- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Uhhh…… Steve what are you talking about?
Im confused as to what you are saying? If you get a big player at a casino you dont want to send them more players?
I would have thought that if you find a casino that big players like you would want to send them MORE players?
Perhaps I need more coffee, but Im lost here? :confused:
You will decrease exposure to programs where you see decreasing profits? That sure isn’t any sort of epiphany so much like the professor I am afraid I don’t fully understand your tantrum. I do however agree with you that as a player base grows so should your profit margins, but that should go without saying.
If you are not experiencing that phenomena I would advise you to just practice what you preach and decrease exposure for poor performing casinos. Personally for me if a program does not show steady growth despite an increasing player base I consider the honesty of the program.
I recall one program where I would earn the same “average” earnings month in and month out no matter how much traffic I sent no matter how many new players I referred. Needless to say that program is no longer on any of my sites!
Its not rocket science if you make money increase exposure if you dont make money kick them to the curb. I think I will skip the coffee and go right to the vodka!
I get it, I think.
I think it’s about not putting all your eggs in one basket and promoting a diversity of programs.
I agree with that. But I also send more players to any program that tends good players well and retains them for me.
I also give second chances down the road, my site changes and the type of visitors changes over time, and so do the casinos. What may not have worked for me a couple years ago may work very well today.
My first consideration is whether I trust the place – it’s got to be. Both players and affiliates have to receive good treatment there and deals must be fair and adhered to.
Beyond that it’s performance. While I do increase exposure in tune with performance, I always avoid putting all my eggs, or too many of them, in one basket. Because if you do that, the program has you by the ba!!s.
I think I get it – it’s a math thing.
Let’s say that there’s a 1/10 chance of a big player hitting a jackpot (100,000), 8/10 chance of being a small loser (10,000), and 1/10 chance of being a big loser (30,000). Yes these numbers are inaccurate, but they make the math easy.
You have ten big players and are on a 50% share (again, a math assumption) and everything goes according to probability.
All in one casino:
MGR of 10,000 (110,000 – the big winner) means you earn 5000.
In ten casinos.
One winner – MGR -100,000 = no payout.
Small losers – MGR 5000 each (40,000 total)
big loser – MGR 15,000You earn 27,500.
Hope that makes the point clear.
Home Economics, no? Mathematics, no?
I thought this was a lesson in psychology 101. I think I know what you think I think I know so if you’re thinking don’t be thinking I’m not thinking because because I actually know not just think I know what you think I think you think that I really know what I am thinking – do you follow?
:drunk2:
Did I mention that I am thinking … :cheers:
I follow it… However….
It depends upon your customer base, though..
Since mine is slots, I would rather have as many people as possible playing slots. The determining factor here is not the person, but how lucky the person gets.
I suppose it is different with table games, though, as well as poker since there is an element of skill involved.
kw
bb1webs I understand your points perfectly and agree with all of them …
I already took action to account for this strange anomoly.
Aleph I love ya. by the time I got to your post, I wasn’t to sure about what I’d wrote myself.
Now I’m full of git an’ go again. TY.
****************
Okay, lets say you get a big player and you’re making 10k a month.
then a few players later you land another big player and then a few more. and suddenly you find yourself in a situation where you have enough players that its almost certain that one of them is going to hit a big win every month which counter-acts the income you’re making from the losers.
so you make 40k off 4 losers but give it all back to the one person that won a big jackpot. that SHOULDN’T be a problem one would think… but it is the explanation I get ever increasingly, as to why my bottom line sucks.
This is installing a thought process of “protect my accounts” rather than being incentive to send more players.
here is a great example:
I have 8 players at Ruby Fortune. I have promoted it heavily for more than a year, it occupies many top spots; yet my income there this month is$144
when I look at the details; I see that for instance on one banner tag I have
3 $-428 $-1073 players; income to casino -$428, my share is -$107
(these are pathetic stats in any case, but they were what set me off because this seems to be a problem month in and month out – so I’m using them as example)
so what i’m learning from all this is that I’m better off to stagger my players to different properties rather than send them all to one place where I risk having my income wiped out every month by the one wild card in the otherwise predictable deck.
and what I’m asking is ; is that what they are striving for? Because that is exactly what I am being conditioned to think.
………..
I hasten to add that this also involves the new T&Cs at some places, because the casinos can and are set up to absorb the losses because they have such a large player base, but in my case like the above, I had 3 players and you know that I am in the negative because one of those players hit a big jackpot; thus wiping out the income from the other two.
with the ever-increasingly affiliate-unfriendly T&Cs they are implementing; it becomes even more reason to the affiliate to be thinking about these things; because since they’re cutting at us from every angle possible; we cannot absorb these losses in the same fashion as before; and in the case of some sponsors – well you see this happen month in and month out and you start asking yourself why you bothered sending any more players …
axl wrote:Home Economics, no? Mathematics, no?I thought this was a lesson in psychology 101. I think I know what you think I think I know so if you’re thinking don’t be thinking I’m not thinking because because I actually know not just think I know what you think I think you think that I really know what I am thinking – do you follow?
:drunk2:
Did I mention that I am thinking … :cheers:
You only think you think, but you are not thinking, because the thinking of thoughts is thoughtless thinking. :cheers:
Beyond that, BB1 you are exactly right. And it holds triple true for places that bundle. It is very bad to send too many players there. I found that out the hard way too. It’s not so bad for places that account for casinos individually.Places that bundle, you should only promote one casino, and keep that down to a few players at a time.
You do have the factor that your % increases with the amount you bring the casino, but I find it doesn’t make up at all for the benefits of spreading your earnings out.
And last not least, the way this industry has been behaving, it’s really likely that you will have to dump places from time to time. If you have too much income from there, it hurts.
It’s best to diversify for lots of reasons.
while there are probably more than one reason
it makes me think of the old trick used by many aff programs to get exposed to your player base and once that is done, you see your income drop off drastically because the sponsor figures now that they’ve gotten the best of the bulk out of you in terms of exposure to your surfers; they can now afford to shave you hard and if you decide to drop them;
big deal. they still got the majority of what players from your sites; that they were going to get anyway. and since they’ve shaved them off from having to pay you your share; they are now making nice income off those players while risking the loss of what? not being listed someplace where they’ve already become yesterday’s news?
small price to pay.
but the result of this is what I was saying. if every time I list a sponsor and out of the chute they make decent income and then disappoint, before long I will be making policy that protects me from this anomoly as Aleph put it.
**********
… since they’ve shaved them off …
My drunken rambling was getting at this I just didnt want to be the one to state it.
Also I dont think we should be limiting our player base golly that doesnt make any sense to me at all. If I have 130 active players at casino X I am going to be making a really nice profit a large percentage of the time. Sure if I have just 10 active players I can expect to have a winner wipe me out more often, but thats no reason to limit the players you send thats the perfect reason to send more!
Along those lines if you have 130 active players and your profits are always down because of big winners, THEN you have a problem! THEN I think you think I know we all know whats going on !!!
Now onto another drink :cheers:
yes … I thought you were alluding to “shaving” of revenue too.
However, you cannot assume fraud … and gambling stats can be frustrating things … just consider my experience at big Euro bookie Bet365.They offer Casino, Poker, Games and Sports … have good customer retention and a physical bricks n mortar presence. I trust these guys. But …
For the first 8 months we attracted 47 customers … every month was a winning month. Life was sweet. Turnover between 15K – 25K monthly. How much fun is this ???
:la-de-da:Month 9. We added 5 more customers – had average turnover … but took a major loss that set the program into a $5K hole for us ($15K for them ) !!! Remember that Bet365 rollover negatives.
The offer daily statistics … and this loss came on one day … ironically almost a year ago 28-Aug-2004 when they lost $17K to three clients who staked on a football accumlator I recommended …
:Ohno:
:tongue:Since then we’ve added another 123 active customers in the last 12 months. So the size is much bigger now … but they’ve had 8 winning months and 4 losing months.
Overall – we have around 175 customers there now. Turnover is 100K+ per month. Stability of results has still not been achieved – but it is a profitable relationship.
:la-de-da:So while I agree that a greater size should mean stable results … I’ve yet to see it even with this many customers at a bookie.
Overall the bookie win/loss month count over all my sports books since January 2005 has been 44 wins / 13 losses ..
If anyone is seriously are suggesting fraudulent activity ( and I notice that several users on here seem to start a thread a week with such accusations) ….… then why on earth would you continue to promote such a site as a safe place to gamble ? If you think that are screwing you – then what are they doing to your customers ?
:banger:Simply :
– Post a warning here …
– Drop the advertising for the site …
– Pick up reliable programs …
to get back to my original post; it is conditioning me to start thinking that I’m better off to stagger the casino’s exposure so that the way it works is that I get fewer amount of players spread over a larger number of sponsor programs – and I’m quite certain that is NOT a desired effect the sponsors want to happen.
thus the reason I brought this up. If they want to avoid that scenario, perhaps it is time to go back to drawing board and come out with some kind of plan that doesn’t punish the affiliate for “well I got a couple good players there, if I get anymore I’ll start to see less earnings due to winners wiping out earnings, I better start sending traffic to some other program”
I can’t imagine that is a desired effect.
@bb1webs]to get back to my original post it is conditioning me to start thinking that I’m better off to stagger the casino’s exposure so that the way it works is that I get fewer amount of players spread over a larger number of sponsor programs – and I’m quite certain that is NOT a desired effect the sponsors want to happen. [/QUOTE wrote:
I have been doing this for years. I spread players over a large number of casinos.
In time, with an honest program, you build up a player base anyway and create something solid.
It doesn’t matter to my bank if one casino pays me 10,000 or ten casinos pay me 1000, the bank likes me anyway. And it preserves my freedom, no one program has me under it’s thumb.
If anyone is seriously are suggesting fraudulent activity ( and I notice that several users on here seem to start a thread a week with such accusations) ….
… then why on earth would you continue to promote such a site as a safe place to gamble ? If you think that are screwing you – then what are they doing to your customers ?
That is why I regularly read player boards and note player complaints. I do not promote casinos that have a lot of player complaints. It takes some practice, but eventually you get good at seperating the irate player who lost from the one who got cheated.
Spreading myself thin allows me to act on such information immediately without losing much income.
Hello Dominique
Thanks for the post.
:satisfiedI also think that having an interest in a few properties (casinos / sports books) is far healthier for leveling out the potential variation of monthly totals too.
Usually we have 1-2 great monthly payments, 4-5 average ones, and 1-2 zero balances. The cheque amount at different sources might change … but the total values each month is pretty similar.
And as you say – with 10 properties to promote – we are less beholding to a single operator.
I’m currently at about 10-12 advertisers, and that seems to be working well with me. It enables me to promote the benefits of each proprety (and charge a monthly retainer to each) yet have enough variation to switch things around and keep them fresh.
The final thing I’ve noticed is that different properties appeal to different segments of your visitors … I’ve had bookmakers that have sites that look barely average to me acquire plenty of new clients … and vice-versa.
Good thread guys and girls…
:la-de-da:
