Get exclusive CAP network offers from top brands

View CAP Offers

MAJOR Terms and Conditions Changes coming at Referback

[bsa_pro_ad_space id=2]
  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 164 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #670217
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I have not promoted RB casinos heavily for a pretty long time now, but nowhere in the threads have I seen anyone post actual figures, unless I mised them.

    I was in conference with a very established webmaster who was kind enough to share some of his retention figures of around 10,000 players gathered over the last half a decade:

    75% of players deposited once.
    25% deposited a second time.

    You are immediately losing 75% of your income and this equates to millions of dollars of rightful earnings across the affiliate network. His estimation was RB would be wrongfully retaining a conservative 8-10+ million per year!

    You fulfilled any obligation by supplying a player in the first place and the establishment holds the obligation to retain that player. If they are not, who is at fault here?

    Now, who is going to rollover and take a 75% paycut graciously?

    #670219
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I still don’t think this is okay. Deaning’s post made a lot of sense even for those that don’t fully understand what the changing of these (not only RB’s) changes in T&C’s are. Surely you can look at it from a business point of view and realize that what these groups are doing is getting the most they can out of us hard working affiliates. We are literally doing all the dirty work while they sit back on their king sized water beds eating grapes….
    Very smart, greedy plan they have in place, but from where I stand which is as you all, an affiliate, I am being robbed of my hard earned money and I don’t like it. I’ve always tried to be neutral and objective about things but when I believe in something- I stick with it. This issue is in no way resolved…

    #670220
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    quote: “while they sit back on their king sized water beds eating grapes….”

    lmaooo, 2 funny, but yes, I agree 110%.

    :shots:

    #670221
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    Engineer wrote:
    I would personally like to see Referback de-listed here, and I’d also like to see a new CAP Blacklist. CAP is a powerful entity, and this power should be used to protect the future of the industry, IMO. If that means putting Referback out of business, so be it. Naturally this isn’t my call, but I think that’s what I would do if I was running the show.

    I hear you Dave and agree 110% . But this should not just apply to Referback who admittedly have reversed many of their retroactive changes, but now have new very poor terms. This should apply to all programs that are in breach, period. Just my 10cents.

    #670223
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    It has to be all programs in breach otherwise it becomes selective ineffectiveness. I am rather cynical these days when it comes to webmasters acting in concert (as opposed to talking) together and if you do nothing else, take individual for action of some kind to preserve your business. If you don’t it will be suicidal for many of you.

    Your greatest weapon is your site and communication, let the public and the programs know your are not a happy little vegemite! players WILL listen to webmasters.

    There are lots of no cost and low cost options, from a simple email newsletter to your players and the programs in question, to cheap traffic carrying a blacklist ad of offending programs (10k of gambling traffic from $2.25/1000) and lots of other things…we are marketers aren’t we? if we don’t know how to get a message out then no one can!

    Offer alternatives if you can…like, hey casino, offer realistic retentive bonuses instead of crap aimed directly at the single instance depositor. ;) :capmiami:

    #670226
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I understand what some of you are saying about de-certifying RB and other programs in breach- BUT how would that help other than the shock of it for a day or two. IMHO, the line of communication should remain open. I like to stay informed and as you also may experience, I don’t always get emails from programs regarding important issues. I need to be able to view an affiliate program’s response and stand on matters, whether it’s good and bad.

    #670240
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    deaning wrote:
    75% of players deposited once.
    25% deposited a second time.

    Wow. If Referback already knows this…. the thought makes me sick.

    Quote:
    You fulfilled any obligation by supplying a player in the first place and the establishment holds the obligation to retain that player. If they are not, who is at fault here?Great point.
    #670244
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    deaning wrote:
    75% of players deposited once.
    25% deposited a second time.

    Engineer wrote:
    Wow. If Referback already knows this…. the thought makes me sick.

    Great point.

    I assume they know the expected gain for all of the changes they are forcing.

    As far as forums remaining open… that’s fine with me, but they will soon no longer want them when most of the posts become small essays on how they cannot be trusted.

    #670255
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    Quote:
    I understand what some of you are saying about de-certifying RB and other programs in breach- BUT how would that help other than the shock of it for a day or two.

    It would help because new affiliates and those who have not yet found this site won’t arrive here and get confused thinking that “Certified” means “trusted” Then doing work on their portals and plastering the “certified” sites all over their portals.

    Quote:
    IMHO, the line of communication should remain open. I like to stay informed and as you also may experience, I don’t always get emails from programs regarding important issues. I need to be able to view an affiliate program’s response and stand on matters, whether it’s good and bad.

    I don’t think that de-certifying them cuts off communication, it just temporarily puts them off the list. I am certain they can still post in here.

    Again – This is a very touchy subject and I think we should stop discussing it here, because ultimately this is Lou’s call and he is gonna get pissed if we start telling him what to do.

    B

    #670256
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Bernie is right. Let’s focus on a unified stance about dealing with these programs, not fingerpointing amongst ourselves. Every one of us must do what is best for us. Most have decided to at least remove banners while some are going further and blacklisting. I support every indivduals rights to do what he/she sees as best, but I think we should all stay focused on what we agree on, and that is these changes and terms are not acceptable, and not tell each other how to run our businesses.

    #670257
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I agree with pokermonger 100%

    #670274
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I totally agree. This is someone elses house and we shouldnt throw stones at them.

    At the same time if you visit your neighbors house and they are drinking piss and trying to pass it off as wine you’ll learn real quick to take everything they present with a grain or two of salt, but that never means that you should you disrespect or attack them in their own home!

    Lets stay focused here, this is not about CAP its about Referback, Fortune Affiliates, Vegas Partner, Partner Logic, & any other program stepping out of time! If we forget that for one moment we will be buried in their crap!

    #670281
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    axl wrote:
    Lets stay focused here, this is not about CAP its about Referback, Fortune Affiliates, Vegas Partner, Partner Logic, & any other program stepping out of time! If we forget that for one moment we will be buried in their crap!

    Well spoken, axl!

    #670303
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Spearmaster,

    That’s it for this week. Next week – the bomb drops (Got2Bet Newsletter, Volume 5, Issue 31)

    Great newsletter. It sure has stirred up the mud in my neck of the woods! And to top it off….. your spelling was top notch as well!!! My Hero!!! :clapper:

    Sue

    #670324
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Hi again,

    well Wayne asked me to wait until the new week before making any changes and I can surely give him that since Its going to take forever and a day to make all the necessary changes that I am facing and I don’t want to have to do it in the first place.

    I imagine he’s fighting hard for us as I would think that anybody at RB would be a little uptight right now as to the future of their jobs.

    If RB sees its casinos hit the blacklist on the web-wide basis that I think we will see happen … anybody not holding a pretty high position in the company is surely at risk of being let go.

    Gotta have affiliates to manage don’t you know?

    I have already went ahead and got the ball rolling by getting up warnings for the other contract-breachers on a couple of my more visited sites and I’ve begun the search for their links to be replaced with a link to my warning page asking players to please choose a different casino.

    we’ll see whether RB Joins that happy list come the first of the week. I know I shouldn’t let them slide on the first time they breached but that was my fault for not standing up then. I won’t make that same mistake this time.

    ……………………

    and Dean, I love ya but …

    75% of players deposited once.
    25% deposited a second time.

    You are immediately losing 75% of your income

    I’m pretty sure that doesn’t figure out to be 75% of income lost. :)

    and further, IMHO most of us make 95% of our money on those second depositers.

    ….. but if its any consolation…. I’d love to have a record as good as yours.

    and the numbers were quite intersting to know if nothing else, but seriously, like if you looked at my stats at brightshare … they used to have all the accounts you ever signed up showing and my page was very long but it was always the same 4 or 5 accounts that made me the majority of my money.

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 164 total)