- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I think most people like net rev than CPA.
Net rev….
most cpa’s come with some sort of terms anyway, like a min deposit or number of deposits, so rev share generally is the preferred method for me.
I like net revenue better as you will earn a percentage of all deposits your player(s) will make instead of just a fix amount one time… We all know that a lot of casino players will first deposit the minimum amount just to try the casino and make sure is what they are looking for, after that initial stage they will start depositing bigger and bigger and there is when you start earning real bucks.:hattip:
Net revenue 100%. I did a retro calculation last month and found that I would have made 50% or more less with $150 CPA.
Net rev- if for nothing else, then for the excitement of seeing what your troopers have brought you since last check
Absolutely, definitely rev share.
I have a few 275$ and 300$ CPA´s…and sometimes I use them with Playtech casinos.
My experience is that player value at Playtech casinos are lower than Microgaming and RTG.
And my site are focused on bonuses…I have alto of small depositors – so for me I think CPA sometimes are better than net.rev.
CPA always causes problems.
One party always loses in CPA. There is no win-win.
Either the casino is happy with the deal – and more likely than not this is because they make more money than they would if it was rev share. In that case the affiliate loses.
Or, the affiliate is happy because s/he sends low value players and still gets decent money for them. In that case the casino loses, and soon will boot the affiliate and all kinds of arguments ensue.
Cases where the CPA actually matches the player value are a rare coincidence.
On CPA you will never know when a whale will cross your path, and most of the revenues come from big players. The casinos know this, and count on it.
Since the casino will simply stop paying you if your player value is too low, generally in CPA the casino wins and you lose.
see below as I made a mistake doing this post.
Simoneaton;208273 wrote:A recent article I wrote regarding this
The most popular method of earning for poker affiliates is through CPA. Although CPA is a great short term gain, it really can hurt the affiliate in the long run. An affiliate who is serious in the poker affiliate world referring good qualifying players to recognized brands will make more money over the space of 18 months from a revenue-share deal rather than a CPA deal.The escalating cost of acquiring poker players makes some CPA deals quite attractive. However you need to keep in mind one thing and that is the companies are willing to pay these CPA rates in the understanding that the players will make them more money in the long run than if they offered you a revenue-share deal.
I have been in the online gambling industry for over ten years and during my time I have seen some small affiliates earn large amounts from a select few players. Luckily these affiliates choose revenue-share so they continued to earn money from the players they referred far after they continued sending depositors. One good poker player can easily generate in excess of a $1,000 a month in rake, where if you were paid CPA you would have earned just a one off payment from that player, whereas with revenue-share you will continue to earn for the life of the player.
Choose revenue-share over CPA as in the long term this is a winning option for an affiliate sending qualified players. The average revenue-share amount is 25-35% commissions for life of the player.
If you bring an average of 10 depositors in a month and were to make $200 CPA for these players you would earn $2,000. However with the same players if they generated an average of $75 a month in rake each ($750 a month total in rake). You will earn an average of 30% of $750 coming to a total of $270. The players are likely to stay with the same poker room for a couple of years, meaning you would have made $3,240 in commissions in the first year alone. This is $1,240 greater than you would have made by a generous CPA offer.
If this argument is not convincing enough for you to consider working with affiliate programs on revenue-share you should take a moment to think how you would feel should you refer that all important VIP player that generates $1,000’s a week in rake you got paid a measly CPA.
A major risk factor affiliate managers need to consider when working on CPA is the potential of CPA fraud. This is when an affiliate deliberately creates a CPA deal with a program with the intent of defrauding the program). Programs have overcome this problem by setting up limits/rake which needs to be generated before the CPA is released, but the potential for abuse still exists.
As an experienced poker affiliate manager I find the ones who work strictly on revenue-share have more value, however I do cater for both. Some of the large poker affiliates earn six figures a month, and a majority of their commission check comes from players they referred twelve months back.
This article was written by Simon Eaton the affiliate manager for the bet365 poker affiliate program
pokeraffiliateuniversity.com/commissions/cpa-or-revenue-share-don%E2%80%99t-be-taken-in-by-the-quick-buck/
