• Do you have any victories you'd like to share for the month of May? Help us celebrate others by posting here.

The First Thing Agents Need to Demand From Lead Vendors

Crabcake Johnny

Guru
5000 Post Club
14,809
Maryland
Already in dealing with agents and lead vendors the first major issue is apparent and it's a very well known issue. It's also an issue where the agent community somehow needs to pull together and say "enough."

It's the relatively recent policy all lead vendors have adopted of charging full price with no credit unless all contact information is bogus - that would be phone and email.

It's painfully apparent that affiliates have found a way to game this system and a relatively high percentage of leads (go figure) have bogus numbers but emails that don't bounce.

At minimum there should be separate pricing for leads with fake numbers but a real address. This, by the way, even guesses that it's "real." Because it doesn't bounce doesn't mean it's real. No one can argue that the value of those type of leads are diminished. If a lead with a working phone and email is $8.00 then a lead with a bogus number but working email should be, say, $3.00.

I welcome comments - especially from lead vendors.
 
Last edited:
I understand your point but it still leaves a huge loophole for the affiliates as some domains do not bounce back invalid emails, the affiliates just put a fake email down.

The other part of the coin is I'm buying this lead and it now becomes my job to prove that it is bogus which is a far different thing than what the vendors claim in thier ads of internet search driven requests. The vendor at most has to offer a credit on the lead that is proven bogus by the agent thats not good enough, they must pay a penalty until they have to give 3x or more in credit for a bad lead they will never crack down on affiliates that offer a chance to win an ipod if you fill out a survey requesting a life insurance quote.
 
There's no reason to crack down on affiliates if vendors can charge for blatantly bogus leads just because the email doesn't bounce.

My point still stands - if the number is fake then the price should drop. I'd be waiting for any lucid argument that a lead with a disconnected phone number is worth the same as a lead with a working phone number.
 
Last edited:
Why should you pay at all if the number is invalid but the email doesn't bounce? The fact they put down a bogus number at all indicates they really didn't want to speak with anyone. The first and biggest criteria for a valid lead is that they want to speak with someone.
 
I agree with VolAgent. And if I was going to initiate an e-mail campaign (which I wouldn't), I certainly wouldn't pay any more than 5 cents per lead. Hopefully with an e-mail lead list, the prospects aren't being bombarded with e-mail solicitations from numerous agents at the same time who weren't able to reach them by phone off of an internet lead.
 
There's no reason to crack down on affiliates if vendors can charge for blatantly bogus leads just because the email doesn't bounce.

My point still stands - if the number is fake then the price should drop. I'd be waiting for any lucid argument that a lead with a disconnected phone number is worth the same as a lead with a working phone number.

My point is this. The way the system works now the Lead vendor has no incentive to provide squat. You pay for the lead and its bogus and you have to jump through hoops wasting your time to prove its bogus and at worse the Lead vendor provides you with another crappy lead...Eventually you will fail to be able to prove its bogus in whatever timeframe they allow.

Your system of dropping the price based on certain factors is a halfstep. I say halfstep because an instant partial credit is certainly better than nothing, however as I mentioned before there are email providers that will NOT bounce invalid emails and you will never be able to prove those leads are bogus.

With my system that has penalties for providing bogus info the lead vendor has something to lose they could end up oweing you more than they made and it makes them bring quality back. The other issue is lets say the phone number is valid but for someone else and this someone else is on the DNC...We have a lead so we don't check the DNC anyone know what the FTCs stance is when you call John Doe at Jane Smiths DNC listed phone number?
 
With my system that has penalties for providing bogus info the lead vendor has something to lose they could end up oweing you more than they made and it makes them bring quality back. The other issue is lets say the phone number is valid but for someone else and this someone else is on the DNC...We have a lead so we don't check the DNC anyone know what the FTCs stance is when you call John Doe at Jane Smiths DNC listed phone number?

I would think you would be safe as long as you didn't continue to call when told you had the wrong number. You were provided with a lead that you believed to be real. Of course, if you are always doing it, then maybe you get in trouble.
 
Agents are guilty until proven innocent and it's an issue. One the vendor's side, they cannot blanket issue credits because the agent claims it's a bad lead. Too many agents would take advantage of that system.

When you call John Smith, someone answers and says "Who? There's no John Smith here" it's near impossible to get a credit. Number works.

Back to my original points regarding the value of a lead with a flat out bad number - disconnected. The value is actually near zero - maybe $1.00. It would at least be a step in the right direction for vendors to reduce the price of leads with disconnected numbers since that's easy to verify on the vendor's end.

Only in dealing with just one agent with 50% of their numbers disconnected on his last batch of leads, emails didn't bounce = no credit. That has to stop.
 
Then out them. People need to stop ordering from these vendors.

Leads are a good way to go broke as it is. Bad vendors only makes it worse.
 
Back
Top