Guest BostonGuy Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 I see that the new flirt4free banner is now integrated into every page of this product, without any reference at all to the fact that it's an advertisement or in any way not an integral part of maleescortreview.com. I don't think I've seen very many instances where an advertisement was integrated into a product so completely and with so little indication that it was anything other than part of the product. In fact, with the color schemes being what they are, the new f4f banner appears to the viewer to be the most important part of the site, more important than any content on the pages. The obvious inference is that these two products are now one. Is that true? Also, the new f4f banner is auto-updating on a very short schedule (seems like possibly once per minute). I'm generally against pages auto-updating because I like to update things when I want to. But I especially don't like it when pages auto-update (1) on a very rapid schedule and (2) with now obvious change in content -- when (1) and (2) combine, it's clear that the only intent is to try to attract the eye of the viewer and get them to take some action regarding the auto-updating content. Much as I like this place, I'll definitely now come less often, read anything in the forums as quickly as possible when I do come, and then leave, again as quickly as possible. And, yes, the new banner is that annoying. Pity, really, because the end effect is precisely the opposite of what was (I guess) intended: instead of wanting to click through and check out their content, I am aggravated enough by the huge, bright banner to want never to click on it. Sorry for the negative message. I thought about not posting but decided it's better for you to hear viewer comments. Perhaps some people will really like the banner and will post that. Happy Memorial Day to all of you. BG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marcanthony Posted May 25, 2007 Members Share Posted May 25, 2007 Well to be honest, the banner doesn't bother me quite as much as it does you... especially knowing that the site is trying to turn a dollar too. But what is concerning is that now that this banner is up today, when I cllick on the top 10 profiles of the day (an activity that I really love due to the eye candy), I get the banner, but no profile. Just the banner over a blank page. Hopefully that's temporary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BostonGuy Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 I totally support them doing whatever they need to do to make a buck. An ad for flirt4free could easily be a nice addition to the site. Unfortunately, this one is just so intrusive that, in my opinion, it interferes with the site's design -- I had to actively look for a bit to find the Home button, even though it's in the same place it was before -- and takes over the entire page. All of the careful design that went into the site is completely lost and all you see is this big red banner. Oh well... on to other things. BG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FourAces Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 BG I kind of doubt that if you haven't used F4F service at this point,( HB had it up for years on his site), then you most likely won't ever be using it. Also, if you have used F4F before Oz and TY will not make a penny off of you clicking on the banner. F4F uses a cradle to grave affiliate program. I agree the red background color is really horrific and I'm sure OZ can have his program people tone it down if he or TY want to. But from my knowledge the Iframes refresh rate is set by the host vsmedia not by MER. I hope a lot of new guys click on the banner and buy some time so OZ and TY can keep this site free. I dont find it any interference at all when viewing this site. Just curious BG do you read a magazine then complain about the ad placement j/k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BostonGuy Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 >Just curious BG do you read a magazine then complain about the >ad placement j/k LOL... I horrified a fellow passenger on a flight a while back. I went through a magazine and -- as I always do -- removed and discarded all of the inserted postcards and also pulled out and threw away all of the thicker pages that the magazine opens to when you read it. I did this while studiously not looking at the contents of the insert cards or the pages I was discarding. It turned out that he was in the marketing biz and used these kinds of vehicles for some of his campaigns. He couldn't believe that I was completely ignoring the messages on those cards. I told him that I found them aggravating and so refused to look at them -- while sometimes paying a fair amount of attention to conventional ads that were printed in less aggravating ways. It's just the little things, sometimes. And it's good to speak up because otherwise no one knows that someone "out there" is finding a particular advertisement or advertising campaign to be annoying. I'll reiterate that I like MER, hope they do well, would love to see them make a ton of money off the site and certainly support the idea of using advertising here. Oz and TY are great guys and they've done a great job with MER. The site looks good, works well, etc. Unfortunately, it seems that sites like this are down in "readership" across the board, for reasons that aren't entirely clear to me. My only beef was with the nature of this particular advertisement: in your face on a site that isn't like that otherwise, so bright in color that it overwhelms the rest of the page, self-updating too frequently, etc. I'd feel the same way if it was on the NY Times site or anywhere else. BG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TampaYankee Posted May 27, 2007 Members Share Posted May 27, 2007 >The obvious inference is that these two products are now one. >Is that true? > No it is not, as far as I know. >I am aggravated enough by >the huge, bright banner... > The background color is not my favorite but I think i have some vague recall that it is a fav of Oz. >Sorry for the negative message. I thought about not posting >but decided it's better for you to hear viewer comments. It is better to get feedback -- the good the bad, and, in your assessment, the ugly. That is the only way we can provide what members want. Oz is very sensitive to responding to customer suggestions and other inputs. Oz also is trying to turn this site from a money sink into at least a break even endeavor. More than break even would be better. To that end, we are providing adult content opportunities for those that wish to avail themselves of them. The challenge is to integrate the adult site portals into MER with minimal disruption of the site atmosphere. The initial integration of some portals has been undertaken. Now we are getting some feedback to consider. More will come and we will consider the feedback as we go. The goal is to provide a site that members/viewers want to visit for free content and discussion and also a site to generate income to cover expenses at least and maybe a bit more. We are dedicated to keeping the escort information content FREE for all. To generate income we will offer premium services and adult content portals to those who want them. The challenge is to balance these two aspects so that neither overshadows the other. We need feedback to get that right. Thanks. I'm sure you are aware of our goals but I thought I'd take this opportunity to address a larger audience. :7 > >Happy Memorial Day to all of you. >BG Thanks and a Happy Memorial day to you too. TY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BostonGuy Posted May 27, 2007 Share Posted May 27, 2007 Thanks, TY. I really do support you guys here and I really do hope the site becomes profitable for you. BG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
