- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Hi!
As a certified partner we d´also appreciate that “Certification” means more than just paying the money. In the end we will profit from stronger regularities if we are willing to respect them – and we are. Paying our affiliates, answering quickly and no spam at all are a matter of fact.
Florian
Stryyke.comYes thanks Dominique
As a few others have said, prior to this thread I thought it actually meant something to be “certified” too.Lets be frank – the only reason a program would want to be certified is to sell to us affiliates who use this site.
So maybe us affiliates should have a say in who is allowed in to sell to us?
Appreciate that CAP needs to make money but its likely to make more money long term from programs which its users are receptive to…. so maybe its users should help in the vetting process.
If each new program went through a process which included a discussion thread where members could discuss any concerns they have or rumours they have heard etc. and then maybe vote or have some say as to whether the program became certified?
If that process took place then I for one would be much more receptive to any affiliate manager lurking here or trying to sell me their program as I would have confidence that my fellow CAP members had vetted them or at least had a part to play in vetting them.
hmmmm I’m just off to ask my forum members which bookmaker they will allow me to sell to them next!
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss this Dominique.
:hattip:The “CAP certification” status is a widely known anomoly amongst experienced affiliates, with the implication that these programs are measured, monitored, and conform to some exisiting criteria. This does not appear to be true. And everyday we see posts from newbie affiliates who have followed the list, got burnt, and then fill the forums with the same old problems.
However, it’s not just CAP, I have the same issue with the GPWA, who do a very similar thing but simply call them SPONSORS, while assigning grades like PLATINUM, GOLD, SILVER, BRONZE … implying a level of quality that simply is not there. The grades are assigned according to the size of the cheque …
It’s the same at conferences, CAP and CAC and ICE, where shonky programs buy a veneer of respectability with a nice fat cheque …
SHEESH !!
:Cry:So I do not believe that simply calling this the sponsors section changes anything, and experienced affiliates have known it’s a “sponsors list” anyway. What needs to change is the quality of the entrants.
CAP should not be listing newly formed, undercapitalised companies that have a higher chance of going broke. CAP should not be listing the companies that routinely delay payments, engage in excessive SPAMMING or blackhat activities and are generally considered unsavoury by the general affiliate population.
However, if that criteria was applied then CAP (and many other major affiliate sites) would probably lose 1/3 to 1/2 of their programs !!
:Cry:So … certified list, sponsors, advertisers, listed programs … call them what you will, CAP still need to do some “due diligence” … and then if CAP could actually list only the programs that are worth recommending (as opposed to those who are prepared to pay) then it would be a huge leap forward.
FFS – I do it on my sites, and turn down multiple advertising requests each week. I’m sure that Dominique, Alex, Judy, Simmo, Richard, Ixian and many others do it on their sites too.
I expect similar standards for ANY site claiming to be an affiliate portal.
Any independent certifier in any industry that stands to gain commercially is inherently flawed.
This is why in any other mainstream industry, certifiers, industry bodies, standards authorities or call them what you may etc are non for profit. These bodies usually charge an admin fee so they can pay a couple of people, run some events and do a bit of marketing and for things like legal counsel.
It removes any bias.
CAP is a business and that will not change and we are naive if we think it will. What CAP chooses to call certification and how it charge for this is their business. We all come here out of free will and implicitly accept the model by being here. If we don’t like it we are free to go.
There’s room for improvement but CAP’s commercial interest is not going away so its hard to see how the model can change much.
Don’t mean to undermine the efforts of everyone in the thread but that’s the reality.
@TheGooner 196592 wrote:
So I do not believe that simply calling this the sponsors section changes anything, and experienced affiliates have known it’s a “sponsors list” anyway. What needs to change is the quality of the entrants.
Yes and no, I agree and I disagree.
I do think that having most any possible program here (with exception of gross offenders like Grand Prive, who refuse to fix things or even talk about them) is beneficial to us. A condition should be (and I don’t know if it is now) that they are willing to communicate and use the space to solve issues and answer questions. This is a useful thing and gives us access. In all these years the programs who ended up cheating me out of money were for the most part not here and not accessible. Of course there will likely be some programs who start out ok and then go rogue (like Grand Prive).
So I don’t have an issue with them being here, I find it useful. IMO the issue lies with aiding newbies with selection of programs. So maybe there could be real levels of membership? Not determined by the size of check but by….. fill in the blanks here.
I can see a system where they can all come in if they pledge to resolve issues and answer questions, but then us affiliates design some sort of “recommended” levels for them.
But how to determine such levels? I don’t think it can be done by generation of revenue, since none of us ever agree and different programs perform differently on different sites and at various times. But maybe we can have categories we check – do they spam, how is the responsiveness to queries, do they pass audits, do they pay with regularity (some room needs to be given here to programs paying into the US because of UIGEA and processor issues) and and and?
I think it’s important to remember that this is CAP’s site and they are free to decide how programs are represented which is why I think Sponsorship is an apt term accompanied by a disclaimer, clearly visble throughout the site, that say CAP does not endorse programs who advertise.
It’s down to affiliates to decide themselves who they represent and consequently it’s up to affiliates to do their own due diligence. Until now, the Certification claim has perhaps encouraged new affiliates to stop right there, when further reading might have swayed a decision.
Therefore doing those two things above will make new affiliates more conscious of the fact that they need to do their own research, and the opinions of members then become the deciding factor – or one of them at least. As most of us know, the experience of others is by far the best way to decide on who to promote.
So if I were CAP, I would simply remove all references to, or indications of, endorsement. I’d still apply ethics when deciding who to allow to sponsor/advertise, but the disclaimer at least covers the base that everyone will have different opinions on different programs and puts the onus on affiliates to do proper research.
@Simmo! 196609 wrote:
I think it’s important to remember that this is CAP’s site and they are free to decide how programs are represented.
Admin wants to know what we think and want, they are open to making some changes here.
If CAP wants to keep the term “Certification” i think there is one Big Thing missing.
We all need protection from companies that end up not paying there affiliates, and to date there is really nothing we can do but sit back and say thank you very much.
My suggestion is, If a group wants to be certified, besides whatever criteria is in place now for this process, i think there should be a legal documentation of some sort that a group must agree to, say ” upon disolvement of this company or any other unseen event, we are liable to pay all outstanding monies due to our partners and affiliates”. Something in that order were the management of CAP can legally pursue payments for the affiliates that they recommend these companies to.
I mean if CAP wants affiliates to use there Certification as a recommendation from them that these programs are worthy of our time and money, then they should be able to legally represents us in non payment issues legally, if this can not be done, then there can not be certification, because it means absolutely nothing. If CAP is getting paid by these companies to “recommend” them to us, then CAP is responsible to us the affiliates to make sure we are paid.
No legal documentation to assist in making companies pay….THEN NO CERTIFICATION, MUST BE CALLED SOMETHING ELSE. Like suggested, just approved without liability.
It’s down to affiliates to decide themselves who they represent and consequently it’s up to affiliates to do their own due diligence.
How true that is. I have stressed this over and over to newbies please do your own research and never depend on seals of any kind when it comes to who and what your going to promote.
One thing is clear by having the programs here on CAP no matter what they are called it is and has always been a huge benefit to affiliates. We have faster responses on questions, we are notified of promotions when our emails maybe are spam blocking, we get to the bottom of serious issues and have many times over turned negative terms to good terms by sticking together here at CAP.
There is one thing I want to suggest and not to derail at all but maybe some could be a tad nicer to the affiliate managers when your wanting to collect money, they are not here to be treated and talked to the way they are at times. It just bothers me when they are not shown respect and have to take abuse they way they do at times no matter who they work for they should be treated respectfully.
Back on track now
@eclipse 196532 wrote:
If you want to continue calling it “Certification” please ensure that:
Payments R on time.
Tracking is working, no tricks with cookies or other shaving techniques.
Managers respond to emails in 24h
Casino is NOT sending spam or not allows spam affiliates. Now there R some casinos, which send spam on a massive scale. That is not acceptable.
Mark newbie casinos, so affiliates know it’s a new operation.Make sure You use 35K USD or whatever amount to test the operation in and out.
In the CAP Audits forum during the Rome testing I had mentioned that a program should not be listed until it passed the Audit. It didn’t go over too big and I can’t find the reply, perhaps it’s still there and I just missed it.
In any event, I agree with eclipse on many of those points.
I also agree that precious metal levels are misleading for both the newbie and
the program.For Certification:
A program should meet basic minimum guidelines before even being listed, suchas not massive player and affiliate complaints, fast email responses for both player and affiliate, an AM contact on staff etc..
Then maybe a performance based “certification” process, this permits CAP to still generate revenue.
However, it is important to indicate publicly what the minimum guidelines and performance levels are.
So for example a new program could be at a level I indicating it is new program and has met the minimum guidelines.
As a program gains confidence in player and affiliate satisfaction it moves up a level.
A fully certified program has passed a CAP Audit.
From a merchant’s point of view, I rather naively considered the ‘certification’ to mean that my program would be screened by CAP and if it passed I’d have the opportunity (at a cost) to promote the program alongside other reputable brands who operate to similar standards.
The fact that this isn’t the case basically nullifies this ‘certification’ and you run the risk of being tarred with the same brush of those less ethical programs.
For example, the totesport casino runs off Playtech software, but because of previous indiscretions there’s plenty of aff’s that won’t consider promoting a Playtech casino, despite us running the program independently.
It’d sit much more comfortably with me if the term certification was replaced. Either that or run CAP as a not-for-profit organisation and don’t charge us so much :wink-wink
Thanks for bringing this up – Playtech is a good example that the CAP system does filter successfully.
The reason it does filter is us affiliates – we post about issues, we support each other, and questionable programs soon have enough negative posts in their forum to discourage newbies.
The best way at the time for newbies to make decisions is to type the name of the program into “search” and see the affiliate feedback.
There are a lot of good suggestions here, keep’em coming. They will all be taken into consideration when the certification process is revamped.
Everyone’s ideas are equally important. Programs should chime in more too – CAP message board is yours as well as ours and we all can shape it together to make it what we want, or as close to that as possible.
Oh I also forgot the other thing to remember is that CAP is now doing the audits granted the 1st was a bit of a mess but usually the first time around at something new doesn’t go without a glitch. So that said even if they are “certified” they will still have to be monitored and watched. Maybe there should be a “certified with caution” or something? I know Gambling Wages, CPays and a few others will NEVER touch my sites no matter how many seals they have paid for.
Interesting discussion.
From my point of view the chief reason that the programs I represent (Mecca Bingo and Blue Square) are not certified is that the cost to benefit ratio is flawed. It costs too much for what you get so we decided against it.
Cheers
@Dominique 196680 wrote:
Thanks for bringing this up – Playtech is a good example that the CAP system does filter successfully.
The reason it does filter is us affiliates – we post about issues, we support each other, and questionable programs soon have enough negative posts in their forum to discourage newbies.
The best way at the time for newbies to make decisions is to type the name of the program into “search” and see the affiliate feedback.
There are a lot of good suggestions here, keep’em coming. They will all be taken into consideration when the certification process is revamped.
Everyone’s ideas are equally important. Programs should chime in more too – CAP message board is yours as well as ours and we all can shape it together to make it what we want, or as close to that as possible.
Personally, and I meant to mention this before, is I’d love to see the programs listed by brand. When I first started out I never really paid attention to the different brands but as I gained some experience I learned to recognize them. When I’m looking to add or replace a program I always do it by brand first.
Something newbies might want to consider as well when building their sites.
