- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Professor wrote:2. We generally consider minimum player requirements predatory if they are based on monthly requirements. One player over six months is NOT excessive and anyone making even a modest effort should have no problem acheiving that. Remember affiliate marketing is a partnership between you and the program. If you worked anywhere else and didnt show up for work for six months you would have been sacked in short order.
While I agree that one player in 6 months is not unreasonable, personally, if I’m going to send a player to a casino under a “rev share” option and that player continues to make money for them beyond 6 months, even if I’m retired and living in Outer Mongolia, I would still want to be compensated while that player continues to provide an income.
Conversely, if the terms clearly state “1 player every 6 months to continue receiving payments”, as here, then it’s not deceptive. Just not appealing.
Cheers
Simmo!
Simmo! wrote:While I agree that one player in 6 months is not unreasonable, personally, if I’m going to send a player to a casino under a “rev share” option and that player continues to make money for them beyond 6 months, even if I’m retired and living in Outer Mongolia, I would still want to be compensated while that player continues to provide an income.Conversely, if the terms clearly state “1 player every 6 months to continue receiving payments”, as here, then it’s not deceptive. Just not appealing.
Cheers
Simmo!
Yep. And there are programs where this is not an issue.
Dominique wrote:Yep. And there are programs where this is not an issue.Exactly. So it makes more sense to promote those if they are good at treating their players right.
Simmo! wrote:Exactly. So it makes more sense to promote those if they are good at treating their players right.My point exactly. The fact that they have it in their terms cannot be used to say that they are horrible people. This is what they chose and have placed it clearly for all to read. Your choice whether to promote them or not.
ensign_lee wrote:IF ANY MODIFICATION IS UNACCEPTABLE TO YOU, YOUR ONLY RECOURSE IS TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT. YOUR CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAM FOLLOWING OUR POSTING OF A CHANGE NOTICE OR NEW AGREEMENT ON OUR SITE WILL CONSTITUTE BINDING ACCEPTANCE OF THE CHANGE.The clause at glance looks like standard, but……they are able to post modifications only in their site.
Of course no one affiliate may expend a cup of hours all the months searching for changes in the terms of conditions of each program.
Maybe a website with staff but that is not the rule in this business.
I find the statement like an abuse against the basic affiliates like me.At least the clause should include in the merchant duties an email notification.
I’ve been surprisingly successful at getting some clauses in the T&Cs changed. Nick777 sometimes a simple post or email does work. I think often it is a case of copying some-one elses terms and not doing a good enough job of reading them and changing parts. Perhaps they are afraid of the lawyer-speak. It’s actually a bit scary that sometimes they don’t even appear to know that things are in there. On a couple of occasions the search and replace hasn’t been 100% applied and it’s so obvious they copied it. Now, if only they had all copied from a more affiliate friendly set then it would have been ideal.
My parting statement to programs that won’t change terms that I find unacceptable is to point out that fortunately there are a lot of programs around and there are a lot of affiliates as well, so both parties are probably better off moving on to other more value added tasks.
LadyHoldem wrote:Nope, not for me, thank you very much.Whether I promote actively or tell you later I don’t like that new change in rules and you can go to hell, you’re still profiting off of my prior referrals, and therefore I still intend to profit as well.
~LadyH
See. Now THAT’S what I was talking about. If I want to hang it up one day or I decide to leave the program because I don’t like how the affiliate agreement changed, I still want the revenue for th work I ALREADY did. But the way this is worded for clause 1 is that “if you don’t like it, fine. Leave. But we get to keep the players you already referred us and we don’t have to pay you anymore since you left.” and Clause 2 seems to me to say “if you don’t keep working for us FOREVER, you won’t get paid for your previous work.”
And perhaps I phrased the original question wrong.
“Would these terms be enough to deter you from signing up for a program?” would probably be a better question.
villa10 wrote:ensign_lee wrote:IF ANY MODIFICATION IS UNACCEPTABLE TO YOU, YOUR ONLY RECOURSE IS TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT. YOUR CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAM FOLLOWING OUR POSTING OF A CHANGE NOTICE OR NEW AGREEMENT ON OUR SITE WILL CONSTITUTE BINDING ACCEPTANCE OF THE CHANGE.I don’t know who that is, but if it’s a CAP program and they actually tried to pull that they would catch hellfire from me.
Been there, done that, these are not empty words.
