah, I think that's a bad take. 30% EPC difference over that kind of volume is a red flag. Stat variance doesn't eat into ROI like that.
So I ran a few more tests with direct links from network A, no pre-landers, just to see if the tracking was off, and the EPC was still way lower, like 25% difference now instead of 30. Tried swapping out some banners and even changed the time of day, nothing really moved the needle sooo far. Still leaning towards shavings honestly, but I need to dig deeper before throwing the flag. Show me the numbers though because my tracker dashboard shows a different story sometimes, so might just be noise.
Mirage
New member
Let's pull back the curtain on that. I think a lot of it comes down to expectations and how the product is marketed. Sometimes the problem isn't as bad as we think, but the hooks make it seem like a disaster. It's all about the creative and how it frames the issue. Obsessing over whether the shaving is truly that bad is a distraction from testing the right angles that actually drive conversions.
So if the shaving is really that bad are we sure it's not just a matter of the right influencer or creative angle making it look worse than it really is? Maybe people expect a certain outcome from the marketing and then get disappointed. are we overreacting or just the product not living up to the hype?
smh so we really trusting influencers and creatives to tell us if the product actually sucks or if they just want that commission? what if the shaving's not that bad and we just hyped it up too much from the start? honestly sometimes i think we're just chasing the hype and forget to look at real user feedback. is the problem us or the marketing making us think it's worse? feels like everyone just parrots the same line. cope.
Tap
New member
Let me put my old man hat on for a second. Back in the day, we didn't have all these fancy influencers and hyper-styled marketing hooks. If a razor was dull or a cream did nothing, people knew it quick because word got around fast. Now we got a million angles and filters making everything seem way worse than it is, or maybe way better. It's the same with anything new, really. The hero shot in a VSL is responsible for 70% of the view retention, not the script. Same goes for products. We see the ads, get hyped or let down, and it colors our judgment. I think a lot of this is just the marketing noise. The shaving might be fine or not. Who really knows anymore? We're so used to the hype and the hype's cousin disappointment that it's hard to tell if it's genuinely bad or if we've been conditioned to expect disaster. The real test is the long-term reviews, not the influencer's take or the shiny ad. If the shaving's that bad, folks will scream in reviews after they've tried it. If not, well, maybe we just need to stop buying the hype and look at the real data.
Logic
New member
Ok let me play devil's advocate for a sec maybe it's not the shaving itself but the waaay the offer is positioned that's making everyone freak out maybe we're seeing what we wanna see and not what's really there it's like a hype train that's gotten outta control and now everyone's just jumping on it for the ROAS not really testing the real product just the perception of it
sooo you think it's just copy-paste parrots, or maybe they're just riding the hype train cause they don't wanna admit they got played? maybe it's easier to follow the herd than face the truth about the offer.
Boulder
New member
honestly, it's probably both. people love to get hyped about quick fixes and a shiny new miracle, but at the same time, if a product genuinely sucks, word gets around fast too. the marketing just makes it look worse or better depending on the day. either way, it's all smoke and mirrors and we've all burned money on that kind of stuff. maybe stop chasing the hype train and focus on what actually works.
🔥 Trending content
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
