@Dominique 203750 wrote:
I really don’t understand the concern some programs have about paying for the life of the player.
This is quite a messy topic. But I will try my best to answer this fairly. Before going further 
I have to say that for the programs that I have managed in past, I have never enforced this rule or let my company enforce this. Because I think it is unfair.
The only valid reason that I can think of is using this as a pressure tactics to get the affiliates to keep sending new players month on month.
This policy would only come from big established operators and never from small programs that depend on affiliates for majority of their traffic. The big operators have high acquisition targets for new depositing players every month and normal understanding is that they will get ‘x’ number of high rollers per every 100 players. One of the things they do to achieve this is pushing existing affiliates to improve the tally of new depositing players. It is understood that not every affiliate can’t grow month on month but at least can maintain the current numbers.
hope this helps
I know most programs dont carryover negatives but the players that affiliates refer should they not also be accountable for the losses too and not just the wins?
If a player wins big on the last day of the month sending the affiliate into the red, then spunks it all back on the first day of the following month, once commissions have been reset to zero. The casino takes the hit of the win, then has to pay out further commissions on the money spunked back.
Is that fair?
This is an interesting topic. I would love to hear what other people have to say.