Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

llsocial.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#51

Post by VonLipwig »

loceng wrote: post #38
thegyppo wrote: post #19

I have absolutely no issues with this: 1. It's the most scalable way for them to generate revenue without shoving ads down your throat. 2. Skimlinks doesn't "modify" your links, they simply put it through a redirect to see if it affiliates. The link you've submitted to Pinterest will likely stay as is. 3. If users submit affiliate links already, then services like Viglink/Skimlinks don't overwrite your cookie (i.e. R…

I would think the affiliate programs would be the ones who would have an issue. No affiliate link to adding one costs them profits they wouldn't otherwise have to give away. What's Pinterest going to do if this option doesn't exist, remove the links? No.. they could change the display algorithm to display links with their affiliate code more often, but that may mess with quality of content and click-rates..

I don't see why affiliate programs would have an issue here. If Pinterest didn't exist they wouldn't be getting the traffic.

Pinterest has every right to monetize their website in the least intrusive way possible. These referal links are transparent and provide a neat way to get some income.

What suprises me is how they are giving away 25% of their profits by using a third-party service instead of making something themselves.

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#52

Post by z303 »

gst wrote: post #41

DuckDuckGo (the search engine) is doing the same. E.g., search for something that returns Amazon search result, and the link to Amazon will have their affiliate tag included. A positive point, however, is that they are open about this on their website: http://help.duckduckgo.com/customer/portal/articles/216405-m...

Metafilter also does something similar with any Amazon link and are open about it, which does seem the best way to handle it

http://faq.metafilter.com/#51

This seems

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#53

Post by jarek »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #45
wiredd wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there is an effective way to hide the use of affiliate links, so they may as well disclose it in their FAQ or TOS just to avoid complaints that they're not being genuine towards their users.

Sure there is, if you are talking about the links on the pinterest items users hover over and not the eventual destination url of the merchant. Just use an in house link shortner that does a lookup to the original destination url, identify if an affiliate program exists, modify if needed and complete the redirect.

Unless you use an iframe, the affiliated URL will be in the user's address bar at the end of the exercise either way. If you do try to trick that away, there'll still be an HTTP request to the URL unless you proxy the entire page. Someone interested or sufficiently bored will be able to see what is going on.

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#54

Post by rplnt »

gst wrote: post #41

DuckDuckGo (the search engine) is doing the same. E.g., search for something that returns Amazon search result, and the link to Amazon will have their affiliate tag included. A positive point, however, is that they are open about this on their website: http://help.duckduckgo.com/customer/portal/articles/216405-m...

It is not really the same as DDG is providing the links itself while pinterest is modifying user submitted links. However, I have no problem with either of them. It would be nice of they said it in their FAQ (or wherever) as DDG did.

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#55

Post by Jare »

VonLipwig wrote: post #51
loceng wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think the affiliate programs would be the ones who would have an issue. No affiliate link to adding one costs them profits they wouldn't otherwise have to give away. What's Pinterest going to do if this option doesn't exist, remove the links? No.. they could change the display algorithm to display links with their affiliate code more often, but that may mess with quality of content and click-rates..

I don't see why affiliate programs would have an issue here. If Pinterest didn't exist they wouldn't be getting the traffic. Pinterest has every right to monetize their website in the least intrusive way possible. These referal links are transparent and provide a neat way to get some income. What suprises me is how they are giving away 25% of their profits by using a third-party service instead of making something th…

They may have an issue if this completely changes the scale, demographics, and therefore the economics of their affiliate program. It's one thing to have and affiliate program for bloggers that may bring dozens or hundreds of interested viewers, vs Pinterest bringing thousands or millions of casual viewers.

Some (many?) programs will need to adjust their terms for this practice, or they may face one of those Groupon-like situations where a family bakery needs to serve 100k muffins, at a loss, in a weekend.

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#56

Post by ak86 »

spacemanaki wrote: post #24

Does Stack Overflow also do this, at least with Amazon links? Someone please correct me if I'm wrong because I wouldn't want to spread misinformation. But IIRC Amazon links turn into something like "rads.stackoverflow.com/..." which I always assumed were affiliate. I think it's pretty reasonable, as others have pointed out.

Yup, Stack Overflow does do that: http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/26964/auto-inserting... and http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/11/our-amazon-advertising...

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#58

Post by adambyrtek »

Jare wrote: post #55
VonLipwig wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why affiliate programs would have an issue here. If Pinterest didn't exist they wouldn't be getting the traffic. Pinterest has every right to monetize their website in the least intrusive way possible. These referal links are transparent and provide a neat way to get some income. What suprises me is how they are giving away 25% of their profits by using a third-party service instead of making something th…

They may have an issue if this completely changes the scale, demographics, and therefore the economics of their affiliate program. It's one thing to have and affiliate program for bloggers that may bring dozens or hundreds of interested viewers, vs Pinterest bringing thousands or millions of casual viewers. Some (many?) programs will need to adjust their terms for this practice, or they may face one of those Groupon-…

Most affiliate programs I know reward actual purchases, not clicks, and share only a small fraction of profits. I don't see how 100k people ordering a book could ever be a bad thing for Amazon.

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#59

Post by adambyrtek »

nhangen wrote: post #35

Really surprised that no one has a problem with this. How would we feel if PG turned every Apple, Amazon, or other ecommerce link into an affiliate link, with our name pinned to it? Horrible decision on their part, and I think it's going to bite them in the ass when the average user gets wind of it.

Well, if you claim that it's such a horrible thing you should at least try to explain why. Personally, I wouldn't mind if Amazon links from HN had an affiliate code attached.

Re: Pinterest quietly modifying users links to generate affiliate revenue

#60

Post by nl »

adambyrtek wrote: post #58
Jare wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may have an issue if this completely changes the scale, demographics, and therefore the economics of their affiliate program. It's one thing to have and affiliate program for bloggers that may bring dozens or hundreds of interested viewers, vs Pinterest bringing thousands or millions of casual viewers. Some (many?) programs will need to adjust their terms for this practice, or they may face one of those Groupon-…

Most affiliate programs I know reward actual purchases, not clicks, and share only a small fraction of profits. I don't see how 100k people ordering a book could ever be a bad thing for Amazon.

Some affiliate programs are loss-leaders.

They assume a proportion of the buyers will be repeat purchasers. Paying for a loss-leader product for 100k casual visitors with unknown demographics or purchase patters is riskier than many businesses are comfortable with (for good reason!).

Also, if you are Fred's custom napkin business, and you usually sell 10 napkins a week and suddenly you receive 100k orders you are going to have a problem scaling a physical business that quickly.

Post reply on HN