888 / Uffiliates Add Predatory Terms

[Integrity]

Hello Miko,

I am happy to see you're becoming pro-active in here, and that you have a good attitude about things. For the past year and a half, however, I have gone on and on about what many felt were serious short comings with the 888 affiliate program on video after video.

In all that time, there has never been any response from 888 to APCW. There has never been any attempt to work things out with us. There has never been the slightest indication that anyone at 888 or Uffiliates cared in the least what we were saying. Why was that? Why the interest now?

The point is that it's really great you're here at this time, but you have some serious work cut out for you. The reality is that affiliates will take some convincing at this point. Talk is cheap (or non-existant in some cases) and actions must demonstrate sincerity... over the long term.

[casinobonusguy]

Miko is my affiliate manager and I pointed him to this post . We met in person in Niagara Falls last year and he is really good at working with us while we try to fit their brands into our websites.I have to say that I rank him in my top 5 in terms of communication and commitment to helping me build a successful relationship with their brands.

Judy

[Uffiliates]

The point is that it's really great you're here at this time, but you have some serious work cut out for you. The reality is that affiliates will take some convincing at this point. Talk is cheap (or non-existant in some cases) and actions must demonstrate sincerity... over the long term.

You are right and that is fair enough.
Talking is nice but it's a whole different thing to put your money where your mouth is. We'll have to see together if Uffiliates can live up to it.
It's not going to be easy nor fast as there are many years of history here and I'll apriciate everyone's help on it as I see this a dual work...


My team and I are here to make things better
Good Luck to all of us

[lots0]

I don't think it is possible for 888 to 'make up' for years and years flat out stealing and spamming from affiliates with one or two posts in a forum.

Have the 888 T&C's been changed?

Have 888 stopped their in house Blackhat SEO program?

A big thanks to you for 'helping' out Dom, but what about all the other Webmasters that are having to deal with your affiliates blackhat crap? When are you gonna help them?

I know it's in style now to do one very public act of retribution and then have one or two nicey nice posts on a forum and then years and years of blackhat/spamming/shady marketing are just supposed to be forgotten in the name of making a few bucks... But I am afraid I am not really into that style...

How about some action instead of words?

When are we gonna see a reduction in the amount of blackhat activities and spamming associated with 888 and their 'special' affiliates and white labels like lucky ace?

to the person that asked why now... Like I said before, the UGIEA is going away soon and 888 wants back into the USA...

[MichaelCorfman]

A big thanks to you for 'helping' out Dom, but what about all the other Webmasters that are having to deal with your affiliates blackhat crap? When are you gonna help them?

I know it's in style now to do one very public act of retribution and then have one or two nicey nice posts on a forum and then years and years of blackhat/spamming/shady marketing are just supposed to be forgotten in the name of making a few bucks... But I am afraid I am not really into that style...

The purpose of my "nicey nice post" was to encourage webmasters to report instances and details where any 888 affiliates are engaged in content theft and blackhat SEO. There is a perception among many people that it is not worth reporting instances because they will not be acted upon. We now have an 888 representative who has publicly stated they will follow-up on such reports. I say we should be reporting instances in as many specific and substantiated posts as we can and monitoring the response. So let's report in detail what what we know about that needs to be done to help all of the other webmasters.

Michael

[pgaming]

So let's report in detail what what we know about that needs to be done to help all of the other webmasters.

Possible to start this discussion on a new thread we are going to need it. Besides the intent of this thread was to inform courtesy of AGD.

JMO

greek39

[MichaelCorfman]

Possible to start this discussion on a new thread we are going to need it. Besides the intent of this thread was to inform courtesy of AGD.

Yes, absolutely that is the correct approach. Please make each such report a new post in the Uffiliates forum.

Thanks,

Michael

[pgaming]

Sorry again Michael would it be possible for lotso or non-private members to take part.

If 888 is willing participate open discussions would be very beneficial to all parties.

greek39

[CityGuard]

Sorry again Michael would it be possible for lotso or non-private members to take part.

If 888 is willing participate open discussions would be very beneficial to all parties.

greek39

A few months ago we created public program-specific areas to provide a more accessibe place for discussing individual programs prior to becoming a private member. The private program areas were moved to be subsections of the public ones.

I think it would be appropriate for these discussions to be in the public Uffiliates forum area rather than the subsection that is restricted to private members.

[pgaming]

Thanks City was unsure if that was the case.

greek39

[CasinoCityRebecca]

Hi everyone,

I realize that there are many strong opinions out there, but I do want to say one thing: throughout my 4+ years at Casino City, my main points of contact at 888.com have been incredibly responsive and helpful. First Jonathan and Sharon, then Mark S., and now I'm working with Miko on the GPWA side of the business.

I did not have very much involvement with the GPWA side of our biz until just recently, but so far, Miko has been a complete pleasure and has done nothing but emphasize that he wants to work with GPWA, AGD, Casinomeister, etc, to bring U-ffiliates to the right place. He and I are in constant touch and I cannot imagine that this will change.

Lets see how it goes over time- I'm very hopeful and pretty positive that we're headed in the right direction here.

[lots0]

Thanks greek for the inclusion...

But.. the way I see it, this discussion here at gwpa about 888 is heading the wrong way and I'm opting out of this discussion.

I'm not into forgiving these crooks at 888 nor am I into giving them more chances to steal from honest (if clueless) webmasters.

BTW - I don't find the stealing and blackhat SEO from 888 as 'kid stuff' or easily forgiven...

All I got to say is... These crooks at 888 DON'T have enough money to make it ALLLL Better... At least with me.

[Integrity]

...I'm opting out of this discussion.

Yea, me too...

Seems kinda obvious this is now a GPWA/Uffiliates issue.

[MichaelCorfman]

I'm not into forgiving these crooks at 888 nor am I into giving them more chances to steal from honest (if clueless) webmasters.

BTW - I don't find the stealing and blackhat SEO from 888 as 'kid stuff' or easily forgiven...

All I got to say is... These crooks at 888 DON'T have enough money to make it ALLLL Better... At least with me.

I think whether or not to forgive the past is an individual decision. I, for one, can respect and support a position that past issues are a legitimate reason to make a decision that you do not want to support or otherwise endorse a program today. There is virtue in the perspective that the past should not be too easily forgotten.

However, I would hope that view would not get in the way of helping to identify current issues so that any current victims can have their issues addressed. We should have a shared interest here in helping to make unethical business practices bad for those who engage in such business. So, please, if you are aware of such instances on the part of anyone in this industry, please provide the details that the rest of us can use to help put those practices to an end, or at least so the rest of us can put a dent in the pocket of those who try to profit from such an approach.

Michael

[lots0]

Michael,
I guess I don't understand.

Are you saying that 888's predatory affiliate terms and their past shady actions toward Webmasters are not enough reason to blacklist 888 and keep them on the Blacklist?

How about 888 does something toward making it better... Like how about they start dropping their predatory affiliate terms???

It seems that 888 making ANY positive actions at toward Webmasters is out of the question...

But we webmasters that have been ripped off, trashed in the SERP and treated like 3rd class citizens by 888 are supposed to just forget and forgive... Without 888 taking a SINGLE step to correct a SINGLE problem...

Because, if that is what your saying Michael.... I want some of what your smoking...

I can tell you one thing, I don't want and I won't accept... a single dirty cent from 888... Till 888 changes their their T&C's... How about you Michael?

Michael, want to join me (and a bunch of other webmasters) in a public pledge that none of our associated companies will take a dollar from 888 till they get rid of their predatory affiliate terms and start acting like an honest company toward affiliates? I mean you are an affiliate advocate... aren't you?

But then you would have to join the rest of us concerned webmasters and stop advertising and promoting 888 or at least move them off of the top spot on your site...

[MichaelCorfman]

Are you saying that 888's predatory affiliate terms and their past shady actions toward Webmasters are not enough reason to blacklist 888 and keep them on the Blacklist?

How about 888 does something toward making it better... Like how about they start dropping their predatory affiliate terms???

It seems that 888 making ANY positive actions at toward Webmasters is out of the question...

I can tell you one thing, I don't want and I won't accept... a single dirty cent from 888... Till 888 changes their their T&C's... How about you Michael?

Michael, want to join me (and a bunch of other webmasters) in a public pledge that none of our associated companies will take a dollar from 888 till they get rid of their predatory affiliate terms and start acting like an honest company toward affiliates? I mean you are an affiliate advocate... aren't you?

But then you would have to join the rest of us concerned webmasters and stop advertising and promoting 888 or at least move them off of the top spot on your site...

I agree that the documented affiliate terms are an issue. I've talked to them about this, and I have put them in touch with AGD and told them they need to understand the perspective they will hear from AGD and adjust their terms appropriately and that a creative way needs to be found to deal with the business issues they are trying to address in a way that does not also read as predatory affiliate terms.

Based on my discussions with them on this issue, let me give an example of the type fraudulent situation that can arise with affiliate programs. Suppose a couple players, who are not in the business of being affiliates, each establish affiliate accounts, and then sign up under each other's affiliate accounts. They can then engage in collusion against the gaming site depending on how they structure wagers. Because of this type of situation, they want to have terms and conditions that can be used in such situations to remove pretend affiliates from their ranks.

Personally, I believe that having a way to remove such players from the ranks of affiliates is reasonable. So the challenge is how to craft terms and conditions that enable that to be done without also having those terms and conditions read a predatory terms and conditions for smaller webmasters. I think that challenge can be solved, and my personal goal is to help find a way to solve the business issue (which I view as a legitimate one) without the use of terms that also enable abusive behavior with respect to smaller webmasters. Right now my view is that 888 takes this matter seriously (or at least that the individuals there I am talking with do).

If it became clear to me that was not the case, then I'd certainly feel that Casino City could not ignore that situation. In terms of positions on the Casino City website, position decisions are not based on revenue from affiliate relationships. They are based 100% on data from third-party web traffic sources about the popularity of websites. I'm adamant about keeping those rankings pure, and not having them based on sales relationships, which, as you might imagine, is a somewhat controversial position internally with those involved in the sales process.

Michael

[lots0]

Michael you should have been a politician.

The art of not answering a direct question and redirecting the issue, is difficult to pull off for most folks... but you do it very well...

[kwblue]

I am pouring over their T&C's 'as we speak' and will be chatting with the folks at 888 soon.

I'd like to use their newfound interest in affiliates to help foster the kind of change that has been sorely needed at 888 for some time. If we can help that out in any way by the amendment/updating of terms, we will certainly do our part.

[joeyl]

Based on my discussions with them on this issue, let me give an example of the type fraudulent situation that can arise with affiliate programs.

Suppose a couple players, who are not in the business of being affiliates, each establish affiliate accounts, and then sign up under each other's affiliate accounts. They can then engage in collusion against the gaming site depending on how they structure wagers.

Because of this type of situation, they want to have terms and conditions that can be used in such situations to remove pretend affiliates from their ranks.

Personally, I believe that having a way to remove such players from the ranks of affiliates is reasonable. So the challenge is how to craft terms and conditions that enable that to be done without also having those terms and conditions read a predatory terms and conditions for smaller webmasters.

I trust the shareholders would be against closing down the holes in the sign up process that exist, in exchange for extroadinary terms.

1) I can decide whether a webmaster has a legitimate website quite quickly. 20 minutes tops.

2) I can give specific examples of unwanted nefarious activity to the new affiliate partner.

3) I can inform them all clicks from that webmaster's domains that have not been approved, will not be recorded, so don't open up new sites without saying so, and don't plaster the bonus forums with your aff link.

I am trying to take this seriously but it isn't easy. This is 888 Michael. A big firm. Are we really to trawl the net and prove this and that webmaster are up to no good? This is an unacceptable solution i'm afraid.

Cheers.

[MichaelCorfman]

2) I can give specific examples of unwanted nefarious activity to the new affiliate partner.

3) I can inform them all clicks from that webmaster's domains that have not been approved, will not be recorded, so don't open up new sites without saying so, and don't plaster the bonus forums with your aff link.

I am trying to take this seriously but it isn't easy. This is 888 Michael. A big firm. Are we really to trawl the net and prove this and that webmaster are up to no good? This is an unacceptable solution i'm afraid.

I think we would all welcome specific examples of 2) above, and not necessarily related specifically to 888. My guess is that webmasters acting improperly probably have a number of affiliate relationships and they should all be shut down. I believe that it does make sense for GPWA to help organize members to identify sites engaged in unethical practices, and to create an infrastructure where there is positive visibility for affiliate programs that respond promptly to such situations and negative visibility for those that don't. This sort of project feels like it is at the core of one of the things the GPWA should be about - working together to help reduce the incentive to be an unethical webmaster. We all benefit from that. And by all, I mean players, ethical webmasters, and ethical operators.

Michael