Tell me about it. Our company moved to it and its been horrible with any third party application or marketing pixel.
My boss tried to warn VPs of AMP being a nuclear option. Instead of fixing the website they rather put a bandaid over it.
My boss tried to warn VPs of AMP being a nuclear option. Instead of fixing the website they rather put a bandaid over it.
Isn't that part of the point though? 3rd party marketing and tracking pixels are NOT things that improve the experience or performance for the visitor.
But neither is AMP. This seems like a pure land grab to send more info to Google and less to other adtech companies.
The main issue here is executives believed the hype that an AMP website would result in higher revenue and that is not the case. The money spent on making our website AMP'd could have been spent fixing the current system.