I appreciate the efforts made by Lou and Warren too.
Let me just say this, I have always enjoyed, and appreciate Jeff and Frederick as well.
On the subject of making a negative changes to Affiliate’s Agreements, I too feel that this kind change should never be Retroactive. Changes going forward for new affiliates are fine.
In all the posts I just read here, I didn’t see one that addresses the larger picture.
Webmasters promote different ways, and have to constantly change their strategy depending on how well a certain casino does for them.
As we have seen for years, some people seem to do well with Microgaming Casinos and not be able to convert RTG’s worth a damn, OR Vise Versa.
Even within a given brand, one webmaster might do well at most Microgamings,{for example}, but can’t get conversions at a few of them that other webmasters seem to RAVE about.
It’s a strange phenomena, but is a fact that we have seen for years.
At the same time,….and for a fact,…. some casinos spend more money to have people to specifically work with conversions, are well trained, and simply do a better job at maximizing the leads the affiliates send them.
Some programs spend more dollars on eye popping, professional creatives, while others just offer the basics.
Some places call a sign up that hasn’t deposited and works with them to find a solution that will work for them.
So the bottom line is that if the traffic is there, but the conversions aren’t, it isn’t ALL the affiliate’s fault.
In the larger picture of this issue was UIEGA. There probably would not be a Best Casino Partner using Vegas Technology software had this not passed.
Many of us were fiercely LOYAL to the Casino Blasters Program, and were able to convert those brands, and the Playtech Software fine. The funding solutions were plentiful, and it’s IMPORTANT to remember, a lot of people were largely focused on U.S. Traffic at that time.
While they did a fabulous job of navigating thru the pitfalls of UIEGA to retain some of the U.S. Players we had all built up at Casino Blasters,….that was also clearly to their benefit as well. It was as a partnership should be, IMO.
A Win/Win situation for them and the Affiliates.
That said, in the larger picture again, I think everyone needs to recognize that the Vegas Technology Software might not convert for EVERYONE as well as the Playtech Software did.
BCP does not appear, {at least on the website}, to offer the better funding solutions that are available for U.S. Players at this time.
IE: Neteller, Click2Pay, and Solid Prepaid Debit are the only three listed.
While there may be more available, and perhaps they even call the players that do sign up, IF THE PLAYER DOSEN’T bother to sign up because they don’t see QuickTender, or some of the other popular U.S. solutions, you’ll not have their phone number to follow up on to generate the conversion!!!
This could easily kill the smaller Webmaster that has largely U.S. Traffic, and needs the casino to have U.S. Targeted Funding solutions and TARGETED Creatives for U.S. Players as well.
And lastly in the larger picture, not ALL Webmasters are FRONT LINE Marketers.
Some people are marketing heavily on the Sub Affiliate/Tiered Concept.
As I recall, many years ago, this was exactly how Lou got started!
In fact, CAP is the product of that marketing concept.
While Lou is probably strong on the front line NOW,…he began with the Tiered marketing Strategy.
So people that use this strategy are totally screwed under these proposed changes.
Especially those that created decent downlines at Casino Blasters prior to the UIEGA Crisis.
These people might not be able to meet a PLAYER quota, not to mention smaller affiliates. All that work is now at BCP, and they would expect to be paid for all the Tiered Marketing they did at Blasters. And so they should expect that.
It would Not be for lack of effort, but because that isn’t what they do, and the smaller Front Line Marketers might not be able to send enough traffic if the casinos don’t convert well for them.
Additionally, there have been many times over the years when a casino stopped converting well, so I had to back them off and make some changes for my own self preservation.
In those cases, I NEVER dropped any casino, but changed focus for a while to Sub Affiliate Marketing on that unit. After 6 months or so, I switch it back around, ETC, ETC.
Everyone needs to understand that Affiliates are constantly having to adjust, shift gears, and make some temporary changes to preserve their own business. It usually isn’t done out of spite, or with the intention of NEVER putting a place back in the upper fold.
Just like a Casino site, we have to keep fresh material out there for the Players that use out portals.
After some time passes and we get new users to our sites, then we can put your casinos back in the prime positions and get some results.
In closing, Affiliates should not have to worry about getting commissions cut back or Frozen for the hard work of they did for you in the past.
In most cases, we are just trying to keep ourselves in the game so we can come back to you in a few months, and be productive again.
Sometimes we actually have to reduce exposure so we can be around to send you business in the FUTURE, and for the LONG HAUL!
A long and Productive Future is Win/Win for both of us.
Part of making that Win/Win happen, and ensuring that we can have that kind of relationship for the future is paying us fair and square for the good work and success we had and agreed to in the past.
Should you be expected to pay when someone totally DROPS you? No, I’m not saying that either.
I am saying that you need to understand the PLIGHT of the Affiliate better, recognize that there will be ups and downs over the years, and not penalize webmasters that are sending traffic, and making the effort. You should not try to micro manage affiliates with player quotas because in the end, the Webmaster knows what will work best for him/her, and what’s best for you as it pertains to THEIR site.
The Player Quota thing needs to go away, accounts should NEVER be frozen, and ALL earned commissions, Front Line and Tiered, should be paid as agreed.
Sorry this was so long, however, I felt it was important to show Fred and Jeff the larger picture from the Affiliate side of this issue.
Fred and Jeff, please don’t take offense, but if you are just wanting to ensure traffic, let’s come up with a plan that meets your needs on that concern without putting the affiliates future in jeopardy by having Player Quotas.
Thanks,
Nick