- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 28, 2006 at 5:20 pm #720191
biggygMemberLOU ,Let’s just say i was not expecting to achieve exact performance BUT A REASONABLE PERFORMANCE.Bingo hall has made $7.50 ,1 player deposited 25.00 ,this is far cry from $1000 or $570 in profits. previous owner claims they were making.I was showed over $11,000 in deposits for revenue giants group for one month ,the month of sepetember . If i was making even 10% of what i was showed I would have never said anything or considered any action.These groups still accept usa players too so that is not even factor here.I have to go buy myself a shirt today with ‘stupid’ on it lol NOT.
December 28, 2006 at 6:04 pm #720196
vladcizsolMemberOk I think I am starting to understand what’s going on. After re-reading the entire thread and seeing the thorough cross examination by The Gooner, I think the problem may not be that you were scammed. It may be that you didnt understand exactly what you were buying and therefore had expectations that were not in line with what you actually purchased.
Ok it sounds as if:
1. You purchased the website(s) only, not the affiliate accounts from the previous owners.
2. During due dilligence the seller indicated what their present earnings were. These figures may or may not have been inflated. Either way it doesnt matter because you werent buying the affiliate accounts that were generating the earnings.
3. Based on the figures for earnings that you were presented you decided to purchase the website(s).
4. The transaction took place. The funds were exchanged and you have ownership of the websites, but NOT the affiliate accounts that were generating the earnings you were presented.
5. You now find that the websites are NOT producing the earnings you expected by a wide margin.
Ok if those points are correct, lets examine the “rub”
The problem is the earnings, right? Well the earnings being generated were from affiliate accounts. The seller retained those accounts so they in essence retained the earnings. What you bought was the websites, not the affiliate accounts.
What you most likely didn’t understand was:
1. Without the players there were NO EARNINGS. When the players left with the seller you only had website(s). You were starting from zero. Yes, the sites had search rankings, but no income.
2. It can take YEARS to build up an income from a depositing player base. We have no way of knowing how long it took the previous owner to build up a base of 132 depositing players. It’s also a fact that 90% of your income will come from a few whales. MOST players will produce little income.
You assumed since the previous owners were earning x number of dollars that you would earn a similar amount of money, and you very well may, eventually, but its not going to be in the short term. You have to build up a player base from scratch and thats going to take time.
I dont believe the previous owners really explained the nature of the sale well and allowed you to make assumptions which were not correct. They SHOULD have informed you that you were basically just buying websites with search rankings and X number of visitors. They should NOT have made reference to their earnings with the site as it was totally Irrelevant and did mislead you.
In that respect they are guilty of less then above board dealings.December 28, 2006 at 6:25 pm #720197Anonymous
InactiveThats why it amazes me that some sellers selling sites and say (as an example) $5000 monthly income and price of site $40,000 – Only 8 months rev, what a good deal……. etc etc
But without affiliate accounts the true figure could be anything from $0 to $5000 per month from New real money players which means your not buying the site for 8 months rev but prob anything from 8 to 50 months rev.
Im not saying this happened to you “casinobonusguy” , just that i see alot of sellers asking way too much money for sites when affiliate accounts are not included.
December 28, 2006 at 7:26 pm #720202Anonymous
InactiveIf you are buying a site without accounts, in essence you are buying traffic.
If you are sure of where the traffic came from and that you can maintain the level of traffic, you can expect to eventually build up new accounts with this traffic.
As the Professor points out, it takes time to build up a player base. The price of a site without accounts is based on traffic numbers as I see it, and knowing exactly what type traffic you are buying is crucial. The previous income is a tool to help ascertain that, along with the source i.e. SE visitors, bought links etc etc.
The age of the site matters a lot because it will be an advantage in generating SE traffic.
Everyone seems to have their own formula as to how to value a site, this is mine for a site without accounts.
As far as the seller goes, be aware that programs with predatory clauses, such as confiscating earnings if you don’t deliver x players per period, will make holding on to accounts futile.
December 28, 2006 at 8:08 pm #720206
biggygMemberwell the serps and the doctored stats for revenue giants made it look like a good deal. why wouldnt i get the same new sign ups if the Serps didnt change?In any case I am glad we had this conversation ,It helped me decide on what to do with the situation .I also read my own emails to the seller.
Here is my question to her , Traffic is not always true indication of income and I used my own website as example:
MY Q:what sort of new money is it creating at this time?I have a website with over 19000 visitors but i get maybe 3 new sign ups a week.
The answer : The ones you see on the home page are the best converters
I average 1000 a month with bingohall alone.
This site was established in 2000 and has a very good reputation for promoting only honest sites. I have personally played at all the sites I promote I do this to test customer service, ease of with drawal ease of deposit bonus requirements etc. so it is safe to say if you leave it the way it is and just replace your own tags where mine will be removed you can average 1500 a month in income to start. For the month of sept I made 2150 from revenue giants alone. the only change I would make is to replace some of the banners from us to the ones that show pounds euros etc.
For legal reasons my lawyer says not to publish the website or sellers name but if you want to send me a PM I will tell you the site , the two sites that are still up for sale now and who the seller is.
On a positive note I bought two nice sites from AmCAN back in november and got my money back already and showing a profit for december.I dont know how to play poker so it has been tough trying to promote a poker site.That’s on my things to do list , buy a poker for dummies book unless one of you guys want to teach me and take my money in the process:kissass:
December 28, 2006 at 9:32 pm #720210Anonymous
InactiveWhen you look at an account under these circumstances, you can only look at the revenue from new depositing players for each month. Obviously you will have no existing players contributing.
Is that what you did? Was the number of new depositors altered?
December 28, 2006 at 9:51 pm #720214
biggygMemberYes Dominique the New Depositors each month was altered .New depositors probably should have been 12 not 132.I knew i was not going to get her past income so all my questions i gave her was related to what i can expect in new accounts each month starting from Zero.As i posted earlier i have one site that gets 19,000 visitors a month from banners on ezboards yet i only get about 3 new players a week.Alot of the traffic is looking for free money.
December 28, 2006 at 11:18 pm #720218Anonymous
InactiveThat’s why you have to analyse the traffic when you buy a site like that.
December 29, 2006 at 1:37 am #720228Anonymous
Inactivegood discussion
-
AuthorPosts