I’m even OK with a deposit/wagerthrough once requirement, to address Professor’s $10 wagering example.
But imagine this player: He clicks through turtleD’s link, and deposits $1000. He plays slots for two days straight, wagering over $100,000. He hits a jackpot for $10K, but plays it all back, and he finally cashes out for $951.
turtleD doesn’t get paid a dime for this player.
Now that we’ve each provided extreme examples at opposite ends of the spectrum, let me recap my point:
A program is welcome to require a certain deposit amount, or even a certain wagering requirement, but the customer’s net win or loss should not be a part of the criteria.
Obviously, we live in a free market world, and if some affiliates are less picky about CPA deals, then perhaps this idea will succeed. But I won’t be signing on to any.