Far from being the work of a selfless white knight, Eyeo’s business model borders on racketeering. In its Acceptable Ads Manifesto, Eyeo states the virtues of what the company feels are tolerable formats:
Acceptable Ads are not annoying.
Acceptable Ads do not disrupt or distort the page content we’re trying to read.
Acceptable Ads are transparent with us about being an ad.
Acceptable Ads are effective without shouting at us.
Acceptable Ads are appropriate to the site that we are on.
Who could disagree? But such blandishments go with a ruthless business model that attests to the merits of straight talk:
We are being paid by some larger properties that serve non-intrusive advertisements that want to participate in the Acceptable Ads initiative.
Whitelisting is free for all small and medium-sized websites and blogs. However, managing this list requires significant effort on our side and this task cannot be completely taken over by volunteers as it happens with common filter lists.
Note that we will never whitelist any ads that don’t meet these criteria. There is no way to buy a spot in the whitelist. Also note that whitelisting is free for small- and medium-sized websites.
In addition, we received startup capital from our investors, like Tim Schumacher, who believe in Acceptable Ads and want to see the concept succeed.
Of course, they do not post their rates publicly. Eyeo doesn’t provide any measure of what defines “small and medium size websites” either. A site with five million monthly uniques can be small in the English speaking market but huge in Finland. And the number of “larger properties” and the amount they had to pay to be whitelisted remains a closely guarded secret. According to some German websites, Eyeo is said to have snatched $30 million from big internet players; not bad for an operation of fewer than 30 people (depending on the recurrence of this whitelisting fee.)
