Summary of Findings Surrounding 2016 Advertising Services Provided by The Maritime Executive to Larson Electronics – Larson Electronics

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary
2.0 Introduction
3.0 Online Lead Generation
4.0 The Maritime Executive Advertising Services

• 4.1 Overview and Conditions
• 4.2 Lead Generation Results
  • 4.2a LinkedIn Evaluation
  • 4.2b Mimecast Evaluation
  • 4.2c Quantifying Reach in 2016 Media Kit
  • 4.2d Duplications and Non-requested Circulations
  • 4.2e Quality and Frequency of Fraudulent Leads
• 4.3 Banner Campaign Results
• 4.4 Website Traffic Results
• 4.5 Email Campaign Results

5.0 Conclusion

1.0 Executive Summary

This composition covers a drumhead of findings surrounding advertise services requested by Larson Electronics ( “ customer ” ), an industrial light company, from The Maritime Executive ( “ publisher ” ), an on-line news and magazine publication that focuses on the commercial marine sector. The services, which were requested between February 2016 and August 2016, involved the promotion of diverse customer webpages and products via the publisher ’ mho advertise services ( electronic mail newsletter campaigns and promotional on-line ads ). A key assertion in this summary involves the origin and quality of the e-mail leads, equally well as the generation of web site traffic from the ad campaigns and results provided by the publisher. Furthermore, a weigh publish ( published on October 20, 2016 ) titled “ Larson Electronics Severs Ties to Maritime Executive and their Bogus Lead Generation Program ” was used to outline and supplement information found in this composition .
The telescope of this report covers the current state of digital commercialize, deceitful run genesis practices and examples of legal cases surrounding damages related to dishonest operation selling methods. furthermore, the compendious aims to shine light on the publisher A conclusive analysis of The Maritime Executive ’ s advertise services that was provided to Larson Electronics can besides be found in this report. information in this report may not be utilized to support assertions and statements made by any individual, group or party, without consent and clearance from the generator. Larson Electronics and the author of this composition may not be held liable for assertions made in this report .
2.0 Introduction

Internet selling, a market practice that specializes in using digital mediums for advertise campaigns and promotions, is not deoxyadenosine monophosphate guileless as many consumers and businesses believe it to be. Deceiving digital marketing techniques have been around since the nascent proliferation of the internet earned run average in the 90s. For exercise, Search Engine Optimization ( SEO ), the practice of meeting specific algorithmic standards set by a search engine, for example, Google or Bing, in holy order to “ social station ” higher in the Search Engine Results Page ( SERP ), has, since its origin, been split into three categories : White Hat SEO ( leveraging non-invasive SEO guidelines ), Black Hat SEO ( exploiting SEO guidelines to force one ’ s web site ranking in SERPs ) and Grey Hat SEO ( a combination of White Hat SEO and Black Hat SEO methods ). furthermore, the use of scripts or bots to automate and manipulate certain aspects of the digital market process, such as customer lead generation and web site traffic, has become more prevailing, as having a digital presence has now become the average for businesses that want to reach their on-line consultation .
In most cases, the quality of results generated from ambidextrous or deceitful digital selling methods are very poor. Yet, many publishers, ad agencies and early websites that offer advertising services continue to utilize such methods to speed up versatile processes that would normally take weeks or months to complete. According to a report released by the Interactive Advertising Bureau ( IAB ) in December 2015, digital ad fraud costs the industry around $ 8.2 billion per annum. “ Non-human ” traffic makes up $ 4.2 billion of the project visualize. This is relevant, because according to a study by Incapsula, 61.5 percentage of web site traffic cosmopolitan is generated by bots ( search engines, scrapers, hack tools, spammers and non-human impersonators ). In tip genesis, the consumption of scrapers to generate hundreds of electronic mail leads is becoming increasingly common. These programs scour the internet for contact information using a hardened of pre-determined criteria to ensure accuracy and relevance. however, the results are rarely accurate and relevant, resulting in low sales and wasted money for the customer who purchases the leads from the publisher .
An example of such occurrences can be traced back to a high-profile legal encase between NetQuote and MostChoice in 2008. Both companies relied on an on-line precede generation model that encouraged consumers to submit applications for insurance quotes on their respective websites. The data acquired from the companies were then sold to insurance brokers, who used the leads to contact prospective customers. NetQuote had received respective complaints from insurers about imposter leads, which triggered an investigation. In 2006, the ship’s company proceeded to file a suit against MostChoice after attorneys found out that MostChoice hired an individual, Brandon Byrd, to submit around 3,500 fake applications on the NetQuote site over a span of nine months .
The court rejected MostChoice ’ south defense, which asserted that it should not be liable for false leads since it was not aware that NetQuote would act on the leads. The company besides claimed that by submitting thousands of bogus leads on the NetQuote web site, it contributed to the development of the company ’ sulfur lead filtering system. In the conclusion, the jury heavily favored NetQuote and awarded the company $ 4.8 million for falling victim to the creation of false leads. In a move by the court to use the case as a warn for other publishers attempting to leverage corruptible lead generation practices, the jury awarded double the punitive damages requested by NetQuote .
3.0 Online Lead Generation

3.1 Overview
Online lead generation refers to the generation of prospective customer touch data, which is used by businesses to increase merchandise awareness or sales. such internet marketing practices typically rely on digital mediums to acquire contact information, such as e-mail newsletters, social media surveys, opt-in subscriptions and contest entries. The potency of on-line jumper cable coevals has changed to become more effective in the past ten years. According to a Business Products Buyers Survey ( March 2007 ), over 80 percentage of consumers claim that they find the intersection or service they are looking for, before a company or agency reaches out to them about the merchandise or overhaul. furthermore, buyers are normally between 66-90 percentage into the buying journey before interacting with a seller. At this charge in the bribe process, the gamble of “ dropout ” is low, compared to an individual who is stuck in the early stages of the bribe travel. This suggests that with a list of leads generated on-line ( based on the definition above ), businesses should be able to close sales well or “ commute ” a prospective buyer into a customer with minimal attempt. unfortunately, this is not always the case .
When it comes to the timbre of on-line leads, a bombastic bulge presently in circulation by companies that sell leads ( sellers or publishers ) are irrelevant, outdated or fake. According to Glenn D Burks, a professional internet and market flight simulator, many people are enticed by the plain quantity of internet market leads, while overlooking the quality of contacts. Burks arrived at this ending during a lead generation campaign conducted in 2002. The political campaign was able to generate roughly 600+ leads per calendar month. however, a closer spirit at the information collected suggests that the list generated miss quality with over 80 percentage of the leads generated being filled with erroneous or forge information. In the digital market sector, it is coarse practice for sellers to avoid providing assurance over the quality of data. In order to safeguard themselves from scrutiny or accusations, some sellers use mislead terms like “ audited ” or “ screened ” leads, without providing diaphanous information on how the leads were acquired .
According to Venable LLP, there are three laws that regulate deceitful head generation practices :

• “General advertising and marketing law principles, enshrined in the FTC Act, the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA), and state laws (known as “mini-FTC Acts”), that prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices, including the dissemination of false or misleading advertising. The CFPA also prohibits “abusive” practices.
• Specific statutes, both state and federal, regulate certain marketing channels. For example, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and CAN-SPAM Act regulate telephone and email communications, respectively, and the Telemarketing Sales Rule applies to many forms of telemarketing.
• There are statutes that regulate specific consumer products and services, such as mortgages, credit cards, and other consumer loans (e.g., Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z, Credit Card Act, and the Mortgage Acts and Practices Advertising Rule [“MAP Rule” or Regulation N]). These laws typically regulate how such products are advertised, in addition to how they must be structured and serviced.”

The proliferation of deceptive jumper cable generation practices has caught the attention of several government regulators and agencies, including the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). specifically, the groups are cracking down on “ the extent to which, publishers and contribute aggregators are liable for the end users ’ legal complaisance ” and dishonest profit practices by sellers attempting to earn money from low quality or deceitful leads. To help protect consumers and businesses from deceitful sellers, the FTC launched a workshop in 2015, called “ Follow the lead : An FTC Workshop About Online Lead Generation. ”

3.2 Impact of Fraudulent Lead Generation Practices
For businesses, the impact of working with deceitful leads from sellers can be felt in both the short and long term. Soliciting or contacting individuals without their accept could hurt the repute of businesses, leaving them clear to legal risks. furthermore, there is a lot of campaign, time and money that goes into reaching out to prospective buyers. Technically, it is up to the seller or publisher to ensure the quality of leads being generated and sold to the business or buyer. But as mentioned earlier, some sellers take a shortcut to completing this meticulous job by using crafty adjectives and terms/conditions to safeguard themselves from complaints and accusations. however, this does not change the beginning of the erroneous or deceitful leads. Simply put, describing one ’ second leads as “ audited ” does not justify the true nature of the leads, nor should it be treated as a “ loophole ” for publishers to sell a list of “ bad ” or irrelevant leads to a business for profit .
According to a report from ZoomInfo, approximately 30-40 percentage of commercial enterprise contacts change jobs every 12 months. Up to 66 percentage change caper titles, 43 percentage get new call numbers, 34 percentage request for name changes and 37 percentage change electronic mail addresses. This suggests that maintaining spark advance generation lists is no easy job and the chances of receiving irrelevant leads is fairly high, even from reputable lead coevals sellers .
fortunately, it is easy to detect deceitful leads ; but very difficult to report them, as publishers and sellers normally take a defensive position in the timbre of leads sold. presently, according to Larry Kim ( collapse and CTO of Word Stream ), average on-line conversion rates ( sales ) for all industries is 2.3 percentage. By comparison, deceitful leads typically generate zero sales, resulting in zero conversions. Bounced emails is another indicator that there is something wrong with the list of buy leads. additionally, irrelevant leads may besides be a bless that the list was generated falsely or in a manner that is abnormal ( non-human ), such as the utilization of scripts or bots. For case, a business that sells bicycle equipment will likely not generate or attract likely buyers who are frost cream shop commercial enterprise owners or jurisprudence firms that specialize in insurance imposter. By comparison, reputable or positive contribute generation sellers, in holy order to provide quality leads, aim industry-related contacts and avoid contact information that would not benefit the buyer .

3.3 Performance Marketing Fraud
From a B2B position, operation market is a form of on-line ad that focuses on specific activities or actions. The overall goal of this exercise is to facilitate a conversion funnel, wherein a electric potential customer executes a coveted action. This action could be signing up to an e-mail subscription service, submitting contact information for lead coevals, clicking on a streamer ad, purchasing a product or etc. In performance commercialize, businesses merely pay for performance, depending on the agreed prerequisites between the service provider and the client. The “ per carry through basis ” model is seen as identical attractive for businesses, because it allows them to get their money ’ s deserving by merely paying for actions that ultimately should generate some phase of profit. Groups that extend performance market services allow their campaigns to be measured using metrics to boost foil. Some even go arsenic army for the liberation of rwanda as submitting reports that provide summaries of the campaign, which is besides used as a footing for bill, invoices and payments .
With over 36-50 percentage “ non-human ” traffic engaging on-line ads in 2014, around $ 300 billion was lost due to marketing-related imposter ( based on data from HasOffers by TUNE ). This suggests that performance market fraud is becoming increasingly common, as more businesses promote their establishments online. The ranch of such practices does not mean that businesses should tolerate dishonest performance market specialists. As mentioned earlier, the lift of robots and automation has helped fraudsters provide more lucrative web site traffic and head generation services. This development has impacted advertise ROI greatly, since businesses must pay for activities generated by shady publishers, which normally does not lead to sales, conversions or tax income .
There are respective types of performance market tactics being used nowadays. The acme three that are relevant to this newspaper includes the follow :
Data Dumping: For dishonest lead coevals services, the amount of personal, unregulated data in circulation on-line can be advantageous. When generating contacts during go genesis campaigns, some fraudsters “ cushion ” the tilt using old or irrelevant contact information. Blocking this practice is very unmanageable. Most businesses find out weeks or months after the political campaign has finished. Furthermore, data confirmation techniques often overlook identical honest-to-god contact information because they offer a certain degree of singularity that gets passed off as relevant. Careless publishers may “ cushion ” up to 70-80 percentage of leads generated during a political campaign, while claiming 100 percentage relevance .
Website Traffic: Fraudulent publishers often offer web site traffic services to boost awareness for a specific product or event, upon the request of a client. In most cases, the generation of page views or impressions can be exploited using bots. These non-human bots appear as successful page views or impressions, which are billable. Since such actions are not being performed by a human, or a by an individual who is authentically concerned in what the business has to offer, the chances of the generate traffic completing the next step in the conversion funnel is very low. These days, “ incentivized traffic ” is indeed common that businesses can purchase up to 6,000 web site page views for $ 5. Yet, many publishers attempt to charge bounty rates for gloomy quality traffic that are marketed as non-incentivized .
Technical/Network Fraud: This involves the publisher “ forcing ” the customer ’ s platform to count a conversion where such activity did not actually occur. Compared to the early two techniques, this requires the publisher to hack into the customer ’ second network tracking platform. deceitful performance marketers may engage in this practice to say that “ the traffic was indeed low quality, but not deceitful – since there is evidence of conversions. ”

3.4 Sample Legal Cases
As mentioned earlier, businesses should not tolerate deceitful publishers that are exploiting dishonest performance market services. many companies aren ’ metric ton aware that such practices can be disputed legally in motor hotel. Due to a scend in low choice lead generation campaigns and incentivized web site traffic, legal cases between publishers and unsated customers have become increasingly common in the past ten .
An exercise of such quarrel was filed in the Iowa District Court on June 2014 ( LACV081096 ). The case involved CUES, a company providing questionable ad services, and BVS, the node. In 2011, the two parties entered into a document Master Agreement. The contract, which contains a confidentiality provision, indicated that CUES was requested to perform “ particular marketing activities ” on behalf of BVS. The character of undisclosed commercialize overhaul is not relevant to businesses that are victims of performance selling imposter. The chief takeout is that BVS went after CUES due to failure and refusal to execute the shrink, or “ performed them so ailing as to constitute a material transgress of the contract. ”
This was a salient distributor point in the case ; because at the prison term, businesses in personal disputes with publishers were not mindful that under-performance or lack of quality advertising campaign results can be used as grounds for legal disputes.
In another exercise, an estonian man pleaded guilty to imposter and computer chop ( “ clickjacking ” ) charges on April 27, 2016. Vladimir Tsastsin was sentenced in a Manhattan federal motor hotel for participating in an elaborate malware advertising scheme that infected computers and allowed the team of criminals to push ads to compromise systems. The hackers then collected money from customers paying for on-line traffic. The main takeaway from this case is that individuals looking to profit from dishonest web site traffic practices are being taken badly by legal courts .
4.0 The Maritime Executive Advertising Services

4.1 Overview and Conditions
Larson Electronics LLC, a Texas-based industrial alight ship’s company, engaged The Maritime Executive, a publisher that specializes in coverage for the industrial marine industry, for ad services, between February 2016 and August 2016 on a monthly footing. Both parties participated in the deal, which included the forwarding of Larson Electronics message in e-mail smash campaigns and on-line ad placements. By offering promotional services using its platform, contacts and digital reach ( based on “ audited ” data ), The Maritime Executive provides Larson Electronics with contacts for run generation and web site traffic activities for promotion and sales coevals. In The Maritime Executive ’ s tax income model between a customer and publisher, after the completion of the ad campaigns, the publisher charges the customer for promotional services. furthermore, at the end of the advertising campaigns, the publisher provides the results of the campaign, along with the list of contacts generated for star generation, angstrom well as the URLs promoted, total number of clicks and entire number of impressions ( to justify the viability/effectiveness of web site traffic services ) .
According to The Maritime Executive ’ s Consolidated Media Audit Report, which covers 12 months of publications up to June 30, 2016, the publisher defines “ foliate impressions ” as the follow :
“ The combination of one or more files presented to a browser as a individual document as a solution of a single request received by the server, and that is recorded at a point a late as possible in the process of rescue of the content to the user’s browser, therefore closest to the actual opportunity to see the content by the drug user. In effect, one request by a browser should result in one page impression being reported. The counted page impression may not necessarily be in focus or visible in the user’s browser. ”
The publisher besides defines “ alone browser ” as the take after :
“ A measurement of unduplicated cookied browsers that accessed the digital content of a site during the measurement period reported. In the absence of a cookie, the combination of the IP address and user-agent chain may be used to measure a unique browser. For numerous reasons, a unique browser does not represent a unique individual. ”
In the report the publisher provides definitions of social media followers :
“ Facebook Likes : Facebook is a social network web site. A like represents the number of times that a read exploiter clicks on the Like button on a Facebook page controlled by a publisher. A Facebook Like may not equate to an individual person .
chirrup Followers : chitter is a real-time short message serve that works over multiple networks and devices. Followers are register users of Twitter who “ follow ” the “ tweets ” of another registered drug user. A tweet consists of a text message of 140 characters or less. The number of Twitter Followers represents the full followers of the tweets and may contain followers that subscribe to multiple feeds. A Twitter Follower may not equate to an individual person .
LinkedIn Members : LinkedIn is a social network site designed specifically for the business community. With LinkedIn publishers have the ability to have a “ company page. ” LinkedIn users may follow a company page, and are therefore considered “ members. ” A LinkedIn member may not equate to an individual person. ”
In application, the terms can be found throughout the report. On the first gear page of the document, the publisher cited the generation of 248,346 contacts with a disclaimer in all right photographic print : “ Total Gross Contacts include Qualified Paid and Nonpaid Circulation and Unique Browsers. ” The report besides provides accurate figures of web site page impressions ( 504,082 ), web site visits ( 336,732 ), unique browsers ( 225,823 ), Facebook likes ( 18,840 ), sum numeral of Twitter followers ( 33,324 ) and LinkedIn followers ( 64,720 ) .
Based on definitions of terms established by The Maritime Executive in the report, the contacts and activities generated from the company ’ randomness web site, social media channels and early mediums, may not originate from an actual homo. rather, it is very probable that the beginning of contacts or reported activities could be from non-human sources, such as scripts or robots programmed to load a specific web page or link. It is important to note that The Maritime Executive uses page impressions, unique browsers and social media engagements as parameters for gauging the potency and viability of advertise campaigns and services offered to customers, despite suggesting there is a possibility that no actual human being sees or initiates such engagements .
“ Maritime Executive promotes the concept of audit full crying contacts. We need to understand more about what ‘ audited ’ in that context means, but I can tell you that this number is not what we signed up for and we know for a fact already that a statistically significant amount of these folks in these lists we were given as leads are not Maritime Executive readers and never clicked on our ad in any of their campaigns, ” said Rob Bresnahan with Larson Electronics LLC .
In a non-bias IP address audit performed by an undisclosed party, the publisher, its baby company TM Marketing and respective early websites related to the marine diligence were found to be using the like IP address ( 67.43.15.180 ). The results of the non-bias audited account asserted a possibility that web site traffic generated by The Maritime Executive is reporting to its audit chest of drawers, i.e., Alliance for Audited Media, which “ may contain traffic from other sites. ”
Below is a tilt of domains hosted on 67.43.15.180 ( uncovered during the non-bias IP savoir-faire audit ) :

• Electronicpowerdesign.com
• EPDLTD.com
• GatewayterminalsLLC.com
• Interbarage.com
• Maritime-Executive.com
• Maritime-Executive.com.au
• Maritimewoodproducts.com
• Markeymachinery.com
• Medequip.net
• Naviera-centeral.com
• Navieracenteral.co
• Navieracenteral.com
• Navieracenteral.net
• Scfliquids.com
• Scfliquids.net
• Scfmarine.com
• Seabulktankers.com
• Seabulktowing.com
• Seacoramh.com
• Seacorcommoditytrading.com
• Seacorcommoditytrading.net
• Seacorctu.com
• Seacorholdings.com
• Seacorislandlines.net
• Seacorliftboats.com
• SeacorliftboatsLLC.com
• Seacormarine.com
• Seafarershouse.org
• TMmarket.com
• Unitedseamensservice.org
• Vacommoditytraders.com
• Waxler.com
• Workboatacademy.com

4.2 Lead Generation Results
contribution of The Maritime Executive ’ s digital marketing services included lead coevals, which were provided in the mannequin of e-mail addresses ( no name, addresses, phone numbers or respective professional roles ). In the “ natural ” lead generation process, an individual or group would enter his or her contact, as an act of sake in establishing a communication production line with the company for business. In club to come from a valid individual or human source, the liaison data must be valid, relevant and provided out of willingness to participate in the ad campaign as a likely customer .
At the end of the advertising campaigns, the publisher provided a number of e-mail leads with the overview of results. Larson Electronics believes that most of the leads provided by The Maritime Executive were fraudulently generated, possibly using a bot/scraper that scours the web for publicly listed datum that is easily accessible or purchased from a third-party moderate generation service provider that applies like tactics .
To support such assertions, a Larson Electronics spokesperson compiled a list of generate leads ( 213 ) from the advertising campaign results and contacted the leads individually. Below are some results from the compilation :

[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	lead is an attorney – according to assistant, she doesn’t believe he is interested.
[email protected]	email response from the “lead” email address stating the original “lead” left this institute in 2011
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	automated email address – says member of their team will contact you soon
[email protected]	email response from the “lead” email address stating “lead” did not request information
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	email response from the “lead” email address stating they have no use for our products, requested to be taken off any marketing lists
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	sent email to colleagues to see if anyone responded via emailed – no response
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	auto reply email to contact a different person
[email protected]	email response from the “lead” email address stating we have reached him in error
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	no longer works here
[email protected]	email response from the “lead” email address stating “lead” resigned as of 8-11-2014
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	“out of office” auto response
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email – per phone call, “lead” hasn’t been with company since 2011
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	“out of office” auto response
[email protected]	email response from the “lead” email address stating that we have reached them in error
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	email response from the “lead” email address stating not aware of any request for our products and requested to be removed from marketing list
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	no longer works here
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	retired
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	bounced email
[email protected]	out of country

The results show that a number of e-mail leads provided were invalid ( bounced ). furthermore, some individuals confirmed that they were not concern in products from Larson Electronics or were wrongfully contacted and requested to be removed from the list. These findings suggest that the leads were generated using “ unnatural ” means, such as the use of a bot or scraper .
To further assert that the leads were generated fraudulently, it is authoritative to note that several contact information from the leads provided by the publisher were on populace caller directories. The contact information could easily be found using a search engine, including Google. such information was award on both the company domain and public directories – which are sources easily accessible for bots and scrapers. Examples of liaison information that can easily be scrapped or acquired by non-human applications include leads provided by The Maritime Executive in August 2016. Twelve out of the foremost 20 from the list appeared in the SERPs, when searched for on Google .
specifically, some leads provided such as “ shipcareers @ bp.com ” ( an electronic mail address used for recruiting purposes – besides easily searchable using a search engine ) were irrelevant to the products being promoted ( in August 2016, all of the products separate of the campaign were related to industrial lighting systems ). Larson Electronics besides found respective “ swekis.com ” electronic mail addresses, which can be traced back to a law fast. Like the first exemplar, Larson Electronics products are not being used by police firms ; they merely have no need for explosion proof or corrosion resistant alight. possibly the most interest observation is that “ swekis.com ” e-mail addresses appeared numerous times in the number ( i, cofer @ sewkis.com, horton @ sewkis.com, paulsen @ sewkis.com, plankl @ sewkis.com, sknyc @ sewkis.com, timpone @ sewkis.com, wolfe @ sewkis.com and etc. ), suggesting that the contact data ended up on the number via non-human applications, such as a bot or scraper ; as it is not common practice for multiple members from the same company to engage in a product they are not interested in, or is irrelevant to their line of work. The “ swekis.com ” electronic mail addresses can be found on public directories .
From the same list of leads generated by the publisher in August 2016, early contact information shared similar irrelevancies and questionable originations, for example, several “ @ allenovery.com ” e-mail addresses ( Allen & Overy is a law firm that specializes in clientele ). There were respective extra entries, in some cases trio entries, suggesting that the application used to acquire the leads either went over the lapp directory, or encountered several public directories with the e-mail addresses show but failed to notice the duplicate from the inaugural source. Duplicate entries are common with numerous e-mail addresses from the list provided by The Maritime Executive in August 2016. It is very unlikely that an individual would naturally key in his or own email address several times; and it is even more unlikely for this occurrence to happen naturally on multiple, separate occasions from different companies within the same timeframe.
additionally, some leads generated were The Maritime Executive electronic mail addresses from early companies, american samoa well as other advertise companies. These entries do not carry any slant or relevance ; they should not be on the list provided by the publisher. furthermore, advertising companies do not buy industrial lighting systems and products, it would be affected for such groups to request to be added as a lead. A highly probable explanation is that the leads were generated by bots or scrapers ; and since the company contact data used like industry-related keywords that the non-human applications were targeting, the electronic mail addresses were picked up unintentionally by the application. Larson Electronics asserts that most ( roughly 60-95 percentage ) of the leads provided by The Maritime Executive were scraped – either by the publisher or from a third-party service that uses similar automated tools and processes .
4.2a LinkedIn Evaluation
To support that the initiation of such e-mail leads provided by The Maritime Executive was deceitful, far inquiry was conducted on respective items from the results provided by the party. Using LinkedIn as a search platform, names contained in the electronic mail addresses were searched with the company associated with the e-mail addresses. For example, using the e-mail Johndoe @ doetrucking.com, the searchable components include John Doe ( name ) and Doe Trucking ( business name ) .
The results of the investigation showed that many individuals ( provided by The Maritime Executive in the form of e-mail leads ) had left the companies/employment arrangement associated with the comparable businesses in the emails years before the leads were generated .
Examples of such discrepancies include the succeed :
name : Lee Foster
Email Address : leefoster @ rheadgroup.com
Company : Rhead Group
Position : Divisional Director
Employment duration : June 2008 – July 2012 ( 4 years 2 months )
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, two years after Foster left the company.
name : Jake White
Email Address : jake.white @ selbyjennings.com
company : Selby Jennings
Position : Director
Employment Duration : November 2014 – May 2015 ( 7 months )
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, one year after White left the company.

name : Kenny Rogers
Email Address : krogers @ sbulk.com
company : Seabulk Tankers
Position : President
Employment Duration : November 1997 – September 2014 ( 16 years 11 months )
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, two years after Rogers left the company.

list : Craig Lindberg
Email Address : craig.lindberg @ globalgeophysical.com
company : ball-shaped Geophysical
Position : fiscal Officer
Employment duration : Left the company in 2012
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, four years after Lindberg left the company.
name : F Stanley
Email Address : fstanley @ cushwake.com
Company : Cushman & Wakefield
Position : Associate Director
Employment duration : January 2001 – July 2009 ( 8 years, 7 months )
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, seven years after Stanley left the company.
diagnose : J Reinhart
Email Address : jreinhart @ mllnet.com
company : Maersk Line, Limited
Position : President and CEO
Employment duration : January 2000 – January 2014 ( 14 years, 1 month )
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, two years after Reinhart left the company.
name : Laurie Williams
Email Address : laurie.williams @ globalgeophysical.com
company : global Geophysical
Position : general Manager
Employment duration : 2009 – July 2011 ( 2 years )
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, five years after Williams left the company.
name : Mike
Email Address : microphone @ gandgshipping.com
Company : G & G Shipping ( now SEACOR Island Lines )
position : COO
Employment duration : September 2011 – July 2012 ( 11 months )
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, four years after Mike left the company.
name : Laurie Williams
Email Address : laurie.williams @ globalgeophysical.com
company : global Geophysical
Position : general Manager
Employment duration : 2009 – July 2011 ( 2 years )
Notes : The Maritime Executive provided this lead in 2016, five years after Williams left the company.
4.2b Mimecast Evaluation
To further assert that the origin of e-mail leads provided by The Maritime Executive was deceitful and from a single reference, research was conducted on the e-mail services associated with the leads. In practice, companies by and large have a wide range of electronic mail service providers to choose from, such as Gmail, Outlook, Rackspace and Mimecast. Out of the four, Gmail, Outlook and Rackspace makes up about 94 percentage of the electronic mail services grocery store parcel, while Mimecast alone makes up 2.03 percentage .
When checking on the e-mail service providers of the electronic mail leads provided by The Maritime Executive, results showed that over 90 percent of the leads indicated Mimecast as their email service provider. This occurrence is identical abnormal, since Mimecast is not a well-known or popular electronic mail serve provider. A typical e-mail list should contain several e-mail service providers, with boastfully or moderate providers taking the lion ’ s parcel of the list. In this case, based on the results, it would be potential to assert that the leads were originated from a individual source .
4.2c Quantifying Reach in 2016 Media Kit
The Maritime Executive made numerous hyperbolic claims in its media kits. The publisher uses these figures to legitimize their advertise services and support customer learning. In search for an explanation as to why the crusade with Larson Electronics were not generating adequate results and were just failing to engage target readers, research was conducted surrounding the publisher ’ second 2016 Media Kit .
foliate 2 of the report, displays the following data :

• Total Audience: 445,188+
• Audited Circulation: 22,501 (Print and Digital)
• Marex Newsletter: 100,646
• Audited Unique (Website Visitors): 220,108
• Audited Social Media: 101,933
• Audited Reach: 343,542

In the exit recess of the page ( fine print ), it shows the figures were “ Based on June 2015 Publisher ’ s Statement ” with the Alliance for Audited Media ( AAM ) logo. This statement is false, because the Marex Newsletter is not included in The Maritime Executive June 2015 AAM Publisher ’ sulfur Statement .
furthermore, “ Total Audience ” and “ Audited Reach ” figures can not be found in the 2015 Publisher ’ s Statement and are not verified by the AAM. Failing to note the source of these figures has mislead numerous readers and customers of the publisher ’ south ad services, including Larson Electronics. A disclaimer should have been inserted to notify individuals about the origination of the misleading data, since these are major parts of the 2016 Media Kit. The Maritime Executive reserved an entire page at the beginning of the report card to showcase the numbers, indicating its importance and significance .
The “ Audited Social Media ” figure of 101,933 is misleading, as the timbre of employment is not measured. Profiles of its “ engaged audience ” on social media could be from non-active profiles, bots, individuals who are not companion with the industry and more. It is possible to arrive at this conclusion, based on the publisher ’ south “ See Explanatory ” disclaimer in the June 2015 AAM Publisher ’ s statement :
( Facebook Likes : )
“ The issue shown in this report represents the total ‘ Likes ’ and may contain individuals that ‘ Like ’ more than one page ( e.g. may contain duplicates ). A Facebook ‘ Like ’ may not equate to an individual person. ”
( Twitter Followers [ Total ] : )
“ A Twitter follower may not equate to an individual person. ”
( LinkedIn Members : )
“ A LinkedIn member bill may not equate to an individual person. ”
A closer look at the members of The Maritime Executive ’ s LinkedIn group shows that its standards of moderation are extremely low, as the company allows merely about anybody with a LinkedIn account to participate in the group – including individuals not related to the industry. For example, extremity “ Stu Moss ” ( hypertext transfer protocol : //www.linkedin.com/in/stu-moss-37782214/ ) is owner of an consequence entertainment occupation and a professional comedian. Knowing that data from its social media groups will be used in its reports, The Maritime Executive should carefully moderate its members .
4.2d Duplications and Non-requested Circulations
In the first gear page of the June 2015 and 2016 AAM Publisher ’ south Statement ( Consolidated Media Report ), The Maritime Executive highlights its “ Total Gross Contacts ” for the respective period. An asterisk following to the number provides more data about the data, specifically indicating that “ there was no attempt made to eliminate any duplicate that may exist. ”
While the publisher ’ s honesty can be applauded in providing this statement, it is ill-defined why it did not remove the duplications. furthermore, the disclaimer is in all right print, making it very unmanageable to uncover. The presence of the disclaimer shows The Maritime Executive is aware of the duplicates; yet decided to irresponsibly publish the numbers.
The publisher ’ s controversial circulation practices besides play a major function in its inability to provide choice leads and engagements. In reference to the June 2016 Audit Report (page 5), the AAM “Audit ” report shows that 53.6 percent of The Maritime Executive circulation is not requested.
In the circulation of its publications, The Maritime Executive claims 11.5 percentage three-year circulation, based on foliate 4 of the June 2016 Publisher ’ mho Statement. however, according to the June 2016 Audit Report by the AAM audit chest of drawers, that figure is closer to 21.4 percentage. This highlights another major inaccuracy in the publisher ’ mho publications .
4.2e Quality and Frequency of Fraudulent Leads
first gear quality leads provided by deceitful publishers often come with the same typeset of issues, due to exchangeable techniques used during genesis. It is important to point out that, in most cases, such businesses mask the poor quality of leads by providing them in large quantities. Working with big quantities of leads require the habit of “ spray and beg ” commercialize methods, which are a waste of time, money and digital resources. additionally, deceitful publishers, like The Maritime Executive, may use quantity to win over or entice prospective customers, giving the impression that their services are effective due to the number of leads being offered .
A common tactic applied by such businesses include using their own party personnel or numerous employees in a company as leads. When providing the leads, the publisher will randomize the contact information throughout the list to make it less obvious. It is lone when a customer groups the contacts together, that he or she realizes something international relations and security network ’ deoxythymidine monophosphate properly. The chances of 3-10 employees from the same company (especially the lead generation service provider ’s company) appearing in a contact list is extremely low and does not normally occur in lead generation campaigns that are legitimate or organic.
In some instances, the deceitful go generation serve provider fails to clean up the number to make it look legitimate. such businesses assume their customers are not technologically disposed enough to detect inconsistencies in the liaison number. These errors are easy to pick up, as frequently times, the standard format of the involve contacts does not match the others. This could be due to scripting errors, or when a publisher uses a scraper to sift through source code of websites in search for contact information .
In the casing of the deceitful leads from standard campaigns provided by The Maritime Executive to Larson Electronics, there were some inconsistencies in the contact list :

• 02/01/2016: The following lead was provided- [email protected]?
• 04/11/16: The following lead was provided- [email protected]
• 05/30/2016: The following lead was provided- [email protected]?

Referencing the beginning lead, it is rare for individuals to mistakenly add two interrogate marks to their electronic mail addresses. Unlike unintentionally adding a letter in the electronic mail address, inserting a motion punctuate requires pressing multiple keys. For this to happen doubly, the addition of the interview marks would have to be intentional, which again is identical improbable based on lifelike human behavior. Hence, it would be potential to assert that a computer program was used to generate the lead. A quick search on Google shows that the email address can easily be found online, since the contact info appeared three times on the first page of the SERPs. Due to the general handiness of the e-mail address, it would not take a huge effort for a scraper to find the contact data .
Referring to the tip with elements, this further supports the assertion that a scraper was used by the publisher to fraudulently acquire leads online. This HTML tag is normally applied when grouping or applying styles to inline elements. It is not a part of an email address.
other leads provided by the publisher included cable breaks in the cell. This format is inconsistent with the rest of the contacts and such elements are not typically inserted with e-mail addresses :
Some leads contained spaces before the electronic mail. If the leads were acquired through a registration shape, individuals would be prompted to update the e-mail savoir-faire before confirmation or the system would not accept the submission. The watch electronic mail addresses contained spaces before the e-mail address :
It ’ randomness significant to highlight that the e-mail addresses can easily be found on Google research, again suggesting that a scraper plan was used to acquire the contact information .
4.3 Banner Campaign Results

Between January 2016 and July 2016, The Maritime Executive ran banner campaigns for Larson Electronics. In the leads provided, there were some issues related to high amounts of interaction from specific leads that would normally result in conversions :

• [email protected] was counted 22 times between January 2016 and June 2016. The contact did not place any orders on the site or requested additional information. Also, no traffic came from the domain. This email address is currently flagged in an online phishing webpage list (http://antiphishing.reasonables.com/BlackList.aspx?index=3620). Under ID 774013, the email address was flagged on 02/13/2014 at 8:12:06 AM.
• [email protected] was counted 6 times between January 2016 and April 2016.
• [email protected] was counted 5 times between April 2016 and May 2016.
• [email protected] was counted 5 times between January 2016 and June 2016.
• [email protected] was counted 5 times on 05/02/2016.
• [email protected] was counted 4 times between February 2016 and May 2016.
• [email protected] was counted 4 times between January 2016 and May 2016.
• [email protected] was counted 4 times between January 2016 and March 2016.
• [email protected] was counted 4 times on 05/02/2016.

additionally, there were leads from internal employees from The Maritime Executive, which should not have been sold to Larson Electronics as a legalize contact :

• [email protected] engaged the campaign on 3 occasions (01/20/2016, 01/25/2016 and 05/02/16)

4.4 Website Traffic Results
The Maritime Executive provided web site dealings as separate of their service to Larson Electronics. As mentioned earlier, the objective of web site dealings generation is to boost awareness, merchandise promotion and on-line sales ( conversion from a visitor to a customer ). Larson Electronics approached the publisher specifically for this service due to its extensive pass in the nautical sector, which is directly related to the company ’ second note of lighting systems, such as corrosion tolerant luminaries and explosion proof lights .
The results of the campaigns, as reported by The Maritime Executive, showed inconsistencies with data from Larson Electronics ’ Google Analytics chopine. by and large, the publisher reported activities that were non-existent, possibly erroneous or mislead .
Below highlights examples of discrepancies in web site traffic generation results between The Maritime Executive and Larson Electronics :

• Between April and September 2016, the publisher claimed to have delivered 487 clicks (note: not sessions) to the following link: http://www.larsonelectronics.com/p-104691-80-watt-wireless-remote-control-led-spotlight-24-volt-dc-or-120-220v-ac-spot-to-flood.aspx. Using data from Google Analytics, there were zero clicks during the session and 21 page views for the link from all sources between January to September 2016.

• Between April and September 2016, the publisher claimed to have delivered 490 clicks to the following link: http://www.larsonelectronics.com/p-64376-corrosion-resistant-requirements-saltwater-led-light-4-foot-2-lamp-2nd-gen-class-1-div-2.aspx. Using data from Google Analytics, there were 10 user sessions for the duration of the campaign and 248 page views for the link from all sources between January to September 2016.

• Between April and September 2016, the publisher claimed to have delivered 492 clicks to the following link: http://www.larsonelectronics.com/p-73051-160-watt-high-intensity-led-light-21600-lumens-120-277v-ac-high-mast-lighting-outdoor-rated.aspx. Using data from Google Analytics, there were 10 user sessions for the duration of the campaign and 143 page views for the link from all sources between January to September 2016.

It is important to note that for the entire year, Larson Electronics did not receive a individual on-line sale from the ad services provided by the publisher. To measure conversion rates accurately, Larson Electronics uses Smart Goals to monitor the quality of traffic, going beyond traditional metrics, such as average time spent on the web site, which can be defined as the trace :
“ Smart Goals uses machine learning to examine dozens of signals about your web site visits to determine which of those are most likely to result in a conversion. Each visit is assigned a score, with the “ best ” visits being translated into Smart Goals. Some examples of the signals included in the Smart Goals exemplar are Session duration, Pages per seance, Location, Device and Browser .
To determine the best visits, Smart Goals establishes a threshold by selecting approximately the top 5 % of the traffic to your site coming from AdWords. once that doorsill is set, Smart Goals applies it to all your web site visits, including traffic from channels other than AdWords. ”
Larson Electronics averages a conversion rate of 4.93 percentage for e-mail campaigns in 2016, as calculated using smart Goals. Email campaigns from The Maritime Executive resulted in a conversion rate average of zero percent. As mentioned earlier in Section 3.2 and according to a Word Stream report, average conversion rates for all industries is 2.3 percentage ( generally lower for e-commerce, higher for relevant leads and Smart Goals ). Hence, at the very least, the publisher, since it reportedly used relevant sources of traffic, based on its “ audited ” reach of 392,212 and sum audience of 472,692+, should have been able to deliver some conversions ( evening one ) from the advertising campaigns that took station during the integral class of 2016 .
“ naturally, this leads us to the traffic statistics problem. If these people are the ones clicking on our ad in their digital campaign and coming to our locate, how is that possible when these people don ’ t exist, don ’ thyroxine read Maritime Executive or stopped using that electronic mail 5 or 6 years ago ? How is this traffic being generated ? It would surely explain the average page views of one, but the question remains, who or what is generating the traffic ? Whatever the answer to that question is, this does explain why there are no conversions, no fresh goals and no referring links for any sales, etc, ” explained Bresnahan .
4.5 Email Campaign Results
The results of electronic mail campaigns carried out by The Maritime Executive for Larson Electronics were inconsistent and failed to generate sales or legitimate connections. In April 2016, the e-blast campaign resulted in 5,275 opens and 251 clicks with a 5.33 percentage receptive rate and a click-to-open rate of 4.76 percentage. In August, the e-blast campaign resulted in 6,897 opens and 3,917 clicks with a 6.93 percentage open rate and a click-to-open rate of 56.79 percentage. This 50 percentage chute in click-to-open rate over the period of four months is very rare. In fact, according to E-consultancy, in 2016 the sector with the highest click-to-open rate was government, at a rate of 25.36 percentage. The moment is on-line services, fashion and publishing all at roughly 15 percentage. As a whole, all industries averaged at 10.88 percentage. Based on these statistics, the click-to-open rate of 56.79 percent from the August 2016 e-blast campaign was likely supported by inorganic and/or fraudulent practices from the publisher.
Taking a closer look at the August 2016 e-blast political campaign, out of the 1,011 unique leads sold to Larson Electronics, 432 contacts clicked all seven URLs ( links ). This is an uncommon occurrence in electronic mail campaigns, specially taking into consideration that none of the leads resulted in quotes or sales ( it could have been justified if the leads resulted in sales ). Norton Rose accounted for the highest snap domain, resulting in 258 counts, of which all links were clicked 37 times, with the exception of link # 3 ( 36 times ). This ship’s company is an external law firm that serves business and fiscal sectors – it is not related to the industrial marine industry .
In the April 2016 e-blast campaign, several inconsistencies can besides be found. Focusing on domains, route616.com ( it seems this contact was “ interested ” in both Larson Electronics standard ads and electronic mail campaigns ) clicked on all five links. furthermore, the top two domains that interacted with the crusade were hotmail.com ( 20 ) and msn.com ( 6 ). As a B2B industrial publication targeted for businesses, interactions from release electronic mail accounts for individual consumers is rare. Legitimate constituent leads from B2B publications typically come from business emails .
5.0 Conclusion

Based on the results of the advertise services provided by The Maritime Executive to Larson Electronics during the stallion year of 2016, it would be possible to conclude that the advertise services provided were deceitful, abject quality and deceptive. The publisher promised to deliver leads, which can be defined as an individual or group in the buy march who is concerned in the product or service being marketed. The leads provided by the publisher from the advertise campaigns did not meet the definition of a lead – the majority of contacts provided were either acquired artificially or falsely generated. consequently, The Maritime Executive did not actually provide leads. rather, the publisher provided a set of random liaison information and passed them off as genuine leads. furthermore, The Maritime Executive may have used ( or engaged a third-party that offers such services ) bots, scripts or scrapers to acquire low quality, deceitful contact information. It would be potential to assert that the publisher under-performed in its advertise services to Larson Electronics, which according to Section 3.4 in the case between CUES and BVS, such actions may be used as grounds for legal disputes .
following, the web site traffic results provided by The Maritime Executive were inconsistent and falsely generated, when compared with data from Larson Electronics ’ Google Analytics platform. All advertise campaigns conducted by the publisher did not generate any conversions. furthermore, the publisher boasts an extensive “ audited ” pass of 365,212 ; “ audited ” singular browsers of 225,823 ; “ audited ” social media followers of 116,866 ; and a total hearing of 472,692+. Yet, the publisher ’ s advertising campaigns failed to deliver a individual conversion for about an entire year ’ s deserving of advertise services. In this font, the use of the condition “ audited ” does not change the initiation and quality of the advertise services provided. Based on The Maritime Executive ’ randomness Consolidated Media Audit Report, such “audited ” sources may be non-human and “may not equate to an individual person ” (directly quoted from the report); thus suggesting that some of the publisher ’s audience that participates in the advertising campaigns are non-human (bots) that have no genuine interest in the products being marketed.
“ There are then many issues with Maritime Executive ; it is hard to wrap my head around them all, ” said Bresnahan. “ It is not clearly however whether all campaigns we were billed for actually run, but we decidedly have issues with the leads generated by the campaigns that did run. This year, we are pretty aggressive about following up with these leads to further the sales of our products. The goal of advertising is to garner more dollars of gross profit from the ad, than the ad itself price. ”
“ In looking over the leads from Maritime Executive, we noticed that we received electronic mail only datum. This is strange. typically, we get full contact data for leads. We besides noticed respective hundred leads from attorneys at big firms. We advertised explosion validation LED lights for hazardous location areas in these campaigns. These are products that make sense for tankers, refineries, chemical action centers and docking areas where petroleum and other chemicals are routed on and off tape drive vessels. not lawyers. For example, we had 7 partners from one firm ‘ respond ’ to one ad in one e-newsletter on one day. It fair would not happen. ”
To conclude, using fraudulently generated data, The Maritime Executive misled Larson Electronics into thinking that the advertise campaigns were successful. As a result, Larson Electronics continued to pursue the publisher for more advertise services. The publisher, being fully mindful of its actions during the advertise campaigns, profited from the deceitful services .

2014 Audit Report
Download 2014 Audit Report

2016 Audit Report
Download 2016 Audit Report
Leads Sampling
Download Lead Sampling
Press Release
Read Our Press Release