Get exclusive CAP network offers from top brands

View CAP Offers

Alert: Microgaming Casinos

[bsa_pro_ad_space id=2]
  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 5 posts - 136 through 140 (of 140 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #760085
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    They are ALL ok to promote. Only Grand Prive uses the cross promotion without giving credit to affiliates.

    I spoke with several other microgaming programs and none of them will do that.

    #760092
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I got a response from Rewards affiliate. They are 100% ok to promote, my queries in earlier post were responded to by renee :)

    #760341
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Hi All,

    I would like to inform you of an update to this matter, specifically regarding cross marketing and our policy attached to that.

    I have posted the update here:
    http://www.casinoaffiliateprograms.com/bb/cross-marketing-policy-and-questions-answered.25044.html?

    Please let me know if you have any questions.

    #760478
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I have declined to comment up until now but I have no doubt in my mind that single sign on is not beneficial to the affiliate.

    Any group who is serious about the affiliate channel should seriously reconsider.

    The answer to all this is extremely simple:

    You can still have single sign on and track individial account instances to separate affiliates.

    In the Microgaming backend, regardless of single sign on, an account ID and referral Id will still be stored.

    To make sure individual accounts track to different affiliates should be the status quo and if not should be no more than a data structure issue to fix.

    Nothing has changed. Affiliate code passed through URL direct to casino website and recorded in indivual casino database. End of.

    Trying to hide the poaching of players behind this single sign on business is a very weak argument.

    If you want affiliates to promote you stay transparent and don’t change something which has been working for years.

    And spreading a rumor that other groups will follow suit to try and soften the blow of your decision is an even weaker argument.

    I think GP’s efforts will be well spent making sure people can run reports on their backend, something to this day we have not been able to do.

    #760480
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    @justred 153065 wrote:

    I have declined to comment up until now but I have no doubt in my mind that single sign on is not beneficial to the affiliate.

    Any group who is serious about the affiliate channel should seriously reconsider.

    The answer to all this is extremely simple:

    You can still have single sign on and track individial account instances to separate affiliates.

    In the Microgaming backend, regardless of single sign on, an account ID and referral Id will still be stored.

    To make sure individual accounts track to different affiliates should be the status quo and if not should be no more than a data structure issue to fix.

    Nothing has changed. Affiliate code passed through URL direct to casino website and recorded in indivual casino database. End of.

    Trying to hide the poaching of players behind this single sign on business is a very weak argument.

    If you want affiliates to promote you stay transparent and don’t change something which has been working for years.

    And spreading a rumor that other groups will follow suit to try and soften the blow of your decision is an even weaker argument.

    I think GP’s efforts will be well spent making sure people can run reports on their backend, something to this day we have not been able to do.

    GP has decided to do the right thing, which they mentioned in this thread.

    While other groups may switch to SSO, I don’t think any of them will be using the method that GP had been using.

Viewing 5 posts - 136 through 140 (of 140 total)