- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
ACPW is great. And J. Todd is great! I will vote for him.
Hi,
well I think its a mute point. Not Int’s, his is a very necessary idea and I whole-heartily applaud it.
but what I’m saying is about the casinos. If they really were worried about proving they’re not shaving anybody, they’d open up their backend to a 3rd-party auditing agent and/or set things up so that we can see what they see; and in real time.
in case nobody has ever noticed; not one single program out there shows us the whole picture; and there are loopholes no matter what way you go about checking the stats that we’re allowed to see – which can be used to explain-away any differences discovered.
I find it very hard to believe that it wouldn’t be easier for the programs to have it set up so that we can see the stats they are shown by Microgaming, using some kind of password-protection where we can enter the stats area but ONLY see our stats …
as it was for them to set up a whole different site with a whole different model for showing us the stats they are getting straight from Microgaming.
that make any sense?
Ifso; then it comes down to the fact that they only want to show us just enough to allow competent promotion; but not enough to be in a position where the sponsor can’t if so chosen, put a thumb on our scale.
of course, in the end it all does show up and is addressed accordingly by us affs. but some people can’t get it thru their thick heads that those of us seasoned in producing players; know what to expect and that we simply ARE NOT going to list casinos that don’t produce and I mean produce well.
Party Poker is getting ready to learn that fact from me very soon if they don’t pick up. Placating us with a small carrot on the end of a stick simply won’t get you thru the long run. If I am still making $100 bucks a month with Party 6 months from now; you can bet I’m gonna be real sure they are shaving me; because I should be increasing my monthly income every month with them. Simple numbers demand this is so; yet I bet you 6 months from now I’m still making a $100 bucks with them per month. when they first opened and I promoted them I’ve made nearly the same every month.
I absolutely cannot stand it when these places insult my intelligence to this point, and its for that reason I usually take them down. They’d have a much better chance of staying listed on my sites by simply saying, “Steve, we’re only going to pay you $100 a month”. I can respect that even if I laugh at its obvious weakness.
Originally posted by bb1webs
…and there are loopholes no matter what way you go about checking the stats that we’re allowed to see – which can be used to explain-away any differences discovered.This is true… and yet another reason APCW was set up the way it was.
APCW tries to report facts only. If we audit a program 5 times in a row and there is ALWAYS some issue that has to be addresses… ALWAYS some problem with the affiliate stats tracking… ALWAYS some explaination as to why their backend didn’t report information correctly…
…well…then…I’ll just let the membership read the reports and draw their own conclusions.
Originally posted by bb1webs
……… they’d open up their backend to a 3rd-party auditing agent and/or set things up so that we can see what they see; and in real time.That is exactly what I meant by auditing. Open up the backend, prove we’re getting our dues.
Thanks for putting it more eloquently.
