Review and Comparison Site Placement Priced on Lead Quality

The number that decides these buys is contact rate, not traffic. Across the comparison placements we manage, the share of submitted leads a sales team reaches on the first attempt runs from about thirty percent to close to eighty. Same page, same month, similar cost per lead. Until that spread is measured per placement, cost per lead is a fact about the publisher's form and not about your pipeline, and every negotiation conducted on it is conducted blind. Publishers we work with: In Singapore and Malaysia, sgCarMart, Motorist, Oneshift, Carlist.my, WapCar, Paul Tan and Zigwheels on the vehicle side, with MoneySmart, SingSaver, Seedly and ValueChampion where the product is the finance or insurance attached to it. Regionally, Finder and the local comparison properties market by market. For agency and consultancy clients the equivalent inventory is category directories and software comparison pages, which behave the same way commercially and rather worse editorially. What we buy and what we will not: Fixed placement with a defined position and a defined period. Cost per lead with a quality clawback. A hybrid of the two where the publisher will carry some risk. We do not buy rank inside a comparison table. A table that sells its top row has told you exactly what its recommendations are worth, and the traffic it sends behaves accordingly. This position costs us business and we keep it, because a client who buys the top slot once will be asked to buy it every year at a higher price, against a competitor being offered the same slot in the same conversation. The editorial side: A review written from your press release reads like one and ranks like one. We give the publisher what a writer actually needs: pricing that matches your own site on the day of publication, specification data as a feed rather than a PDF, images they are licensed to use, and a named person who answers a factual question inside a day. Then we let them write. We do not ask for copy approval, and we tell clients before signing that we will not chase a critical line that happens to be factually correct. Disclosure and lead data: Paid placement is disclosed, following the ASAS code in Singapore. Where the product is finance or insurance, the publisher's obligations under MAS advertising rules govern which claims can appear at all, and we brief to those before drafting rather than after a takedown. Lead data moves under PDPA with the consent wording on the publisher's form matched to what you may lawfully do with the record. A lead you cannot legally call is worse than no lead, because you paid for it. The feedback loop, which is the actual work: Leads carry their placement tag into the CRM or the dealer system. Monthly we return contact rate, appointment rate and, where the network reports it, show rate by placement, then renegotiate or cut on that basis. Publishers respond to this better than buyers expect. One shown that a form field is producing untraceable phone numbers will generally fix the field. Not for you if: You cannot tag leads by source into your CRM, or your dealer network will not report what happened to them. Without that return path this reduces to shopping for cost per lead, which you can do without us. Also not for you if the product genuinely compares badly on the attributes these publishers rank on. Placement does not fix that; it only makes the finding arrive faster and in front of more people. At the end: Signed placements, the editorial pack, the lead tagging specification, and a quarterly read naming which publishers earn renewal and which do not.