- Affiliate Programs
- Affiliate Networks
- Advertising Networks
- Articles
- Blogs
- Tools
- Social Media Accounts
- Advertising
During the summer, Facebook faced a storm: frequent holds, double charges, and widespread Risk Payments started to occur and seemed nearly impossible to overcome. Some claimed that USA accounts partially solved the issue, but such a setup is more difficult.
By fall, new challenges emerged. Even if a card linked successfully, launching a campaign for conversions (Leads/Sales) triggered Risk Payments under the guise of Policy. Even those passing Policy with flying colors and equipped with ready scripts for appeals could still be caught by Risk Payments.
The most unpleasant development was Facebook's increased penchant for rejecting ads. Even when directing traffic to a white site with white creatives, it's not always clear whether the White Page was unsuitable or if the system triggered rejection due to a creative with a prominent WHO emblem and the face of a well-known doctor.
To tackle these bans, we decided to explore the intricacies of these issues and interviewed two Facebook experts, Alexander Putkov and Vladimir Grow. They shed light on the effectiveness of USA accounts, the necessity of cleaning metadata on images, and how affiliate marketing specialists cope with rejects and Risk Payments.
For more insightful interviews covering diverse topics related to money making and affiliate marketing, check out our Telegram channel.
Interview with Alexander Putkov
Alexander Putkov is the owner and team lead of the media buying team "GENeraTOR." The team operates remotely, with members scattered across the globe. Some handle traffic procurement on Facebook, residing in countries where this source is permitted. Since 2017, Alexander has been consistently tackling the issues that Facebook throws at media buyers, making him well-versed in the intricacies of the platform. He generously shares his experiences on his Telegram channel, GENeraTOR.
What are the Current Challenges for Buyers on Facebook?
Facebook has somewhat eased up recently after the turbulence in late September. At that time, it was rejecting nearly any weight loss-related creative. However, buyers were still grappling with Risk Payments.
On the upside, they retested trending and agency accounts, confirming that their setups were just as effective. The primary challenges of November included:
How do you address these challenges?
As experience has shown, the key to overcoming these challenges lies in volume:
Of course, there are instances where a creative gets rejected after minimal spending. In such cases, it's essential to scrutinize both the creative triggers and the targeted geo.
Through empirical observation, the team discovered that certain creatives breeze through moderation and perform well on one geo but struggle with rejections or escalating costs on another.
The takeaway is clear: focus on a substantial volume of creatives and flood the platform with ad sets, such as a 1-3-3 approach. However, this should be done within the confines of a single account and a specific geo location.
Which White Pages do you use, and do they influence rejects?
We opt for a blank white page instead of websites. An interesting observation is that using the same white page across different domains tends to result in more rejects during moderation.
Given the current emphasis on the volume of creatives and ad sets, is it possible to scale an account with a successful creative?
Scaling one creative across multiple accounts leads to a hike in lead prices universally. Therefore, we steer clear of spy services and creative thieves. They not only drain their budget but also interfere with others.
The auction environment is currently overheated, with everyone vying for their share. Strategic thinking is crucial. For instance, if you take a creative that works well in one geo, it's better to run it in another to avoid interference. Otherwise, the lead prices rise for everyone using the same creative within a specific geo.
Lead prices also surge when scaling a creative across accounts. Success in scaling depends on how burnt out the approach being used is.
Another challenge is Facebook's optimization. It trims the budget for an audience not engaging with the creative. For instance, age breakdowns across multiple geos may reveal that Facebook prioritizes ad delivery to a target audience that doesn't generate leads:
We're currently in the hypothesis-testing phase to address this issue. Most likely, it's linked to the burnout of the approach used in the creative. For example:
Regarding the increase in lead prices, your perspective is clear. How much budget do you trim on a creative to understand whether it's catching on or not?
Success depends not only on the creative but also on the comments beneath it. Here's a recent example where one ad set had comments, and the other did not:
On the ad set without comments, the lead cost was $5.89, whereas on the one with comments, the lead cost was $1.19. Therefore, at the campaign's start, the team boosts comments under the ad to engage with the target audience and respond to queries.
With this approach, they gauge the creative's effectiveness by trimming the cost of a single approval. For example, if the offer payout is $19 and the approval rate is 26%, they trim $4.94 (26% of $19) before drawing conclusions.
With such a quantity of ad sets and various creative variations, do you not encounter Facebook ad bans and Policy issues?
It does happen, but not as frequently. It's crucial to understand that Facebook ad bans and Policy are different matters. Facebook ad bans issues in the ad account show up as "Advertising Activity Violation," while 100% Policy issues are labeled as "Prohibited Business Models" or "Security System Bypass Systems." In either case, appealing will require going through Facebook ad bans. In summary:
What's the best way to handle Facebook ad bans now? Should metadata be cleaned from images? Is higher trust needed if there's SMS verification?
SMS verification is more common if the account has been inactive for a long time after farming. In such cases, any number from SMS reception services can be used. If this function is unavailable, it means the account lacks trust.
People send various documents: some bother with cleaning metadata, some take screenshots on iPhones and send them via Telegram before submitting to Facebook. Some even send Russian passports. However, in practice, there's no difference. Whether the account passes Facebook ad bans depends on its trust, not the document sent. It's not even necessary for the document details to match those on Facebook. That's how it goes.
Is it better to trigger Facebook ad bans on your own or just wait for it?
I believe it's better to work on the account's trust. If Facebook ban comes, a good account will navigate it without any issues. The document itself isn't crucial, but it's better to send unique docs each time, rather than using the same ones everywhere.
If launching through Creative Hub instead of ADS Manager, is there a lower chance of facing Facebook ad bans again?
The team always successfully launches through ADS Manager, so they haven't ventured into Creative Hub. Again, it's emphasized: it's better to work on the account's trust than to sift through hundreds of temporary accounts, fearing unnecessary actions.
How can you boost the trust of an account?
You could completely avoid the hassle of farming by having crystal-clear essentials for registration: IP and fingerprints. However, with time, the availability of pristine essentials diminishes, making farming a necessity. While we absolutely don't want to advertise on our accounts, we've noticed that the following factors influence trust:
Certainly, this might seem like rigorous farming. However, it's better to invest time in farming 1-2 such accounts and then work with them for an extended period.
If running a conversion campaign, you might encounter Risk Payment. How do you combat this? Are there alternatives to fully farmed USA accounts with IPV4 USA proxies?
We've faced this issue. As the team grew, accounts started disappearing rapidly right after farming. That's when we realized the importance of dormancy. We had Kazakhstani accounts that had been dormant for about three months after the aforementioned farming. The team started using them without any issues. The same happened with Ukrainian accounts.
Therefore, I believe that all account problems are tied to trust. I don't know how crucial the USA geo and corresponding proxies are, but to ensure card BINs match the geo, it's better to use the USA. Lately, that's precisely what we've been doing.
We encountered similar issues with trends and agency accounts as with farm accounts without the 1.5-2 weeks of dormancy. Hence, working on farming is crucial.
What other bans have become a serious problem lately? How do you deal with them?
I've highlighted all the problems we've encountered. I can't pinpoint anything else.
Anything else to add?
Undoubtedly, not every affiliate marketer wants to deal with account farming, technical aspects, filling in tables, accounting, and all the rest — as I mentioned in today's interview. And I haven't even mentioned searching for a lively offer with approval guarantees and a rate bump!
If anyone is interested: I'm willing to collaborate with individuals who have an advertising budget, on a 50/50 profit-sharing basis. We cover all expenses, provide offers with attractive terms, and have a CRM with automatic transfer of ad revenues and expenses. Contact me on Telegram — Alexander.
Interview with Vladimir Grou
Vladimir Grou, CEO of the unique affiliate platform for affiliate marketers — Crazy Profits Partners. Involved in affiliate marketing since 2020.
Since August, rejections have been on the rise. Is the issue with creatives or whites?
Both creatives and whites can influence rejections, but more often, it's the creatives. It's always worth reading the reasons for rejections: there's either a precise answer or, at the very least, a hint. For example, "prohibited business models" are likely due to the white. And "Security system bypass" is probably related to the text.
In almost all other cases, the blame lies with the creative.
How is it best to handle Facebook ad bans now? Should metadata be cleaned from images, and is higher trust needed if there's SMS verification?
I haven't experienced any significant changes with Facebook ad bans for a long time. I go through with the documents that come with the accounts — no edits, unique elements, metadata substitutions, or anything like that.
Is it better to trigger Facebook ad bans on your own or just wait for it?
Definitely not worth triggering — currently, it's not the most common or relevant issue.
If launching through Creative Hub instead of ADS Manager, is there a lower chance of facing Facebook ad bans again?
I don't use this method: repeat Facebook ban comes very slowly or not at all.
If running a conversion campaign, you might catch Risk Payment. How do you deal with this? Are there alternatives to fully farmed USA accounts with IPV4 USA proxies?
When Risk Payments occur, and proxy, campaign geo, and payments don't help, linking the card through post promotion in the Feed helps me. After that, you can safely launch conversion campaigns without facing Risk Payments.
And, of course, the most important thing is to use a reliable payment card: currently, the freshest and most effective BINs are with Stellar Card; many are transitioning to it.
What other bans have been relevant lately?
From the latest, only rejections stood out, but they are easily overcome with tests.
Conclusion
Facebook has never been a stable platform — there's always something amiss with it. The most significant issue this November has been rejections and Risk Payments, but even with these, you can cope:
And when Facebook storms again, we'll release new material. This way, you'll always be informed about the intricacies of working with this source.
