I don't get the point of spambots

[b3nn3tt]

Can anyone enlighten me as to why companies actually do this? Because as far as I'm aware, very few people actually follow the links they posts, and of those few I doubt any actually buy the product being advertised.

So why bother? All it does is clog up forums, and if anything makes people less likely to buy anything from their website.

Anyone know what makes companies think it's a good idea?

 

[DJDarque]

It's spam. It doesn't have to be well thought out. And honestly even if they were selling things more to our collective interest it would still be just as annoying.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Very few is more than none[footnote]Especially if they target loads and loads of places, I've seen the most recent one on other forums, comes back every few months[/footnote], and if the sites receive advertising money based on how many people visit their webpage, well...

 

[therandombear]

Very few is more than none[footnote]Especially if they target loads and loads of places, I've seen the most recent one on other forums, comes back every few months[/footnote], and if the sites receive advertising money based on how many people visit their webpage, well...

Exactly, even if they only get 3 here they might have spammed it on several forums at once, so they end up with 3 here, 4 there, 5 another place again. And so on. It all adds up to the big pot of money in the end.

 

[theheroofaction]

Because they each think everyone else just did it wrong, and that somehow, they'll be able to spam you in such a way that you want their product.

 

[Aitur]

Simply enough - margins.
For example I can create a quick and simple spambot to send a million emails a day, and all it'll cost me is the electricity to power my laptop (and not even that if I've slaved someone else's system), and even if only 0.000001% of those people buy something that'll be one person per day for zero cost.
Now give me a botnet and I could be sending a 100 million emails per day with the 0.000001% take up rate.
No other marketing strategy has those numbers for that cost (zero!), and yes people do actually buy things from all these viagra / breast enhancement spam emails.

So with the forum spambots, minute take up percentage but again zero cost, if even one person in a million buys something they've succeeded.

 

[veloper]

Never underestimate how extremely stupid some marks are.
Spam works.

 

[Hexenwolf]

I remember reading a statistic once, I believe in a Cracked article[footnote]Who said citing sources was important? xD[/footnote], where the answer to the question "why does spam exist?" was "approximately 30% of the population that receives spam clicks on it."

Off topic, quick grammar question. In the above sentence, should that question mark be replaced with a comma, since the sentence continues, despite the fact that the dialog is complete?

 

[Hexenwolf]

My first double post ever on the escapist! *confetti cannon*

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

yeah man they send out this bots and spam and even if only every 1 in a thousand people is a sucker, you can still make more than a normal job out of it. Not to mention a lot of these spammer guys reside in shitty countries where they cant get a real job cause everyones so poor.

 

[UnknownGunslinger]

Simply enough - margins.
For example I can create a quick and simple spambot to send a million emails a day, and all it'll cost me is the electricity to power my laptop (and not even that if I've slaved someone else's system), and even if only 0.000001% of those people buy something that'll be one person per day for zero cost.
Now give me a botnet and I could be sending a 100 million emails per day with the 0.000001% take up rate.
No other marketing strategy has those numbers for that cost (zero!), and yes people do actually buy things from all these viagra / breast enhancement spam emails.

So with the forum spambots, minute take up percentage but again zero cost, if even one person in a million buys something they've succeeded.

I think the profits are exaggerated, it's like the telemarketing calls in the first days of the telephone - at first it made large profits out of the cheap technology that allowed them to connect to peoples homes.
However precisely because the system was so cheap to utilize, the market quickly became over-saturated and invasive in it's practises for attention so that the target audiences stooped paying the needed attention and stopped purchasing from telemarketing calls!
Why does it still exist - because it's cheap and creates the illusion of actual tangible profits precisely because of the low costs. But the more it's used the less effective it has become.

Same with spam bots, people have wised up on the spam adverts and scams, we don't pay attention to them any more!
It is used because it is virtually free and limitless in its reach, but it only gives the illusion of possible profits.
Spam does not work because there's a limit to how much information you can soak when bombarded with ads.

The reasoning of some people that it must work because it's being done is called affirming the consequent, it's a logical fallacy that we're prone to fall for.
And if you think that people aren't as stupid as to keep using a tool even after it's no longer useful, just think about the phone books that we keep getting or the 20% of Internet user who still used Internet Explorer 6 (10 year old browser!) last year.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Because its free, because it increases web traffic and because it can reach a large number of people quickly. The more attention their site gets, the more will most likely come to a certain site, even if their absolutely hated by the forum. If they didn't make money out of it in some way or another, they wouldn't be doing it after all.

 

[Aitur]

Snip...

I didn't mean to insinuate that there was massive profits in doing it, the numbers I used were just made up for the example, what I was trying to say was that spam still goes on because the overheads are so low that if even just 1 person responds it's a profit, and also the operation is massively scalable while still retaining minute overheads.

So yes it is flogging a dead horse even beyond the point where it has decomposed into gloopy mess on the floor, but it's not costing them anything to flog that horse and there's always that tiny chance someone will be dumb enough to buy something.
Which is why (in answer to the original question) the spambots continue to spam forums.

 

[n1ght5talker]

The cause is quite simple; The less-vigilant people ruin it for the rest of us.
For every successful spam or scam a thousand more will come. Every person who falls victim to any spam or scam is actually promoting and funding what they fell for.
Have no pity for those that get virus's on their machine or pay some 'Nigerian prince' out of their pocket. Instead, blame them! It is their lack of vigilance that is funding the destruction of the Internet's credibility.
Unfortunately there are so many more 'less-vigilant' people out there then we might wish and it is by naming and shaming these people, by making these people see that they are assisting in what should be a criminal action that we can reduce the motivation for spam and scam's on the Internet.

 

[staika]

Because its free to do and there is always one guy dumb enough to click the link and if they can get that one piece of traffic then in their mind they succeeded. I don't think its that good of a plan but spam does work which is why companies will spam you until you surrender to them.

 

[intheweeds]

I remember reading a statistic once, I believe in a Cracked article[footnote]Who said citing sources was important? xD[/footnote], where the answer to the question "why does spam exist?" was "approximately 30% of the population that receives spam clicks on it."

Off topic, quick grammar question. In the above sentence, should that question mark be replaced with a comma, since the sentence continues, despite the fact that the dialog is complete?

Okay someone will correct me if I'm wrong I'm sure. I think you're okay doing it this way, the quote should have it's proper punctuation and the sentence goes on. I might put a comma immediately after the quote, but I'm not sure if that is actually right or if I just think it looks right. I'm curious too. Surely we have an english teacher around here?

OT: Everyone said it before I had the chance. Don't underestimate the stupidity of the general public. Spam keeps happening because even though the return is small, the return exists. The cost to the advertiser is low and there are, believe it or not, enough idiots out there buying this crap that they keep doing it.