Huge problem with SCRIPT sites

[Pro]

Everything I did here, I have technical data to back it up.

Problem: Trading with scrip sites such as scorpion, UCJ-III is alot more harder.

Why ? Well that is because their stats are inaccurate by aprox 15-25%, and that's a fact.

Reason: Scripts that tell you to send hits just to their domains CAN NOT track all the referrals in the environment. Some browser do not even have the capability to pass this variable. Some disable it. I have not tested AOL yet, but I will, my suspicions are the these scripts can not track most of AOL users.

So next time you talk to your trade who says that you sent him only 12k when you show you sent 18k, you can say well that is not your fault. It is not your fault if the other party can't properly track hits ? Ofcourse I do realize I will get many replies saying that alot of people close windows, believe me I have accounted for the loss in here.

Pro, ICQ me @ 52992074
"In search of growth"

[Juggler]

Hi Pro

I can not see how it would make a difference as the precentage of trades not count would be approx the same for all trades and as scripts will send excess to trades so if you send 10k and only 7k show up someone sending 20 would only have 14k show as trades are done by a precentage you would get the same amount back if 10k or the 7k is tracked.

The way I judge the scripts is by looking at my top ten senders and they are 100% sites that track by Domion so the scripts are doing something right.

I am still using the perl version of UCJ (Only because I can not afford UCJ-C 3) and I am 100% convinced that UCJ-c 3 or one of the other Domion tracking scripts would be 100% better, But even scripts that use a URL to track do not track 100% I run several sites and the stats never tally up from one site to another, but personally I do not really give a dam if scripts track my hits all I care about is if they send hits back and I earn $$$ and the scripts sending me the most hits and therefore earning me the most $$$ are UCJ-C 3 Scorpion and Blindo also check the top 100 to see what scripts are trading the best

Just my 2 cents worth I think it may of been 10 cent but it is late ((-:

Happy Trading

[Due]

I agree with Pro. It is impossible to track refferers with everyone.Just check your sextracker stats.... How many bookmarks do you have comming in? The amount of bookmarks you have = the amount og surfers that don't show the refferer domain

Juggler>> If every visitor you sent was counted then your trades would be a lot bigger = more $$$

Anyway I prefer sending to a unique URL with a user ID instead of the domain but I will offcourse trade with all sites :-)

[richard]

blindio scores a cheap point:

Trading with a site running blindio can remove this problem (should it infact exist).

My sites, freerotic.com/freehornysluts.com - if you would prefer to trade with an URL eg www.freehornysluts.com/?site=999 (http://www.freehornysluts.com/?site=999) we can do so - give me an email (prefered) or ICQ 41012160.

Rich. pp Chris

[blacula]

I also agree with Pro and Due. One of the first comments I hear from my newbie webhosters is that they are getting X bookmark traffic a day. When in reality, it is just browsers that are not passing referrals. For instance "Mozilla 3.01 (compatible)" (yes, I have it memorized) never passes a referral and it is a large percentage of the traffic that I see hitting my servers.

Also, when using 'target="_blank"' under some browsers it treats the new URL as a typin or bookmark and doesn't send a referral at all or worst it uses the first page the surfer has viewed when starting the browser as the referral. I know I have gotten alot of hits over the years from "http://www.yahoo.com/" or someone's personal homepage and my link is nowhere to be found.

I can go and on about the problems with using referrals instead of a unique URL to do trades. I know there is some advantages to using referrals (speed) but it does lack accuracy and completeness -- because you are counting the incoming traffic as referral based and counting every single click out accurately (or close).

So, if I send you a 100 hits, and you count 60. you will only send 78 hits (130%) in return. BUT since ppl don't let pages load fully -- part of the biz -- I only count 70.

And that is why I think alot of ES and UCJ3 sites advertise such high ratios -- which in away makes up for the loss -- because in actually they are getting 90-100hits into theirs sites and producing 130% off of that (117 hits) but only counting 60 giving them almost a 200% clickthru rate

The numbers may be not accurate but it should give you an idea of what I am talking about.

I have found away around this problem -- unless you have a problem with losing traffic at first -- is to set the your ratio to some ungodly ratio when trading with a referral site -- you may lose traffic but if the site you are trading with is using a high ratio like 180-200% then the trade should be good.

Well, that is my 2cents

[Rimmer]

Today 14.4% of my traffic was "No Referrer Traffic"

This 14.4% of traffic was distributed evenly by UCJ-C Version III to all the trades that sent traffic based upon the 85.6% of traffic where the referrer was counted.

All scripts that track via domain do this one way or another as there just isn't enough margin in cj'ing to shave 14.4% of traffic as you're suggesting. IMPOSSIBLE!

UCJ-C has run via domain tracking and via incoming cgi's and I've got to admit that tracking via domain is much better. The 85.6 gives a fantastic picture of the remaining 14.4% of traffic so the stats are a extremely good indication of what's going on.