Are Co-Ops really Co-Ops?

[Sean Supplee]

Many new sites have come out claiming they are Co-Ops but are they really? (opinions welcomed)

 

A co op by definition is "Definition: Advertisements by retailers that include the specific mention of manufacturers, who---in turn---repay the retailers for all or part of the cost of the advertisement"

 

Most so called co ops are making you send traffic to other peoples pages and earning a credit this one credit is then used to display your site on any number of sites it is being rotated on. Not only that but they also allow you to BUY credits.

 

To me the whole premises of allowing someone to BUY credits on a co op and then having that co op show up on my site is right out reselling of my traffic credits on my exchange thus in reality stealing money from my business and I violation of most sites TOS which is not allowing resell of credits.

 

To me a TRUE co op would be a funded source a pool of money which each person buys into each month. Then that pool of money is used to buy advertising at any number of sites and then used to send traffic. Instead of it being credit based everyone in the pool now gets an even share of the advertising that was bought.

 

The benefit of joining a co op is to get more exposure for your business at a lower cost then it would take for you to outright buy the ad yourself. Which is what makes it popular with many start up and small businesses.

 

Opinions, thoughts ?

[Darren Olander]

Hmm.. I'd say a lot of terms have changed meanings over the years and a co-op is one of them. 

 

I would agree with you that the traditional meaning is everyone is purchasing a share into an overall advertising campaign. Also you made a good point, these traditional Co-ops are done in bulk which means the advertising is usually obtained at a cheaper price which benefits everyone in the co-op. As for these credit based co-ops I don't think there is any price benefit except being able to earn the traffic for free?

 

I think they are a brilliant idea though, and I have no problem with them, but if co-op is not the right word for them, what is?

[Matt Koshko]

Personally I've been leery of co-op advertising in our niches although I know co-op advertising can be pretty cost-effective. Years ago I put together a campaign for a Direct Selling business which involved about 20-25 members who each paid in XX dollars to participate. The campaign was to purchase, in bulk, car stickers which we would all put on our cars advertising one domain, and evenly distribute the leads. It DID work and certainly ended up being fair. 

 

...how times have changed!

[Roscoe]

What are your highest converting traffic sources that you are using? 

[market101]

I agree with your definition.  "To me a TRUE co op would be a funded source a pool of money which each person buys into each month. Then that pool of money is used to buy advertising at any number of sites and then used to send traffic. Instead of it being credit based everyone in the pool now gets an even share of the advertising that was bought."

 

However, I have had several bad experiences with co-ops.  The 3 that I joined, promised major advertising and sharing of all new members.  I have no way of knowing how many replied to the ads, but I do know that my equal share, was far below what I would normally have obtained just advertising for myself.

 

That was several years ago and I have not fallen into that trap since.

[Len]

Not sure if their worth it.

[John Bell]

I disagree, a co-op is a co-operative, everyone working together.  It's the same as a traffic exchange (the original name for Traffic Swirl was traffic co-op, because that's what it is; people working together).

 

 

An Advertising Co-Op would be, three of us get our businesses together and pitch on an advertising and split it... but when you're buying traffic from most of these sites that call themselves co-ops, that's not really what you're doing... I guess in the long term it is because they are pooling the resources to buy advertising at a lower cost, but that's sort of a spin.. they're really just selling you advertising and outsourcing it's delivery, a lot of them even are using their referral credits so they're not even really buying the advertising to begin with, just reselling you their traffic they have for free.

 

 

I'm sure I wasn't the first to come up with the idea of the viral co-op, but I hadn't seen it before when I created Explosive Traffic and I don't think anyone can argue it's effectiveness.  I refer to the site as a viral co-op because of two reasons - one being the definition I provided at the beginning of this post in that it is people combining their efforts -- you surf there, i'll surf here, and we'll split our ads.  In it's most basic form, that is why I created this site to begin with.  I knew that if I could even get 1 other person on board - then we could each double our reach.. that was why I created it, and that mission is why it remains successful.  The viral aspect obviously being that it spreads.. your individual advertising exponentiates your reach because it is human by nature.

 

 

If you're trying to buy a "co-op" share of someone's advertising then of course you are at their will, and most people could advertise more effectively on their own - but you're paying for that convenience...

 

At the end of the day I would consider the viral co-ops as true co-ops, as well as Matt's example, that is a true co-op because it is the people who are working together, the kind of co-ops that you are referencing, and I've heard your argument a hundred times, isn't really a co-op.. you are in theory pooling with other people to get a deal, but you're not actually pooling with anybody -- you're buying advertising directly from an agent, regardless of how that advertising is delivered - the reality remains that no matter how you paint it, you're buying traffic.  Period.