- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Excellent question Nickpicky and a great topic for discussion.
Personally I prefer “Fencing” as it gives everyone an incentive to promote the individual properties or brands that the casino group has. When they are combined it removes that incentive.
One key point from me though
If the player ventures to another property within the group via internal marketing by the casino the original affiliate SHOULD still receive credit. If not then you could have problems with cross promotion by the casino group poaching players (especially whales) from affiliates and thats obviously NOT a good thing.
Professor wrote:If the player ventures to another property within the group via internal marketing by the casino the original affiliate SHOULD still receive credit. If not then you could have problems with cross promotion by the casino group poaching players (especially whales) from affiliates and thats obviously NOT a good thing.Yes, this is a byproduct of the way these programs operate which is why I feel it is important to know how each program is operating. It is this exact situation that makes me wary of the Belle Rock Buddy and Casino Action (internal marketing tools that disguise themselves as rewards programs).
To take it a step further, what if a player is attracted to his/her initial product by no affiliate (default linkage) and then registers another account within the group from an affiliate?
Hi there NickyPicky,
At ReferBack the brands are not fenced, we link a customer to the affiliate who first introduced said player to the group.
This way we guarantee affiliates that any revenue we generate across our suite of brands as a result of cross sell and player migration will be paid to that affiliate.
Long term this works to allow affiliates the oppurtunity for a player to become a whale, some brands don’t entice players to spending greatness while others do – here you are guaranteed that if a player has that potential then it will be paid to you.
For affiliates who find new sources of traffic it is great as they benefit from maximum monetization of their unique traffic source.
Shane
Shane wrote:Hi there NickyPicky,At ReferBack the brands are not fenced, we link a customer to the affiliate who first introduced said player to the group.
This way we guarantee affiliates that any revenue we generate across our suite of brands as a result of cross sell and player migration will be paid to that affiliate.
Long term this works to allow affiliates the oppurtunity for a player to become a whale, some brands don’t entice players to spending greatness while others do – here you are guaranteed that if a player has that potential then it will be paid to you.
For affiliates who find new sources of traffic it is great as they benefit from maximum monetization of their unique traffic source.
Shane
Hi Shane,
This is the kind of feedback I am looking for. As far as I understand it, the Referback brands are fenced in terms of players (profits at one brand will not be applied against losses at another), but you are telling me they are bundled in terms of affiliation (linkage to one brand creates a link to all).
I can certainly see the merits in such an arrangement, but I don’t think that all fenced groups operate in the same manner. Am I incorrect? I sure would be happy to hear from others!
That is 100% correct – brands are fenced off from one another in terms of revenue but linked in term of affiliate ownership.
This arrangement really maximises returns per player as you get the full benefit of each of YOUR customers across our network of brands while not suffering the down side of those players who win large amounts.
Shane
PS: To really maximise on your traffic here one should push Progressive games to your players as any jackpot wins do not affect your net revenue, and any of the wagers placed using their ‘big win’ will then add revenue to your account
This is a great thread so I thought I’d give it a nudge.
Are any other affiliate progs going to front up with their policies on this?
I’ve had a whale poached before internally, but it was from a group that is renowned for this kind of thing and I was warned.
I really like the sound of Referback’s policy, I’m heading over to check them out…
If the player ventures to another property within the group via internal marketing by the casino the original affiliate SHOULD still receive credit. If not then you could have problems with cross promotion by the casino group poaching players (especially whales)
:santa2::santa2::santa2:
Grand Prive will cross market your players and NOT give you the credit for it.
Another group that is good about giving the affiliates the credit when they cross market is 400 and Pantasia.
@bonustreak 133488 wrote:
Grand Prive will cross market your players and NOT give you the credit for it.
They are still doing this???
That is really scummy and unethical.
Remember, Grand Prive, you wouldn’t even have those player if it wasn’t for your affiliates. Cross marketing without giving the affiliate credit is stealing, plain and simple.
Not only that they bought Big Dollar and refuse to open an affiliate program with it and market it to all the existing players they have which we all know many were sent by affiliates.
That is outrageous! :madat:
I have to say I’m pretty damn shocked by this.
i’ll be staying away from Grand Prive.
I asked a similar question the other day, thanks to whoever bumped it.
Hi ya,
I do remember discussing on someone else’s original topic, in particular about Grand Prive / Big Dollar in particular about cross marketing ..
http://www.casinoaffiliateprograms.com/bb/big-dollar-casino.13938.html?&highlight=cross-marketing
Not much extra info there (most of it already posted in this one).
I believe it’s fairest to:-
1. Give affiliate A the player originally visiting their first brand in the group via affiliate A’s tags.
2. Give affiliate B the same player visiting another brand in the group if referred by affiliate B.
3. Give affiliate A the same player visiting another brand in the group if it is via group marketing.(agreeing with most/if not all posts above)
Thanks for re-vitalising this post
I suspect we’ll not see any other affiliate programs post here unless they do it (i.e. I don’t suspect any will change – especially Grand Prive which I’m getting so tired of ‘listening, agreeing, then ignoring’ lol) …
Cheers all
Geno/CC
Personally I like if the player is credited to the affiliate who send him first, period.
It simplifies everything and allows affiliates to build up a decent player base.
I will always give preferred treatment to programs that use this simple method.
Just thought I would dig this up to refresh everyone just on the way GP thinks…
Bonustreak, once a player registers at any one brand in a group – there’s nothing to stop that group from cross-marketing to that player anyway. This is pretty much de rigueur for our industry and makes your question moot.
Regards,
Yashinhttp://www.casinoaffiliateprograms.com/bb/grand-prive-companion.13944.html?
I know that Yashin is not at GP any more but I am 99% sure that the company as a whole still have this opinion on cross marketing, since well yah they are still doing it when they email our players with offers from “Grand Prive” and show ALL off the brands(except Big Dollar, don’t get me going on this BS) but they are not giving the “GP” marketing material to affiliates. Example is JPF they give affiliates several brand banners to attract players to the JPF site, any and all casinos that they player signs up from there will be credited to the original affiliate.
GP has been on my BS list now for a couple yrs due to the unfair marketing practices they have used against affiliates, even though I have reviewed their terms and approved them for AGD I am really considering just removing them from my sites all together and giving all the exposure to a worthy program such as JPF or Referback!
