Casino Coins adds High Roller Policy

[kwblue]

Casino Coins is the next in line to add a high-roller policy. Their term came into effect on 6-6-09 and is retroactive to all players in your existing affiliate account.

The difference with the Casino Coins term is that your first month's earnings will NOT be wiped out. The player is truly fenced from the start.

Please see the full terms alert as any retroactive change is something ALL affiliates need to worry about / be wary of:

Casino Coins Retroactive High Roller Policy

[SabrinaCoins]

If anyone has any questions, please do not hesitate to drop me a PM.

Cheers!

[Jinnia]

Changes within any Terms and Conditions, added Policies, etc., should NOT include existing affiliates!!

Pre-existing affiliates agreed upon the T's and C's, etc. at the time they
registered to become one.

It's wrong no matter how you look at it!!

[casinobonusguy]

Casino Coins has been very good to us so I will still continue to work with them.I would choose option b , they are still paying commisison on the rest of the players and most players will play back winnings over time.

[TheCPA]

Please see the full terms alert as any retroactive change is something ALL affiliates need to worry about / be wary of:

Absolutely. Unfortunately, it seems that several programs feel it's OK to change their agreements with affiliates at will these days.

It also seems that this practice is becoming increasingly popular post UIEGA.
There was a time, "Pre UIEGA", when this would have never been considered by a program for a second, and affiliates would have revolted in masses which would have been suicide for the program trying to change terms retroactively.

This is a semi desparate cost cutting measure, IMO, which should not be accepted, and should be considered HIGHLY PREDATORY,.....because it is.

Programs that change terms retroactively should be removed from ANY credible certifications, or sites that offer seals or certifications.

It is perfectly OK for any program to make changes going forward for new affiliate sign ups.
It's predatory to inflict negative changes to the exsiting ones.

To accept these kinds of changes means you will accept lies at every program you have signed up at. Simple as that.

The Truth is the Truth. A Lie is a Lie, and there just ain't much space in between them.

Very sad to see this new direction some programs are taking.

[Payn66]

Hi all,

It's Nick Yap... Sabrina generally handles GPWA postings; however, I felt it was necessary to post on this topic.

In reference to Jinnie and TheCPA's posts, if we were to hold existing affiliates to the exact T&C's at the time in which they signed up, then alot of you, with more programs than just Casino Coins, would go back to having minimum player activity clauses as well as negative carryover! You seem to be all in favour of T&C changes when they are of benefit to you, but when a program see's the need for a change you deem it as predatory or a breach of contract? This business is a 2 way street and must be fair for both parties, sometimes that requires both to bend to make things work.

The new policy that has been adopted is NOT predatory by any means and if you would like to discuss the term in more detail you can email me as I am not very active here (nyap at coinsaffiliates dot com). Please read the term before considering this term predatory.

Before adding this term, I went to AffiliateGuardDog to discuss it, explained the reasoning behind it and worked with him and his team to figure out a way to make it acceptable.

Andy and I are still in contact as we speak to refine this term to ensure it is "Affiliate Friendly."

Cheers,
Nick Yap
Casino Coins
Affiliate Program Manager

[TheCPA]

Hey Nick!
Great post, and it shows just how completely insensitive, unaware, and unknowledgeable your are as to what matters to affiliates,.... and how little respect you have for the agreements/contracts, programs make with affiliates to spend THEIR hard earned affiliate income to market YOUR casinos!!

Whatever you're smokin,...please send a little to your affiliates to ease the pain!

Maybe it will help them see the screw job thru the same foggy lenses you are wearing and see thru!
Screw you!

Before adding this term, I went to AffiliateGuardDog to discuss it, explained the reasoning behind it and worked with him and his team to figure out a way to make it acceptable.

There is absolutely no way to justify retroactive changes. PERIOD!!!! I stand by that 100% and hope that the leaders in this affiliate community will stand tall beside me on this CLEAR issue!!!!

I don't care who you talked to, or who you paid to certify you. If Andy/Affiliate Guard Dog doesn't see a retroactive Terms change as completely predatory, then he should not be trusted either.

Come on GPWA/APCW/Affiliate Guard Dog. ETC.!!!
DO SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!
These RETROACTIVE terms change bullshit are totally out of control!
Stand up and do the right thing!
You guys are supposed to be affiliate leaders! Do your job!

[TheCPA]

Andy and I are still in contact as we speak to refine this term to ensure it is "Affiliate Friendly."

PS: The only way this can be ethical or "AFFILIATE FRIENDLY" is if you all make the new terms effective going forward for new affiliates, and not retroactive to all the folks that have supported you for years.
This isn't rocket science.
Keep your word, and stay TRUE to the commitments you made to the affiliates that have supported you over the years.

Sounds like you and Andy need to do a little more refining, IMO!

It's just ridiculous and unethical that any program would do this in the first place, IMO.

[matted]

I have a question....

I've been an affiliate at casino coins for 8 years or so... Admittedly not all that active, especially recently as the program is not what it was 5+ years ago...

Why didn't I see an email or some notification that the T&C changed?

In the bigger picture - affiliates should always have the option to not accept the new T&C and be paid in accordance with the most recently accepted T&C for players obtained before the change went into effect. Or offer a fair buyout of the affiliate account. I've yet to see a casino offer anything like this.

[TheCPA]

Matt, they are not looking to be fair or spend money on buyouts when they inflict a negative change on affiliates.

They are in a cost cutting mode, ......raise the the bottom line at the expense of affiliates when they make a negative retroactive terms change.

As I mentioned earlier, it is apparent that some places are experiencing cash problems post UIEGA, so they are trying to boost their bottom line, or in some cases just stay AFLOAT by CLIPPING AFFILIATES wherever they can just to stay in business.
Our INDUSTRY LEADERS should be addressing this growing problem,....and as far as I tell,...they aren't!

Let's see AGD, GPWA, GIA, and the APCW actually do something to work for the affiliates on this increasingly disturbing problem of "RETROACTIVE TERMS CHANGES"!

Come on guys! Where are you when we REALLY need you!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is becoming a HUGE problem!!

[pgaming]

Our INDUSTRY LEADERS should be addressing this growing problem,....and as far as I tell,...they aren't!

Let's see AGD, GPWA, GIA, and the APCW actually do something to work for the affiliates on this increasingly disturbing problem of "RETROACTIVE TERMS CHANGES"!

Not sure CPA but I have hunch as to why this may be coming a common occurrence. Dare not speculate but with no concrete answers one is left forming hypothesis's. I wonder if a few big shot affiliates are brokering deals. Could be just one or a few who knows? The feeling I get anyway. Because this is not making any sense and seems as though there is pattern developing.

Just a thought I do not support this program either. If I do they are gone from my real estate.

greek39

[Jinnia]

Hi all,

It's Nick Yap... Sabrina generally handles GPWA postings; however, I felt it was necessary to post on this topic.

In reference to JinniA and TheCPA's posts, if we were to hold existing affiliates to the exact T&C's at the time in which they signed up, then alot of you, with more programs than just Casino Coins, would go back to having minimum player activity clauses as well as negative carryover! You seem to be all in favour of T&C changes when they are of benefit to you, but when a program see's the need for a change you deem it as predatory or a breach of contract? This business is a 2 way street and must be fair for both parties, sometimes that requires both to bend to make things work.

I'll check and see if that includes me.

All I will say for now is, I agree with CPA 100%!!!

[kwblue]

I'm not going to go back and quote folks since it will just take too long at this point. I do have to say a few things, though:


1. NOBODY pays for certification at AGD. To say otherwise is really offensive to me, personally, since I built AGD for affiliates and so far am making negative revenue from it.

2. We ARE working with Nick and we DO understand the issues here.

3. There are plenty of others RIGHT NOW that we are working with as well with retroactive terms. There is a lot going on and it isn't just Coins. It's:

• Roxy Affiliates
• Playshare Affiliates
• Casino Coins

To name a few.


Give me some time, please, and no need to disparage me or AGD. It is difficult enough spending ALL my time away from my sites..... watching my income dwindle because of it... and then getting slammed for trying.

[JohnV]

Lots of interesting posts here. I just had a quick look at Casino Coins T&C and notice the following:

If you wish to participate in our Webmaster program as a Casino Coins Affiliate, please indicate your agreement to do so by clicking the "I Agree" button below. By doing so, these Terms and Conditions become a legally binding agreement (the “Agreement”) between you and us. These Terms and Conditions may be amended from time to time, and when we post the amended Terms and Conditions on our website, you are deemed to have notice of, and to agree to, the amended Terms and Conditions as part of your Agreement with us.

16.8 Modifications may include, for example, changes in the scope of available referral fees, fee schedules, payment procedures and referral program rules. 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 WEBSITE WILL CONSTITUTE BINDING ACCEPTANCE BY YOU OF THE CHANGE.

Of course it looks like the T&C were amended on 1 July so I have no idea what they were like before hand, but as far as I know these are pretty standard bolier plate clauses that I would imagine are common in substance in the majority of T&C's. Essentially, the creator of the T&C's reserves the right to amend the T&C's from time to time and such amendments are deemed accepted.

Now clearly the business model of an affiliate is that you/we provide the leg work promoting the respective brands and as such expect to be remunerated over the course of the life of the player (assuming a rev share basis).

Then again I'm sure it's sometimes necessary for programs to change their T&C's from time to time for business reasons or otherwise. Now, if the changes are really bad towards existing affiliates then no doubt they will get slammed and this may reduce the number of potential new affiliates willing to work with their program.

But in joining the program, you/me accepted the T&C and therefore accepted the risk that the T&C's might change, potentially against you. This is why it is prudent to be carefuly who you work with, who you think won't screw you down the road, etc.

I can only think the idea of multiple T&C's with wach affiliate being bound by the T&C's that were listed at the time of signup/agreement would be a nightmare to administer for a program back end. Imagine how many different rates, carry over, fencing, etc. issues there would be.

The idea of a buy-out as an option on the change of T&C is an interesting one, but I doubt it would find any popularity amongst programs and until one offers it there is probably no incentive for anyone else to either. How would such a buy-out be valued, etc?

Just some thoughts.

John

Edit:

Yep, just took a look at Bodog's affiliate program as an example as I regularly hear how well they treat affiliates, but again the same clause is present in their T&C.

[TheCPA]

Almost all of them have clauses similar to that.

My position, as well as many others, is that those types of clauses do in fact give them the right to make changes, but only going forward, not retroactively. That is the problem with all this.

If a program wants to change going forward, even for existing affiliates, then they should give 30 days notice, and be prepared to separate the existing player base out, and honor the terms those players were aquired under. (Grand Prive comes to mind. Sure, they had the right to discontinue their aff program going forward, but they should have honored payment on the players aquired to that point.}
Any players aquired after a 30 day notice would be subject to the new terms.
If the affiliate chooses to drop the program due to a negative terms change then that's their choice.

Also, The affiliate should not suffer any kind of penalty if they do drop a program that makes an arbitrary adverse change in their terms.

That's the way all of these programs should be implememnting changes if they need to make changes.

Folks, it isn't so much about this one Program, or even this particular terms change.
The overwhelming concern should be that there is a serious pattern of this developing where a few programs are changing terms at will and retroactively.

If they all dropped their commission rates to 5% would that be OK???
Of course not.

Nobody is trying to be unreasonable on the affiliate end, IMO.
We all have to make adjustments from time to time, and whatever the economic environment is at a given time certainly forces us all to make changes.

At the same time we all have to honor the agreements made on the players already aquired, and make those needed changes going forward, not retroactively.

That's fair to both sides as it should be.
Retoactive changes are not in the spirit of a healthy Affiliate/Program partnership, and are clearly predatory on the affiliate community. There is no other way to look at it.

[kwblue]

TheCPA is correct in that the term mentioned above by JohnV can only be legal moving forward.

Essentially, the creator of the T&C's reserves the right to amend the T&C's from time to time and such amendments are deemed accepted.

The funny thing about that statement is that programs 'feel' that they can do whatever they want due to the clause. They really need a consultation with their attorneys. Seriously..... it's called breach of contract. Contact an attorney. A signed contract is a signed contract is a signed contract is a....... what? yep... signed contract

Retroactive clauses where affiliates are being, in effect, stolen from or taken advantage of are the problem and programs who 'feel' they can make changes that will affect affiliate income are jeopardizing not only their affiliate base, but also their legal standing.

[JohnV]

I agree the term is rather open ended in that it expressly makes no reference to those terms applied to players acquired/referred going forward or to all players from that date. And, I agree that the lesser programs may use it to do whatever they want.

kwblue - out of interest, putting aside what a program should do have you actually received legal advice to effect of a change of T&C applying retroactively to players already acquired in this context? Maybe if you have it could be used in these situations.

I am certainly not defending such programs and my post was only a discussion of some of the issues surrounding the use and application of these type of terms.

[bonustreak]

Dare not speculate but with no concrete answers one is left forming hypothesis's. I wonder if a few big shot affiliates are brokering deals.

That is ridiculous to even speculate on! I am part of the certification team at AGD and let me tell you this last week has been hell on all of us over there, we have several programs tossing in these changes all at the same time! It gets very confusing, it is time consuming and all of us have a business to run as well. We do this on a volunteer basis for the affiliate community and have no monetary benefits and to read something like that is just insulting.

[pgaming]

Woe, woe slow down a bit bonustreak. My comments were not directed at AGD rather to explore for explanations why this may be happening.

The what if question? Like Grand Prive closing their doors to affiliates, yeah right. Or out no where VA reneging on their contractual agreements. It just doesn't make sense and when that happens something fishy is usually going on.

So remember this thread and what was posted on the matter. Maybe a month, year, we just may be shocked to learn the truth.

read something like that is just insulting.

Sorry you viewed it as insulting. Perception is a funny thing you know, I too find it insulting to question my loyalties towards AGD. But no problem carry on.


greek39

[pgaming]

double post