- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Better than mine
total income 239,440
total payouts 227,835
total deductions 4,764
total net profit 6,841
total affiliate share 1,710.25Deductions are taken from overall income – your share is calculated by the formula (income-payouts-deductions) x percentage which in your case looks like net 30%.
Deductions include bonuses and progressive contributions. The only way to find out what accounts for what is to ask the player or the casino for a full description of activity. You might be able to make a guess with the bare numbers they provide but better to have all the details.
In case anyone is concerned that the deductions look high, or not fair… they’ve always looked okay to me. I just looked at all my players and the great bulk of deductions came from two players at different casinos who are clearly progressive players – and who always donate the most to my bottom line.
Thanks Much Spear!
considering that you’re the source, you’ve put my worries to rest.
If I’d heard it from an aff manager, I’d still be wondering. Isn’t that shameful?
here are some replies I received from some of the aff managers I contacted about this matter
Wagershare
All of Microgaming’s progressive jackpots are paid from the progressive ‘pot’ and not by the individual casino themselves. This pot is accumulated via the progressive contributions made by players who wager on the progressive games. This contribution is a very small percentage and is taken from every wager that player makes on a progressive game.
As with all other Microgaming affiliate programs we also deduct the progressive contributions from affiliate commissions as it is a cost to us. The upside to this however is that if a player wins a progressive jackpot then it does not come off an affiliate’s revenue, but anything they drop back is treated as a normal deposit. For instance, last week one of our affiliates had a player that won a massive $633,336 on Major Millions. This enormous win did not affect the affiliate in the slightest but the affiliate stands to make a vast sum of money if they lose any back. In fact, at the end of last month this happened to an affiliate player who won over $20,000 on Supajax and they played it all back – the effect to the affiliate was like a player depositing 20k and dropping the lot, as the jackpot win did not count towards his revenues.
Also, I think the player you outline in your email has been extremely lucky to wager such a lot from such a small stake. Usually to wager $640, player loses are much higher (as is the nature of slots) and so the $19 worth of progressive contributions are a much smaller percentage of the revenue they generate, so you still make good money.
So in short, although in your example you made very little from your progressive player, their progressive contributions were unusually high in relation to their revenue creating a skewed picture of how much a progressive player would normally earn you.
Microgaming’s progressive games are the best on the Internet, none of the other software providers can even hold a candle to them and they are one of the main selling points of an MGS operation. Such is the lure of the ‘big win’, these games make the casinos and affiliates a great deal of money which is why all casinos push them so hard.
Casino Rewards
we do not take progressive contribution away from affiliates and also if a players wins a progressive you don’t see a negative. so you would be very very lucky if one of you players wins a progressive becuase they will more than likely lose some back to us and you will see 35% on what they lose back
I understand what Brent wrote, but TIm’s reply kinda lost me; but I take it to mean that I’m better off not promoting the progressives since the only chance I have of really profiting from the progressives is if a player hits it big and doesn’t igive it back in the same month; but does give it back the following month. That’s a lot of ifs.
Frankly I’m surprised not more has been said on this matter as it seems to me to be a signifigant negative to our bottom line.
Don’t get me wrong, I understand the importance of the attraction; but what good is it to me to attract the players to something that isn’t going to make me money?
The non-progressives attract enough and pay well and that’s enough for me. I guess I am going to cut back my push on progressive games and on the pages where I do advertise them; I think CR will get the best spots on those pages hands down.
Someone please point out if my thinking is sideways, I’ve not had any sleep for about 24 hrs trying to finish up a project; and therefore don’t trust my decision making process right now so I thought I’d ask those I whose opinions I value. (that means you)
I’ll of course look at this from a fresh mount after a good night’s sleep, but in the meantime I figured I could be getting some feedback so why not?
thanks in advance for your replies.
In either scenario, you do not get docked for any jackpots which are won.
With CR, you don’t even pay contributions (which can be a significant benefit if you have progressive players.
Either way, however, pushing progressives is one of the best ways to increase your income since the house edge is among the highest with these games.
I calculated progressive contributions to be about 3% – which is to say that if you were to spin Major Millions at max bet ($3), the progressive contribution would be 9 cents (I’m betting it’s actually 10 cents).
Thus – if your player hits Max Bet for 10 spins, the progressive contribution is $1 – of which your share is 25-35% depending on which program and tier you are talking about.
Now I don’t know about you – but I am pretty certain progressive players will spin and spin until they either run out of money or they get frustrated – very few take only a couple of spins.
All of this adds up – if your player deposited $25, and exclusively played Major Millions, gross income was $600 and gross payouts was $575 (assuming no bonuses were given, of course), that would be 200 spins on Major Millions (which if you ask me would be a hell of a lucky run but it happens).
200 spins would cost the casino $20 in progressive contributions, which would leave a net $5 profit – of which you get $1.25-$1.75. And if for some reason (ie. new player) a bonus was given, you and the casino have a net loss.
Yeah, it sucks. But it’s not that common, fortunately – house edge on progressives is probably about 8-10%, of which 3% goes to the contribution – so net casino edge is about 5-7% – still way higher than blackjack or video poker or even normal slots will ever be. Only games like keno have higher house edges.
You should always promote progressive games – heavily, if you can, because these players are your best buddies. Hopefully, if I get enough time to finish my scripts and projects, I will make that MUCH easier for all of you.
I guess I’m really dumb because I don’t see how that is more profitable to us than a straight 25% – 35% of money lost on regular games.
I understand they will spin until all is lost. I’m guilty of that; but how is it more profitable when all we see on a deposit of $25 is a $1.50?
However, I trust Spear and have no doubt that he is not leading me wrong, but I sure don’t get how that is more profitable to us than if the player had lost $25 at somthing else; where I’d get 25% of that; which comes to $6.50.
a considerable difference.
anyway, I thank you very much Spear for taking time to try and explain this to me, even though I’m too thick to understand it.
Thanks Bud
S.
You know, I think like BB1.
Someone needs to straighten my train of thought out also, if it is faulty.
LOL…
If your players lose money no matter what they play, then by all means promote normal games. The whole point of promoting progressive games is because they have a higher house edge – but also give players a chance to hit the big one without denting your bottom line (other than the progressive contributions, of course).
If you can pay, let’s say, a buck on CPC to get a player to sign up at one of your casinos, why wouldn’t you pay another buck to get them to drop $50 spinning Major Millions 40 times? Would you rather they play dollar blackjack and find a way to run up their deposit and bonus to $100 and cash out?
The whole point is that some gamblers prefer to chase the big dreams – these are the same people who go and spend $200 buying lottery tickets at their local 7-Eleven. I’d rather give up a bit more profit for a more likely income, than hoping they will drop it all playing blackjack.
My best income is coming from slot players – no two ways about that. If I think a particular deal is more suited to video poker and blackjack players, I usually choose the CPA route instead. If the deal is good for slot players, I’d rather take the percentage, even if some of it goes back to progressive contributions, because over the long run these slot jockeys spend a great deal of money. You will never be sure of that if they play video poker and blackjack.
