[This] reminds me of a quotation from somebody that, whenever he tried to explain the logical structure of a programming language to a programmer, it was like a cat trying to explain to a fish what it feels like to be wet. (Saul Gorn)
Tribal Fusion did NOT deliver good results for me. That doesn't
mean that it wouldn't work for you. I know, for example, that
many sites have good results from Chitika but that performed poorly for me also. Different
strokes for different sites: what works well for me might not for you
What I liked about Tribal Fusion
I liked the open reporting. They show you who ran the ads, how many
times each ad appeared, what the advertiser paid them and what your cut
is. They show you how many public service and house ads they ran also -
you know exactly where your money came from.
I liked the easy control of ad types. I won't allow popups and
popunders; I could easily block those. I don't like "audio" ads
either; Tribal fusion let me block those.
What I disliked about Tribal Fusion
You mean other than the low CPM? Actually, it wasn't that bad: it
was about a third less than what Google Adsense pays me on average so
it's certainly possible that with tuning (blocking out the low bidding
advertisers) I could have bumped that up. But I'm not sure how
much I could have bumped it - they were feeding me a fair pile of
public service ads as it was. Admittedly I didn't give Tribal Fusion
a very long run, so it's also possible that I might have picked up
higher CPM advertisers over time, but that's an unknown and I didn't
want to wait while watching my income cut by a third.
I really disliked their control panel. It's very confusing and
complicated. For example, you are supposedly able to substitute
other ads when they run out of inventory and would give you public
service ads. The link that they gave to explain how brought me
to an incredibly confusing page that looked like it was talking about
advertising on Tribal Fusion rather than publishing the ads. Even
at that, it seemed to be trying to draw some analogy to
airplane flights - very, very confusing.
I think Adsense is easier and less confusing than Tribal Fusion,
but I do think Google could do far better at reporting and could
learn from what others do. Tribal Fusion is pure CPM - you
get paid for impressions. Google Adsense is mostly pay per click,
although you can get some CPM from them also. Google doesn't tell
you what your cut is, Tribal Fusion is completely open about it.
Why do some sites do better with CPM and some with CPC? It
probably has to do with WHY people came to the site in the first
place. For example, if you come here regularly, you are unlikely
to click on ads. However, if you arrived here because you are
Googling to try to solve some problem, a contextual ad may be
related to your search, and you therefore might click. As
approximately 90% of this sites visitors are from search, it
makes sense that I'd do better with Adsense.
If I had enough traffic, I could tune for maximum performance:
if I saw that a visitor came from search, I'd show CPC ads and otherwise
I'd put up CPM's. However, in my case there just wouldn't be enough
non-search traffic to be worthwhile - the small extra payoff wouldn't
be worth the trouble. I'd need ten times the traffic to bother
with that level of sophistication.
If your site is primarily
regulars, Tribal Fusion or another CPM based network might be
just right (Tribal Fusion does require at least 2,000 visitors
per day so if you are under that figure don't bother to apply).