广告中的cpa

CPS vs. CPA: Which One Is Better for Your Advertising Campaigns

When it comes to online advertising, cost per action (CPA) and cost per sale (CPS) are two popular pricing models that advertisers use to pay for ad space. These models offer different advantages and disadvantages and are suitable for different types of campaigns, depending on the goals and objectives. In this blog post, we will compare CPA and CPS and help you decide which one is better for your advertising campaigns.

What is CPA advertising?

Cost per action (CPA) advertising is a pricing model where advertisers pay publishers for a specific action taken by the user. This action can be anything from filling out a form, downloading an app, or making a purchase. The publisher is paid only when the user completes the action, and the advertiser determines the amount they are willing to pay for each action.

CPA advertising is ideal for campaigns that require a specific action from the user, and the advertiser wants to pay only for actions that result in a conversion. CPA is particularly useful for lead generation campaigns, as advertisers only pay for leads that meet specific criteria, such as location, age, or interests.

man holding a phone with a conversion rate chart on the screen

Image Source: Unsplash

What is CPS advertising?

Cost per sale (CPS) advertising is a pricing model where advertisers pay publishers only when a sale is made. The publisher is paid a percentage of the sale amount, and the advertiser determines the percentage they are willing to pay. CPS advertising is ideal for campaigns that focus on e-commerce sales, as publishers are motivated to promote products that have a higher profit margin.

CPS advertising can be a more cost-effective pricing model for advertisers, as they only pay for sales that result in a conversion. However, the downside is that CPS campaigns require a higher level of trust between the advertiser and the publisher, as the publisher's earnings depend on the sale amount and the advertiser's ability to convert leads into sales.

woman holding a credit card and a shopping bag

Image Source: Unsplash

Which pricing model should you choose?

The choice between CPA and CPS advertising depends on the goals and objectives of your advertising campaign. CPA is suitable for campaigns that require a specific action from the user, such as lead generation or app downloads. CPS is ideal for e-commerce campaigns that focus on sales and revenue generation.

It is important to note that both pricing models require a careful selection of publishers and a high level of trust between advertisers and publishers. When choosing a publisher, advertisers should look for publishers with a relevant audience, high traffic volume, and a good reputation.

In conclusion, CPA and CPS are two popular pricing models that advertisers can use to pay for ad space. The choice between the two depends on the goals and objectives of the advertising campaign. Both pricing models require a careful selection of publishers and a high level of trust between advertisers and publishers.

man holding a megaphone with advertising words on the screen

Image Source: Unsplash

广告中的cpa随机日志

解决了一些已知问题,优化了用户体验

1、日程管理:查看已经下单的客户婚礼日程表,方便进行工作管理,以及管理自己的可接单日期;

2、智能食疗。一键智能给出肥胖症、糖尿病、高血脂、高血压等营养配餐方案。

3、各种萌趣可爱贴纸,在贴纸栏中为用户提供了许多手绘的萌趣贴纸元素;

4、进程通讯类–可让程序与程序之间通讯,达到程序与程序相互调用的功能

5、导税人员负责引导纳税人到相关的服务区域或窗口办理各类涉税事项;辅导纳税人正确填写相关表格和涉税资料;指引纳税人正确使用自助办税设备。

<随心_句子c><随心_句子c><随心_句子c><随心_句子c><随心_句子c>蘋(ping)果(guo)請(qing)求(qiu)最(zui)高(gao)法(fa)院(yuan)推(tui)翻(fan)Epic反(fan)壟(long)斷(duan)案(an)件(jian)裁(cai)決(jue)

苹果请求最高法院推翻Epic反垄断案件裁决

苹果再(zai)壹(yi)次(ci)反對(dui)了(le)兩(liang)年(nian)前(qian)與(yu) Epic Games 提(ti)起(qi)的(de)反垄断訴(su)訟(song)法庭(ting)对决中(zhong)法院做(zuo)出(chu)的裁决。

根(gen)據(ju)一份(fen)最新(xin)的法庭文(wen)件顯(xian)示(shi),苹果正(zheng)在(zai)向(xiang)美(mei)國(guo)最高法院提起上(shang)诉,要(yao)求推翻最初(chu)的裁决。該(gai)裁决判(pan)定(ding)苹果必(bi)須(xu)停(ting)止(zhi)阻(zu)止開(kai)發(fa)者(zhe)引(yin)導(dao)用(yong)戶(hu)使(shi)用其(qi)他(ta)支(zhi)付(fu)渠(qu)道(dao)的做法。

2020 年,Epic 起诉苹果公(gong)司(si)反競(jing)爭(zheng)行(xing)為(wei),因(yin)为苹果此(ci)前將(jiang)《堡(bao)壘(lei)之(zhi)夜(ye)》從(cong) App Store 上下(xia)架(jia),原(yuan)因为《堡垒之夜》在更(geng)新中允(yun)許(xu)玩(wan)家(jia)繞(rao)過(guo)苹果直(zhi)接(jie)購(gou)買(mai)遊(you)戲(xi)內(nei)貨(huo)幣(bi),也(ye)同(tong)時(shi)避(bi)免(mian)了苹果會(hui)收(shou)取(qu)的 30% 抽(chou)成(cheng)。

2021 年,美国加(jia)州(zhou)地(di)方(fang)法院駁(bo)回(hui)了 Epic 的 10 項(xiang)起诉索(suo)賠(pei)中的 9 项,但(dan)在反引导做法上做出了对 Epic 有(you)利(li)的裁决,要求苹果允许开发者提供(gong)和(he)使用替(ti)代(dai)支付選(xuan)项。

苹果与 Epic 均(jun)向美国第(di)九(jiu)巡(xun)回上诉法院提起上诉,该法院繼(ji)續(xu)支持(chi)原本(ben)裁定。隨(sui)後(hou)两家公司再次就(jiu)新裁决提起上诉,但据報(bao)道第九巡回法院已(yi)於(yu) 6 月(yue) 30 日(ri)驳回了這(zhe)些(xie)上诉。

日前,苹果向最高法院提出上诉,認(ren)为法院適(shi)用普(pu)遍(bian)禁(jin)令(ling)(即(ji) Epic 是(shi)“個(ge)人(ren)、非(fei)代表(biao)原告(gao)”)的做法是錯(cuo)誤(wu)的,鑒(jian)于该案是在加利福(fu)尼(ni)亞(ya)州起诉,第九巡回法院不(bu)應(ying)发布(bu)全(quan)国性(xing)禁令。

苹果補(bu)充(chong)稱(cheng),该裁决“引发了影(ying)響(xiang)深(shen)遠(yuan)且(qie)重(zhong)要的問(wen)題(ti)”,即聯(lian)邦(bang)法院发布使用于未(wei)直接參(can)与此案公司依(yi)然(ran)有權(quan)使用禁令實(shi)施(shi)限(xian)制(zhi)。

Epic Games 也可(ke)以(yi)选擇(ze)向最高法院提起上诉。 返(fan)回搜(sou)狐(hu),查(zha)看(kan)更多(duo)

責(ze)任(ren)編(bian)輯(ji):

发布于:云南丽江宁蒗彝族自治县