mukeshsharma1106
Member
I have been messing around with different traffic sources for a while, and lately I keep wondering whether native ads really do anything special for igaming traffic. It is one of those things people keep mentioning in passing, almost like a quiet secret, but no one ever gives straight answers. So I figured I would share what I have seen and also hear what others here are experiencing.
At first, I honestly did not pay much attention to native ads. I always thought they were just those small boxes at the bottom of news sites that nobody clicks unless they are bored. Most of my focus had been on push and pops because they give volume fast. The problem is that volume does not always turn into anything useful. I kept getting traffic spikes that looked good on paper but did not turn into players. That is where the frustration started. I wanted traffic that behaved normally, not people who bounce in two seconds.
A friend kept nudging me to try native ads again. I had brushed it off before because they felt slow and a bit unpredictable. But after a few rough weeks of inconsistent results, I figured I had nothing to lose. My main doubt at the time was whether native placements could actually match the intent level needed for igaming offers. I always assumed the audience there was just casual readers. It felt odd expecting them to convert.
Once I finally tried it, the first thing I noticed was how different the clicks looked. They were slower, but they were reading more, spending more time, and not running away the moment they landed. I am not saying everything magically worked on day one. My first sets of creatives were too direct, almost like push ads but dressed as native. Those flopped badly. After that, I switched to softer angles that felt like helpful content rather than ads pretending to be content. That made a big difference.
One small realization that helped me a lot was that native ads seem to work better when the pre-lander actually feels like something people might read on a normal day. Whenever I stuffed it with aggressive lines or big promises, the numbers dropped. When I wrote it like a simple story or a casual insight, people stayed longer. I guess it matches the mood they are already in when browsing articles. Nothing about it feels rushed, so the traffic ends up acting calmer too.
I also noticed that native ads send a certain type of user who feels more “intent-curious” than “intent-ready.” They are not clicking because they are actively searching for an offer. They click because something in the headline or the story caught their eye. It means you need to guide them more gently to the offer, but once they land, they explore more. In my tests, they did not convert immediately in huge numbers, but the quality across the funnel was steadier than what I was getting from push or pop.
After a few weeks of comparing everything side by side, I started seeing patterns. Native traffic did not spike as wildly as push, but retention was better. Bounce rates were lower, and players who converted ended up sticking around longer. This surprised me because I used to think only search or social traffic could produce that type of behavior. It gave me a bit more confidence to keep experimenting.
A soft tactic that helped me was matching the tone of the pre-lander with the tone of the native placement. If the site feels like a finance blog, I use calmer, informational angles. If it is entertainment-based, I make the story slightly lighter. No hard selling. Just enough curiosity for them to want to continue. That alone improved metrics more than I expected.
If anyone here is on the fence, I would say native ads are worth testing if you are after steady igaming traffic rather than chaotic bursts. They take more patience, and they force you to think like a reader instead of a marketer, but they can send a healthier stream of users. I came across an article recently that breaks down the whole idea in a straightforward way, and it aligned with what I experienced. Sharing it here in case it helps someone else explore or test things out:
deliver better iGaming traffic with native ads
Anyway, that is my take. Native ads are not magic, but they feel more balanced than most formats I have tried. Curious if others have seen the same thing or if your results looked different. Always good to compare notes because igaming traffic behaves in weird ways depending on geography, angle, and even the slightest changes in creative tone. If you have been testing native as well, I would love to hear what worked and what did not.
At first, I honestly did not pay much attention to native ads. I always thought they were just those small boxes at the bottom of news sites that nobody clicks unless they are bored. Most of my focus had been on push and pops because they give volume fast. The problem is that volume does not always turn into anything useful. I kept getting traffic spikes that looked good on paper but did not turn into players. That is where the frustration started. I wanted traffic that behaved normally, not people who bounce in two seconds.
A friend kept nudging me to try native ads again. I had brushed it off before because they felt slow and a bit unpredictable. But after a few rough weeks of inconsistent results, I figured I had nothing to lose. My main doubt at the time was whether native placements could actually match the intent level needed for igaming offers. I always assumed the audience there was just casual readers. It felt odd expecting them to convert.
Once I finally tried it, the first thing I noticed was how different the clicks looked. They were slower, but they were reading more, spending more time, and not running away the moment they landed. I am not saying everything magically worked on day one. My first sets of creatives were too direct, almost like push ads but dressed as native. Those flopped badly. After that, I switched to softer angles that felt like helpful content rather than ads pretending to be content. That made a big difference.
One small realization that helped me a lot was that native ads seem to work better when the pre-lander actually feels like something people might read on a normal day. Whenever I stuffed it with aggressive lines or big promises, the numbers dropped. When I wrote it like a simple story or a casual insight, people stayed longer. I guess it matches the mood they are already in when browsing articles. Nothing about it feels rushed, so the traffic ends up acting calmer too.
I also noticed that native ads send a certain type of user who feels more “intent-curious” than “intent-ready.” They are not clicking because they are actively searching for an offer. They click because something in the headline or the story caught their eye. It means you need to guide them more gently to the offer, but once they land, they explore more. In my tests, they did not convert immediately in huge numbers, but the quality across the funnel was steadier than what I was getting from push or pop.
After a few weeks of comparing everything side by side, I started seeing patterns. Native traffic did not spike as wildly as push, but retention was better. Bounce rates were lower, and players who converted ended up sticking around longer. This surprised me because I used to think only search or social traffic could produce that type of behavior. It gave me a bit more confidence to keep experimenting.
A soft tactic that helped me was matching the tone of the pre-lander with the tone of the native placement. If the site feels like a finance blog, I use calmer, informational angles. If it is entertainment-based, I make the story slightly lighter. No hard selling. Just enough curiosity for them to want to continue. That alone improved metrics more than I expected.
If anyone here is on the fence, I would say native ads are worth testing if you are after steady igaming traffic rather than chaotic bursts. They take more patience, and they force you to think like a reader instead of a marketer, but they can send a healthier stream of users. I came across an article recently that breaks down the whole idea in a straightforward way, and it aligned with what I experienced. Sharing it here in case it helps someone else explore or test things out:
deliver better iGaming traffic with native ads
Anyway, that is my take. Native ads are not magic, but they feel more balanced than most formats I have tried. Curious if others have seen the same thing or if your results looked different. Always good to compare notes because igaming traffic behaves in weird ways depending on geography, angle, and even the slightest changes in creative tone. If you have been testing native as well, I would love to hear what worked and what did not.
231 Nguyễn Văn Cừ, Phường Chợ Quán, TP. Hồ Chí Minh
