zlacker

>>ry8806+(OP)
Other than the volume, one of the issues I have with these types of ads is that you're rarely able to report them as scams. Reddit have a similar issue. You can report an ad, but you have to pick "Other", there's no: "This ad is clearly a scam". That's by design obviously, because by removing the scams, most of the ad networks are left with very little inventory. Certainly not enough to fund all the ad supported service currently in operation through out the web.

When I forget to sign in to YouTube, I see the same pattern, shitty ads that are clearly only allowed because otherwise YouTube wouldn't have sufficient ad inventory to meet their internal KPIs.

>>mrweas+7b
almost every ad is a scam, telling lies directly or indirectly maximizing what is within the legal bounds.

>>tcfhgj+yc
Come on. There is a massive difference between an ad that optimistically emphasizes the best aspects of a real product or service and an ad for a fake product or service that will take your money and leave you with essentially nothing.

>>D13Fd+vg
I think the poster is lamenting the general quality of all advertised products in general. If it's a brand of good quality (Miele, Henry, DeLonghi) it probably does not need to be advertised, as word of mouth and price point is generally enough.

>>tetris+ei
Maybe. Stealing ad space from a competitor may be in itself valuable.

Another metric comes to my mind: if a newcomer has money to spend on ads, then it's a stable firm.

I'm sure there are more.

>>fiftee+Vk
This is something people don't credit enough. How many times have you search for something by name and received a direct competitor's product as top result? This is why I put no stock in digital ads for the little guy. The bigger guy will always have a larger ad buy budget and will outbid you at every turn.