While obviously not ideal, this is far less important than the way the casino behaves for two reasons IMO. Firstly I’m of the opinion that an affiliate should be providing players with a casino that they can trust and secondly it’s clearly in the affiliate’s best interests to make sure the player is happy with where they end up. You often get one shot at a player so you want them to stick for as long as possible. You don’t want them disillusioned at the first hurdle.
I think it would be very short-sighted to prioritise casinos based on how much they pay an affiliate. Of course if they have a very good reputation for retention – an indicator that they treat players well – then there is some justification. But that reputation should be player-based, not affiliate-based.
In fact I guess you could argue that this thread is in fact quite the opposite of what I suggest, and that the bad operators assist the good operators. IE: iNetBet and Bodog can afford to carry over because they have such good reputations compared with a lot of their stable-mates 