ManagementWarrior's picture
Hi fellow co-branded publishers, It's now about 2 weeks since I joined RevResponse. My rejection rate has hovered around 75%, which I think is quite high. What's yours? What do you think are the causes of rejection and what's your idea of how to deal with it? Ismael
five star rating: 

Average: 4.5 (2 votes)

playsafe's picture

Great to start this thread. Same for me. Rejections are high. It is likely that one may see the word FREE and just jump onto it. But my concern is the form that need to be filled out. At times a lot of magazines looks good and useful to an individual because he is in that type of industry but not at Higher levels like Executive or CEO. He may not be able to take part in decision making/purchases either. I think those are rejected right away.

Magazine description says US, CANADA, UK but still forms to be filled out provide OTHERS. If this is restricted may be OTHERS option should be thrown out. This is one good cause of rejection probably.

Search Box also does not return proper results. Search on IPTV and you do not see FierceIPTV which is one of listed magazines in the list under telecom section.

Above are few observations however, as Karen may be seeing this post, she may request technical team to improve search results too.


rem's picture

I have recently changed some parameters, instead of displaying ads for specific journals, I decided to use the code provided from here (geo-targeting...).

In addition, I have increased the amount of delivered ads, so instead of 25% of all Pageviews, 50% of all Pageviews now feature some "Free Magazine" Ads. (I checked your homepages and see 100% of PI delivered with Ads).

Reject Rate increased from 50% to 70%. The amount of subscriptions is equal.

Now should I display the ads offered from here ("Free Magazines"), or my ads including all the information (Qualify for Your Free Subscription! Geographic Eligibility: USA, Canada, Selected International)?

In my point of view, click rate and reject rate is different for
"Free Magazines for Qualified Professionals" and "Free Magazines"...

But I am not able to quantify the effect of the additional impressions versus the different promotional text.

So I have contacted my account manager to receive some more opinions.

work911's picture

rem, I think one of the problems is that we don't have the tools to optimize the ads properly, since tradepub doesn't supply them, and we can't easily track metrics like clickthrus, etc on a lot of the stock creatives. To be honest, we jumped in, spent some time tweaking things as best we could, and now we don't. We just let it run, earn less than we could if we had the tools, and don't worry about it.

Hopefully when revresponse CAN give us this tools, we'll be more motivated to improve, but fiddling without data on things like impressions, and ctr is really virtually pointless.

rem's picture


I totally agree with you. Personally, I should also have a Sub-ID tracking (Channels) to see the success of different ad designs and positions.

Karen's picture

Thank you rem & work911 for your feedback. We know there are areas for improvement within our system and we are specifically aware of our partners' desire for these reporting capabilities. We're committed to correcting them. As I'm sure you've seen during your partnership with us so far, we're constantly rolling out new features and enhancements to directly address the needs of our publishers.

If anyone wants to track specific conversions separately for a different initiative, we can easily provide additional co-branded sites. The reporting for those brands will be centralized under one account. Please let me know if we can do this for you.

work911's picture

Karen I appreciate the improvements, but we've, frankly, hit a wall and until we get better tracking stats that includes impressions and clicks, we aren't able to put any more extra time into this. Without this basic information in addition to the stats you DO already provide combined, any kind of optimization is a complete waste of time for us, since we'd simply be operating blind. I have to ration my time among a lot of projects including working on my next book aimed at small business to create the best outcomes.

It is what it is and I'm happy we're able to do so well without these tools, but I'd figure we could probably double or triple revenue if we could optimize properly.

We'll wait. Eventually, deployments and creatives for which we cannot demonstrate effectiveness will be pulled off our sites until such time as we can test properly, but I don't even have time to do that step right now.

Karen's picture

popping in to let you know I'm taking notes ;)

... but I'll leave the floor to you all. It's nice to see partners discussing amongst each other. If you have specific questions for me, I'll see them and respond.

ManagementWarrior's picture

I wish RevResponse can talk this problem over with the different magazine publishers and get from the horses' mouth the broad criterias, factors and reasons for rejecting free applicants

With that kind of info available we publishers can then think of how to beat the odds.

I just hope that the magazine publishers are not just trying to play smart to build up a huge list of email addresses that they can send direct unlimited offers in the future (do we get any commission there for our contribution to the list?:-).

Take note that email addresses of all applicants--including the rejected ones, and they are more in numbers--are already in the database of the publishers. And if these applicants opted-in to the email notification service then it's a gold mine. As they say in IM, "the money is in the list".

This is one of the few times I'd be happy to be proven wrong with my fears.

Karen's picture

I'm happy to respond to this one and prove your fears wrong. Let's see if this helps...

1. The magazine publishers are not creating a giant list of email addresses from the offers we're providing. The only information we pass on to the publishers is the information they need in order to fulfill a subscription. Any rejected subscriptions are never given to the publishers. The only time those email addresses are used is if those subscribers check the "opt in" box to receive offers from or 3rd party vendors. If they don't check it, that email address is scrubbed.

2. While I can't explain the thinking that each and every publisher has for selecting their rejection criteria, I'll try to shed some insight. Magazines make money on advertising. In order to do so, they must be able to sell those ads to certain advertisers. The publishers want to have a high circulation to a targeted audience in order to sell advertising. Publishers choose rejection criteria based on the audience they are trying to reach with their advertising. This is why an offer about one specific market might be rejected if the subscriber is in a different industry.

ManagementWarrior's picture

Thanks for the clarifications, Karen. It certainly erased unnecessary doubts from my mind. I guess the fears were brought about by frustration since, no matter how I tweaked my site in the past days, the rejection rate has not improved significantly. I'll have to find other ways to make it better soon.

I agree with the other coments and suggestions here so far. I hope we can get more ideas on how to lick this high rejection rate issue soon. It would certainly be more inspiring if the average rejection rate was be in the vicinity of 30%.



ManagementWarrior's picture

Things just got worse for me. Today, 14 of my site guests applied and each and every one of them were rejected. Now my cumulative average rejection rate is a whooping 81%. Gee, this certainly is uninspiring.

Hope somebody can tell me fast what I need to improve in my site to improve the percentage.

Karen's picture

Hi Ismael,

I spent the better part of this morning digging into your metrics and your site traffic pattern to hopefully find a correlation between the traffic you are driving to us vs. the geographic eligibility of the offers made available.

* The traffic you are sending us is highly globalized. It appears that over 60% of the audience is coming from outside of North America. This isn’t a bad thing...we just need to make sure you're sending them to content they are actually eligible to receive.

* Regardless of the stated geographic eligibility of the offers, your audience continues forward. It appears that your audience is quite interested in receiving our offers regardless of the fact that every offer clearly states what countries are eligible to receive the offer. An example of this occurring specifically can be identified below:

You had one audience member from Nigeria yesterday that attempted to subscribe to 12 of the 14 offers. Sadly, the person in question failed to recognize that the publications he requested were not eligible for a person in Nigeria. It clearly states that on the form each publication...see the example URL below:

* Change the generic promotions you have going to Executive Category pages to the home page of your co-branded site. The category pages are by default sorted in alphabetic order while the home page of your co-branded dynamically optimizes itself every day based on what your audience has found success in requesting.

* If you’re determined to send people anything other than the home page of your co-branded page, try sending them to the International Category page. The link to that is below:

* Featured Offer Posts: You’re already putting this tactic to great use…very smart! My only caution to you is that you attempt to find offers that not only contextually serve your audience’s needs but also serve their geographic location. Right now, you have a great promotion on your home page specifically promoting "Unified Business Performance Management". Unfortunately, this offer is only eligible for professionals located in US and Canada.

Let’s attempt to put some of these suggestions in place and review in about a week. I’m confident we can find a way to optimize our offers for your audience but it’s going to take a little experimenting to find the perfect balance.

Thanks again for your continued interest.

work911's picture

This is great, Karen. Can you "pin" it somewhere so that others can find it in the future?

Karen's picture

By “pin it,” I assume you mean to place it in a easily referenced area? I can definitely add this feedback to the Partner FAQ that will be released in about a week or so. Let me know if that is what you are looking for. The Partner FAQ will constantly be evolving based on your needs. Thanks for the suggestion and for looking out for the other partners.

ManagementWarrior's picture

Hi Karen,

One thing that impresses me with RevResponse is its great, nay, excellent customer service. In my years of being active online, I've never seen such passion for monitoring and answering forum posts. Keep it up.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll put them into motion immediately and see how things improve.

I have a bit of a reaction to the metrics and site traffic stats you mentioned. Based on the stats from, my webhost, the geographical source of our monthly traffic of 166,000 (uniques=91,000) are: 85% USA and the rest come from about 20 other countries worldwide. What really surprises me is that 65% of my site guests come from Sunnyvale, California alone. New York takes up 16%.

On the basis of the above percentages, I estimated that only about 15% will be disqualified on account of geographical inavailability of the items (outside of the USA). Of course, there are other factors.



Karen's picture

Ismael, thank you for your praise of our customer service. I'm glad we're able to help. Let us know how your reject rate changes over the next few weeks.

As for your traffic, I should have been a little clearer regarding how we’re interpreting your audience. The traffic percentages are based on the actual traffic you are sending to us, not all of the traffic that exists on your site. You most certainly understand your traffic base far better than us…we simply understand the portion of traffic that gets sent to us. I hope this helps to clear things up.