Hi Howardmoon & all,
Welcome to the affiliate community Howardmoon. I’m sure you’ll do well!
You’ve definitely done as much as you can with the PWC reports as is. The only difference is that the PWC reports aren’t weighted by game type. So to clarify:
let’s say slots was 95, table games were 96, vp was 97, and bj was 98 (just random numbers I’ve picked for the sake of this example):
I’m told the PWC reports are (95+96+97+98)/4
and while the numbers we are using are based on the PWC reports, they are also weighted to by game type. So that means, for example VP (at 97% in this example) might not have made up exactly 25% (1/4) of the bets.
For the sake of argument, say it made up 50% of the bets. So that 97% would carry twice the weight by comparison. So the final margins put forward are weighted to reflect the number of bets we’ve taken on each game type.
Make sense?
Also, Aztec and Phoenician were not factored into this as we did not own them at the time this was calculated.
Another point worth noting is that these margins change slightly as people play, so our plan is to review them every quarter to update them appropriately. They could go up or down … just depends on the games … but it will be 35% of our margin/profit.
Moreover, you can compare this to other programs of a similar nature in the industry and I think you will find us more than competitive. For example, FA pays 0.9% (at least the last time I checked) on slots compared to our 1.3%.