- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Cross posted from 2p2 forums, originally posted by RakeReduction
“From reading PAP, someone emailed Full Tilt asking if money transfers counted as a real money player.
They dont, which is big problem #1
Big problem #2, the 60 day policy is going to be retroactive. This means all your players rakeback or otherwise who have never deposited, only got transfers you will lose.
Obviously a much bigger problem for rakeback players and affiliates.
We are trying to find out what can be done to avoid this problem.”
This is very poor
Unfortunately, at this time, AGD has not crossed into Poker Affiliate T&C’s. We are looking into finding the right person who is a respected poker affiliate and has good relations with many in the poker industry. The same goes for Bingo and Sports as well, actually.
So – at this time, all we can say is that is horrible.
Honestly, if this 60-day change is actually designed to screw rackback affiliates then I’ll be the first to congratulate Full Tilt Poker.
If rackback affiliates are introducing active new players to FullTilt then this shouldn’t be an issue for them. Surely “big” poker players that know and want rackback have the ability to deposit inside 60 days? hmmm ?
However if (as expected) many of the “new” players are actually existing Full Tilt players who are then transfering money from their old accounts (and therefore don’t need to deposit) then perhaps this rule change will serve to minimise the poaching of existing players by removing the economic benefits to the poachers …
An accidental benefit for normal affiliates of this new rule?
I’ll happily forgo my “slow to deposit” players if it also means that whales that I introduce to FullTilt will stay tagged to me account.
:tongue:@AlanAces 156063 wrote:
Feel free to move this thread to the appropriate forum then.
Thank you.
This is definitely an appropriate forum for the post. We just have not evaluated poker affiliate programs yet.
keep on discussing!
I think Gooner does bring up a good point, though.
Here’s the latest update on this – from nell@fulltilt.com
Posted by Nell@fulltiltpoker.com
Posts: 27
Default
Hi Guys,Thanks for all the feedback, I do read the forums and have read every post and email that we’ve received. We have been working on fine tuning the details of which players will remain tracked to your affiliate account after the 60 days. Please see the details and examples below.
Any player whose Real Money balance has reached a minimum of $25 in their first 60 days will also remain tracked to your affiliate account. The player may reach that amount by depositing, winning money in a freeroll or ring games, or a player-to-player transfer.For example, if you decide to host a private freeroll for your players and one of your new players wins $20, and goes on to build this up to $25 or more by playing ring games within their first 60 days, they will remain tracked to your account regardless of when they make their first deposit.
If you have players under your affiliate account who have deposited after 60 days of signup, but have deposited before April 1st, they will remain on your account. Example: Player x signs up Dec 2006 and deposits Oct 2007, this player will remain on your account.
If you have players under your affiliate account who have had at least $25 in their player account before April 1st, they will remain on your account.
Moving forward a player must meet the requirements as stated above within 60 days to remain on your account.
On April 1st, all players that have signed up on or before February 1st who have not made a deposit or had at least $25 in their player account will be removed from your affiliate tracker.
Please let me know if you need clarification on this definition,
Cheers,
Nell
This is the first I heard of this and I am ready to upchuck all over the place! I cannot believe the amount of my players that will be back up for grabs now, this is disgusting. Anyone getting anywhere with these guys on not doing this, they can’t be serious.
For some reason my log in details at PAP are not working and I know there’s a massive thread going on there about this. I’ve been emailing Nell for the last few weeks, I just checked my old shared account with Dean from the forum and there are 500+ players there that have not deposited $25 or more, so we will lose all those players, that’s sickening. I’m guessing they are going to email all the players that have signed up and get them some great promo so they deposit and we lose out. If I could afford to put $25 into 500 players accounts I would but it shouldn’t have to come to that.
I am shocked they are still going through with this, I guess they don’t need us at all.if you decide to host a private freeroll for your players and one of your new players wins $20, and goes on to build this up to $25 or more by playing ring games within their first 60 days, they will remain tracked to your account regardless of when they make their first deposit.
Isn’t that big of them?
You know this is getting old very fast. As soon as a program gets its feet under it they turn around and shit all over us.
ya NOW FT can afford to make these changes and if they lose a few big affs … no worries. In fact it would likely suit them. I’m sure if not already existing that they will add a clause that says you can’t get residuals unless you are promoting them actively… who knows? with what they are proving their attitude may be … unless you are promoting them on top of your first page.
I’m not into poker much anymore. Rakeback chased me out. But I would think that anybody who bases their business on a rev share model … should be especially afraid of FT.
FT has proven that they aren’t really aff-friendly so what’s to keep them at a later date from just tossing in some kind of term that no aff would accept and as such then justify themselves in stealing your players when you stop actively promoting them?
if a program makes a change that is negative to their partners in such an extreme way as FT is proving here… because Ellen is exactly right about all those players then once again become up for grabs …
and newbies please don’t overlook the fact that it took a very much larger number than 500 to achieve 500 signed players.
I finish here stating that if these players were so un-important as FT would have you believe … then why is FT pushing so hard to have them removed from your accounts?
Surely FT would not be selling they need the room it takes to house those players not depositing in the first 60 days on your aff account for their data base because if they are that hard up for money you’d better be getting out now anyway. Because it’s apparent if they don’t have the $5 a month it costs me to rent more than enough space to house the cost of those players not depositing in the first 60 days that they sure aren’t going to be around very much longer.
No, that is not why. Once info is gathered it costs very little to keep it in respect to what that info is worth … and anybody who’s been around a short while knows that. Further is that I guarantee you that those non-depositing players contact information will NOT be tossed away.
It will continue to be stored, only not under any circumstance where the deserving aff gets opportunity to see any income for their hard work on that player.
bb1webs is right, they are totally screwing us in all ways. The problem I have is that with those inactive players, we also have dozens that do play and we make a consistent paycheck with them. Now I have to read the T&C’s very carefully to see if we pull them down, will we lose those players as well.
I strongly urge any webmaster that does not promote them yet NOT TO!
@EllenIng 158288 wrote:
For some reason my log in details at PAP are not working
I may be wrong but when PAP brought in PAW only the PAW log ins stayed and everyone else had to re-register – I may be completely wrong though
I may be wrong but when PAP brought in PAW only the PAW log ins stayed and everyone else had to re-register – I may be completely wrong though
You’re right, I just did that a few minutes ago
This is ridiculous. I started off promoting FT on CPA terms for a month or two and made more money then I have in the last 4-6 months after I switched over to Rev-Share. Thats why after looking over the sorry stats from last month, i thought I would see what others are talking about on CAP.
Should I take a loss on my 250+ PRP players and switch back to CPA?
Also when reading the PRP detail stats, are all of those players active on the list ?
thanks,
Brad
Also when reading the PRP detail stats, are all of those players active on the list ?
There are 2 reports to run “PRP Affiliate Report (exclude inactive players)” and “PRP Affiliate Report”
Right now I still see my 512 players that they said they would remove on April 1st, wondering if there’s a delay with that or if they decided they may lose too many affiliates by doing this and changed their minds, anyone hear anything?
I just ran a player sign up report for last month and I noticed these stats:
Player Id Sign Up Date First Deposit Date
player……….. 09/04/2007 03/01/2008
player……….. 09/25/2007 03/03/2008Since they have signed up back on 09/2007 and just made their first deposit last month, does this mean the 60 day policy is still in affect?
I’m confused now that Neil responded earlier stating that those were the terms. Could someone please explain?
