You are here: Home > Advertising, blogging, problogger, web 2.0 > Pay Per Post and Performancing Deal Nixed

Pay Per Post and Performancing Deal Nixed

by Robyn Tippins on January 5, 2007

I see that the PPP and Performancing deal has fallen through. I have nothing but respect for Nick and the others are Performancing and I was shocked to see they were getting into bed with PPP in the beginning.

However, if PPP could learn from their mistakes (and from the more positive reaction ReviewMe got on it’s launch), they actually stand of chance of making it. Note what Nick says here:

Personally I think discussions like this will be one of the key assets PPP have agreed to aquire, even if they don’t know it yet :)

We have an unrivaled opportunity to influence the way that advertising and sponsorship work within the ‘sphere by participating in such debate, and I can tell you for a fact that the PPP guys, Dan and Ted, do not have horns and tails — they’re good guys pushing at the boundaries of where we can take this stuff, and like it or not, that’s how progress is made.

I’ve not commented till now as I’m very emotionally tied to this community. I’ve invested a year of my life into it, and want to see it continue to grow and prosper — the negativity, be it knee-jerk or otherwise, while understandable, does my damn head in, it’s the hardest part of the ‘business’ of building sites and communities.


But,many of Performancing’s members consider themselves above PPP and didn’t want their blogs tied to the oft reviled company.

The “professional bloggers” wanted no part of the deal. They were not a party to it but somehow they became collateral damage. After seeing some of the reactions and comments in this post from Nick Wilson, it was only a matter of time before the PayPerPost wolf was exposed for its sheep’s clothing.

(via)

Here’s what PPP should take from this. When your brand is so divisive that merely a mention makes people shudder, gird their loins and high-tail it out of there (think past Sony and Microsoft evil), you have a real problem and you need real help in solving it. Invest some of that VC in blogosphere consultants, PR and then act on their suggestions.

Some of what PPP does is right. They’re now famous enough to be known by their initials. ;) They treat their bloggers well, I mean other than WAY undervaluing their work. They are respectful towards them, they engage them in conversation, they build their community, they reward them publicly when they excel. That message needs to get out.

With a few major tweaks, namely the fact that advertisers can choose to only accept positive reviews, PPP could do well in the blogosphere. Note how Andy Beard sums it up here.

However, the fact is that the name has a negative connotation and the brand creates an overall icky feeling in the pit of most blogger’s stomachs. The reason is that we’ve worked hard for the last few years to create a blogosphere that demands respect from outsiders, despite (and because) we are truthful to a fault. The fact that our opinions are truly our opinions means they are valuable. Unfortunately (or fortunately sometimes) that follows that they are valuable to marketers.

Marketers are really just getting the hang of this, so we will see some firms come out and screw up. They are just as amateur at blogging as we were when we started. I think the major thing we have to be willing to do is converse on the the topics and not let them turn into bitch-fests so we can all learn how to navigate these waters in the best way possible.

For the members of Performancing, I’m happy that the deal fell through. However, I think Nick’s company and expertise could have really helped the mess at PPP so I rather wish it could have happened.

Subscribe to the Online Community Brief, a must read daily email newsletter for Online Community Managers and Social Media professionals.

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: