You built an audience
of millions.
95% of
them pay you nothing.
Not because they don’t want to engage — because you haven’t given them a way to. Source Intelligence turns your non-paying players into a revenue stream that outperforms every ad format you’re running today. By 30 to 40 times.
Free download — no credit card
See the Ogame numbers for yourself: OGame case study + full eCPM data
See exactly what $470 eCPM looks like inside a real publisher’s platform.
$470
eCPM in OGame pilot
(vs $12 rewarded video)
30×
rewarded video ads
0
paying users
Live eCPM Comparison
$
470
Banner ads
$1–2
Rewarded video
$10–15
Source Intelligence
$470+
One survey = 200 rewarded video views.
Your user would need to watch 1.5 hours of ads to generate what a single 3-minute survey generates.
- Trusted by
- OGame — $470 eCPM pilot
- 30% avg survey completion rate
- Zero impact on premium user experience
Your ad network is
eating your retention
and paying you pennies for it.
You built a free-to-play game. 95% of your players will never buy anything. So you filled that gap with ads. Banner ads that nobody clicks. Interstitials that make players rage-quit. Rewarded videos that pay you $0.01 per view.
There is a third door. Your non-paying players are willing to trade three minutes of their time for in-game currency they actually want. Brands will pay significantly more for their verified, motivated answers than any ad network will pay you for their eyeballs.
Your current audience — illustrative
Paying players
IAP
1-5%
Non-paying
Generating $0 today
These players are not worthless. They are engaged, habitual, and completely unmonetized — Source Intelligence is the mechanism to capture their value.
OGame delivered
$470 eCPM.
Rewarded video: $12.
OGame — one of Europe’s longest-running browser-based strategy games — integrated Source Intelligence for their non-paying free-tier user base. Users didn’t feel like they were completing a survey. They felt like they were doing a quest.
“We expected surveys to feel bolted on. Instead, players treated them like a gameplay loop — and the economics blew past every ad format we’d ever tested.”
$470+
eCPM — verified pilot
data
vs $10–15 rewarded video
30×
best ad format
30%
average survey completion
rate
Industry avg: 10–15%
+48%
IAP conversion lift after survey engagement
Ads vs. Source Intelligence.
Side-by-side. Same audience. Same platform. Radically different economics.
The Yield Paradox
Real eCPM comparison — OGame pilot data
Banner ads
$1–2
Rewarded video
$10–15
Source Intelligence
$470+
30–40×
Thirty to forty times the revenue yield of the best-performing ad format. At a 5% monthly engagement rate, publishers generate €0.35 per free-tier user per month. No ad network comes close.
The objections we hear.
And exactly why they're wrong.
Objection 01
"Is the $470 eCPM actually real - or is that a best-case number?"
It’s a verified figure from a live plot with OGame-one of Europe’s longest-running browser strategy games. Not a projection. Not a peak-day outlier. A sustained result across their free-tier user base. We can show you the raw data on a call. If you’d rather see a comparable estimate for your own platform first, that’s what the 20-minute revenue audit is for.
The number is real. The methodology is clean. And it’s verifiable before you commit to anything.
Objection 02
"My players won't sit through a survey."
They won’t sit through a survey for a brand they don’t care about, rewarded with points that mean nothing in their game. That’s not what this is. We use a “Bait & Hook” mechanic: a 10-second qualifying question earns immediate in-game currency — currency woven into the economy your players already care about. In OGame, 30% of free-tier users who were shown a survey completed it. The Industry average for standalone survey tools is 10-15%. The difference isn’t the survey. It’s the reward.
When the reward is real, the behaviour follows.
Objection 03
"Ads are passive - surveys feel like work."
Ads feel like interruptions. Surveys, designed correctly, feel like quests. OGame players didn’t describe the experience as completing a survey – they experienced it as part of the game loop. And here’s what the data consistently shows: rewarded engagement – giving players something for their time – correlates with higher purchase intent, not lower. Players who experience the value exchange are more likely to buy into the premium tier, not less. A survey isn’t asking your players to work. It’s showing them what they’d be paying for.
Participation isn’t a burden. It’s a preview of premium.
Objection 04
"We're worried about GDPR and data privacy compliance."
This is where surveys have a structural advantage over ads. Source Intelligence runs entirely on zero-party data – information users voluntarily provide, with full awareness of why they’re providing it. No tracking pixels. No third-party cookies. No behavioural inference. GDPR was designed to protect people from data collection they didn’t consent to. What we do is the opposite of that.
Ads rely on tracking. Surveys rely on consent. GDPR broke one. It protected the other.
Objection 05
"You've got one public case study. What if you don't stick around?"
OGame is the integration we can name publicly. It isn’t the only one running. We have additional pilots live now across different game genres and platform types, with more in active onboarding across Europe and North America. More importantly: the integration is a single lightweight embed. It can be switched off in minutes. The risk of trying this is low. The cost of not trying it – while your ad CPMs continue their quarterly slide – compounds every month you wait.