Pop-under ads, an advertising method I thought had all but died out, seem to be making a comeback on a few websites I frequent.
These aren’t renegade websites selling cheap Viagra or offering online roulette, either. They’re high-traffic sites like ESPN.com and others like it.
It’s these advertisements that fueled the creation of the pop-up blocker, and they surely helped fuel the adoption of the Mozilla family of web browsers.
Even with pop-up blockers these advertisements are becoming a more prevalent part of my web browsing experience. Publishers place pop-under advertisement code in their pages so that a pop-under ad is created when a user clicks a link on the page (or in some cases anywhere on the page), thus circumventing the pop-up blocker, as it appears the browser requested the new window.
Large advertising networks like Undertone and Tribal Fusion offer a pop-under service, and some publishers are reaping the benefits of this annoying method of advertising.
One publisher that is profiting from pop-unders and loving it is MySanAntonio.com. See this quote from Undertone’s testimonial page:
We have a long-standing partnership with Undertone Networks. As our top pop-under partner, Undertone provides us with reliable revenue every month that helps our bottom line. We enjoy the top advertisers Undertone brings to our website and the exceptional customer service they provide.
Now to the main point of this post: Why are publishers still using these types of advertisements? They go against web usability, they offer no functional value to the visitor, and they get in the way of the visitor more than any other type of advertisement.
If, however, you’re the manager of a large corporate website you see the $$ signs and overlook the fact that it makes your users unhappy. You’re only concerned about the website’s bottom line (you don’t want to lose your job, after all).
Most of these large sites aren’t going to lose visitors as the result of using pop-unders because of the unique content they provide, and advertisers must see some benefit from the ads or they wouldn’t pay for them.
I’ve got no special analytics to help my cause here, mostly because it’s not really something you can measure.
You can’t measure the affect a pop-under has on your entire business, because it’s not something clear cut like a click-through ratio.
It’s like a shipping company with a bad truck driver. If I don’t call the 1-800-bad-driver number to report how much the trucker’s bad driving causes me to despise their shipping company then I simply vow never to use the service and hope they notice.
Now equate this to pop-unders. I’ll never use Vonage. I’ll never take a class at Southern Wesleyan. I associate Vonage and Southern Wesleyan with annoyance, but I can’t easily tell them this, so I simply vow to never use their services.
I wonder if these practices affect a business’ bottom line, and I wonder if they even know or care.
They’ve got a click-through ratio to backup their ad spending, something that will surely impress the boss, but is it hurting them as a company?
We may never know, but I’d like to hear your thoughts. Do you vow to never use a service because of annoying pop-unders? Do you think these businesses care more about you or their fancy stats?
Tags: pop-under, ads, annoying, undertone, tribal fusion, vonage, southern wesleyan