Ladbrokes Affiliates - Terms and Conditions - Six Month Rule

[pdjoe]

I can't say your wrong Paul,

It has been there forever as far as I know. I just hate to see them enforce it. It's there option in any case. Times are hard right now and to drive affilates away is a mistake is all.

I don't work with them at this time but feel bad for the smaller affiliates that don't meet the requirements.

[universal4]

Small affiliate = Unable to sustain one depositing player in SIX months?
It's hardly an onerous demand.

I have to disagree STRONGLY with that point.

A small affiliate can easily be defined as any webmaster that happens to put up a disply ad or text link promoting a casino, poker room or book on any website they have (no matter what the theme) in hopes that they might earn a couple of bucks promoting a property they may happen to even visit and play at themselves. And every single eye ball that web page has is more branding for that property.

That affiliate may not have much traffic and in fact they might only get an occassional player, maybe even only one a year.

And trust me, there are thousands, and in reality potentially tens of thousands of those very same type of affiliates around the world.

Why shouldn't that affiliate be paid if they generate that player?

Any affiliate program that takes on the "elitist" attitude that they are too good for the affiliate that may only generate a single player in a year, is NOT small affiliate friendly.

And for those of us that have sites that help affiliates, (small and large) I think we have a responbsibility to those affiliates to make sure they understand this....and I also think we have a responsibility to try and make sure the affiliate programs themselves also understand this and that is why I always encourage AGAINST ANY type of quota (no matter what the quota is) in terms for any programs.

I remember having this same discussion with Lex Sisney (one of the original guys that started Commission Junction) many years ago.....back in those days it was tough to get approved and keep your account at some of the affiliate networks such as LinkShare, BeFree and others due to quotas and other unreasonable demands placed on affiliates. But Lex did not take that same path and he went on build what would become one of the largest affiliate networks, one which had properties lining up wanting to get on his network because even back in the early 2000's CJ boasted over 250,000 affiliates showing millions and millions of ad impressions daily....(these numbers are tiny compared to today's figures)

An affiliate that does not generate a new player, or additional revenue but does continue to advertise is NOT an inactive affiliate, but just an affiliate that hasn't generated revenue for a group.....and those programs that think they are better than affiliates and would move that affiliate to a group potential affiliates slated for removal from said program (inmyopinion) do NOT deserve the traffic (or branding) from the affiliate to start with....even if it is only a visitor here or there.....

....there are plenty of programs that have a good reputation with players that VALUE affiliates no matter what their size.

Rick
Universal4

[Spinweb]

....there are plenty of programs that have a good reputation with players that VALUE affiliates no matter what their size.

While that may or may not be the case, there isn't a gambling brand on the Internet that has a superior service to Ladbrokes. Not a single one.

There are a few that are equal such as Bet365, William Hill and Betfred but none of them are better. No one that has a player account there can honestly deny that.

While Ladbrokes may not be as affiliate friendly as lesser known programs, as gambling webmasters our aim should be to recommend our readers to the best casinos out there (in other words being honest) rather than just advertising the ones that will send us a nice Christams card if you catch my dirft.

[DealTheNuts]

I don't deal with Ladbrokes and cannot comment on how good or bad they are, but it is always difficult to balance the needs of players (who follow the best deals/promotions/software/support/security of funding) with the goal of placing someone on every room you promote and listing your room with an active affiliate who may not have players signed up with you at the moment is still good business.

It is a very competitive market and rooms need to work in partnership with their affiliates. If no signups occur in 6 (or even 3) months there are many reasons why this can be the case and automatically assuming it is a failure by the affiliate is not an optimal approach.

It may be an efficient administration process by large companies to remove 'inactive' affiliate accounts after 3 - 6 months but a process of contact prior to deletion to find out the reasons behind the lack of player interest would be a more useful exercise to identify possible issues.

[tipsfreebets]

I am sorry guys but I have to defend Ladbrokes in this case. I used to work from the operator and I know that there are a large amount of 'lazy' and 'scammers' out there especially in sportsbook. I don't think they will close any account as long as you have a decent site and you show them that you are trying to bring traffic (if they do, I will be very surprised) but they need to have some rule in the T&C otherwise the whole programme will not be viable in the long term and some serious guy will comedown and shut it. I think it is beneficial for all genuine affiliates that they do those checks: we work hard and put up so much content and we don't do anything wrong (ie. signing up via our links etc.) that sincerely I am not worryed at all about those T&C and will continue to push Ladbrokes as is a serious brand. Obviously I don't know specific cases here and I don't comment about those but I think that generally they only close accounts that have no traffic at all and most importantly may have suspicious activity (ie. 2 clicks in a year and 2 players - the owner of the website). It doesn't really matter the 3 or 6 month rule.

[Caruso]

While Ladbrokes may not be as affiliate friendly as lesser known programs, as gambling webmasters our aim should be to recommend our readers to the best casinos out there (in other words being honest) rather than just advertising the ones that will send us a nice Christams card if you catch my dirft.

Could have said this myself.

But what do I do?

I want to advertise the best for players.

Best for players tells me to f**k off.

Now what?

See the problem?

Universal's post is on the money.

[universal4]

Quotas in place now will likely continue to grow.....

Rick
Universal4

[TheGooner]

Small affiliate = Unable to sustain one depositing player in SIX months?
It's hardly an onerous demand.

I have to disagree STRONGLY with that point.

You STRONGLY think that one player in six months is too high a barrier? Really?
If affiliates are not achieving this then they are not active affiliates of the program.

[ALEX777]

I want to advertise the best for players.

Best for players tells me to f**k off.

LOL exactly, and moreover it's almost impossible to convert them because they are on the top of SE's. I guess the companies like this don't need an affiliates, perhaps... and they don't need a small affiliates for sure.

[baldidiot]

I'm with Universal on this one - it shouldn't matter how easy it is to get obtain a player, you should be paid commissions on that player for life. If you only ever send one player to Ladbrokes and they play poker every day for 10 years, why shouldn't you also be getting your share of the profits in 10 years time?

Plus, what about affiliates who have retired and sold their sites but want to keep their aff accounts for some residual income?

[universal4]

You STRONGLY think that one player in six months is too high a barrier? Really?

Yes I do honestly feel this way.

If affiliates are not achieving this then they are not active affiliates of the program.

Then that means Ladbrokes and any other affiliate program that feels this way should NOT ever actively seek any affiliate partners that do NOT do this full time....

No way should they EVER have an affiliate that just gets an occassional player, and we should never encourage small, or part time affiliates to join their programs.....

No way should an affiliate program have a few thousand part time affiliates that show millions (if not billions) of ad impressions annually for a brand because they might not get enough depositing players.

Rick
Universal4

[tipsfreebets]

I agree with TheGooner. To me affiliates are webmasters that are really enjoying what they do, keep their site fresh with content and therefore try to gain traffic. This is also what Google thinks and soon or later (they started already) they will take down static pages. I don't think that someone that put a page up there and never touch it again should be considered as an active affiliate. Why you should get paid for life when the operator has to put costs and money behind to keep that player active. This is not going to work, be realistic. Everyone would like to sign 1 player and than just go on holiday: not really fair. Keep working hard on your site, put content and you will easily get that registration in 6 months. In addition to that they need to have a clause in T&C as most of the affiliates they decide to shut are because they only register one player (mostly themself) and there is suspicious activity.

[universal4]

So in other words....

Full Time larger affiliates only.....

Rick
Universal4

[TheGooner]

So in other words....
Full Time larger affiliates only...

Big, small - full time, part time ... that has not been stated ... I won't step into that minefield ...


How about .... affiliates that actively promote the program and can generate a depositing signup every month or two (or SIX).
Or in other words ... active affiliates.

I don't know the financial mathematics of handling an affiliate program.
But I can think of a few volume based costs :

- Serving and hosting banners for these millions (maybe billions) of banner displays that do not generate signups probably the programs cost significant $$$$ spend in infrastructure and software at the program end.

- Staff time handling questions, queries, emails and calls from affiliates that are not generating signups costs money.

- And quite possibly there are other 3rd party charges via services like ad servers Connextra and Income Access that might charge on a display basis or affiliate volume.

- Bank fees and processing costs for making affiliate payments.

Rick, as neither of has have the exact details for the costs of running an affiliate program - neither of us will be able to determine exactly where the profit line is regarding affiliates be they small, big, active or inactive. I'd love to be a fly on the wall and see the full financial details behind programs of different sizes and different verticals.

But I'm fairly sure that there is a profit line - and that many affiliates (maybe as much as 50%) at ANY program are actually costing programs money to maintain. Active affiliates (of any size) are likely to be above that profit line IMO.

[xecutable]

Quite a thread. I don't think that the t&c's were read correctly. "12.4 If you do not deliver 1 new customer registration within a period of three months (billed months) we may terminate this Agreement immediately by delivery of written notice to you."

I too promote Ladbrokes, perhaps not a lot but I do. And I too haven't generated a depositing player in over 6 months. However, my account hasn't been closed, and they have requested a meeting in BAC, after reading this thread. I think there's more to the equation, and decision to let you go. That doesn't justify it, but I am pretty sure 6 months - no player isn't all of it.

@tipsfreebets How many static pages, put up without any effort and SEO behind them, have you seen generate players? You are talking just theory here. Realistically speaking it's impossible to get a player from a page that will rank #20225252 in the serps and has 3 visitors per year by accident.

Bottom line, can't really see why is everyone arguing here. Obviously everyone is on a different end of the boat, big affiliates on one end, the rest on the other. Doubt you can change someone's mind over the forum, especially if he is making big bucks with Ladbrokes, and I doubt big affiliates can change the mind of the rest if they aren't making anything, hence you are not on the same page.

[Betpartners]

I promote Ladbrokes and personally have had no issues with them at all.

I see both sides of this debate and I think to a certain extent there is a cultural difference in this.

European sportsbook affiliates (not European Casino and Poker affiliates), in my experience, tend to accept the clauses, terms and conditions and other limitations because it is the way it has always been.

Quota's, Negative rollovers, players dropped, etc have been common practice within European based sports books affiliate programs, it is there in almost all the terms and conditions listed.

Simply reading through the top ten known European sports books will confirm what I am saying, they all have very questionable terms and conditions.

Does it make it right? no of course not, some of these terms and conditions are horrendous, but they are there, they have always been there and complaining after the fact only serves to show that the terms and conditions were not read in the first place.

I know straight off the bat that almost all the programs I work with can, if they choose, just close me down, damn, they don't even need a reason most of the time.

I am serious, read the terms and conditions of the top ten European sports books and you will see the terms that basically allow them to do as they wish.

What stops them doing as they wish is communication, whether you be a big or small affiliate if you work with the programs, they will not close you down.

The other alternative is to not promote them, but then you will be in a situation where you are not offering the best sports books to your website users.

It is a balancing act, one has to on occasion accept that they promote a program that they really do not want to because of their unethical terms or not offer the best program to their site users.

I have programs who's affiliate programs are crap, very risky and not great for affiliates, but they are great for players and that, on occasions, but not always, has been my defining criteria.

If you are very unhappy with Ladbrokes terms and conditions but want to offer the biggest and best to your customers then the only real option is to have them on your websites, communicate with the program and accept that they are not the best for you, the affiliate.

A good guide maybe to accept 80% affiliate friendly programs on your sites offering 100% security etc for the players.

If we lived in Utopia then 100% affiliate friendly and 100% player friendly would be perfect, but we do not and so it really is a balancing act and for me Ladbrokes have to be included, they are too big, too good and too reliable for the players for me to ignore them.

Naturally I will not have loads on my sites that are not affiliate friendly, but as long as the players are secure in the gambling then I am prepared to accept some poor affiliate programs, not many, but some.

Like I say, its all a balancing act, Europeans sports books affiliates appear to me to be far more accepting of restrictive terms, Non European sports books affiliates and European and non European casino and poker affiliates appear far less accepting.

Nothing at all wrong with that, just highlights for me the different perspective affiliates have depending on their location and the vertical which they operate within.

I also accept that for some, like Rick as an example, they will not find it acceptable ever with regards to Quota's, I respect and accept that and do not fault him at all for fighting that fight, it is a good fight and one that should be fought, however I am conditioned from day one that there are quotas, always have been and always will be and my business accepts that as part of the cost of doing business within this industry, would I like it changed? yes of course, but it will not be, it is simply an acceptable practice by most European sport books affiliates.

Finally and this may stick in peoples throats, but it is a reality we have to live is that European affiliate programs, especially UK based ones have a very significant advantage over affiliates, regardless of their size and that is that gambling is illegal in so many places, this in turn means that the bigger sports books in Europe to a certain degree enjoy a monopoly, without competition from the States and Asia the Europeans can more or less do as they wish and until such competition comes around, serious competition, then there is no incentive for the Europeans to change their ways.

In time, when the US and Asian markets open up, the European sport book affiliate programs will have no choice but to make their terms more affiliate friendly or risk losing affiliates to programs outside Europe that will have far more friendly programs.

The sooner the Europeans face serious competition for online players the better we all will be.

[Caruso]

Four emails now. No notification in the first place, no response to polite request after polite request (OK, getting less polite now).

What a crock of shit programme, now first port of call in Barcelona. You have no excuses for this.

[FictionNet]

Or, to repeat what I said earlier in this thread, simply promote Ladbrokes via Income Access? Is that not an option?

[universal4]

The fight for no negative carry over had the same kind divisions among affiliates years ago.

Many thought back then that it had no chance of ever being accepted by the programs....

Quotas are bad...period.

Rick
Universal4

[Caruso]

Or, to repeat what I said earlier in this thread, simply promote Ladbrokes via Income Access? Is that not an option?

Hmm, will look at that. Thanks. Still no excuse for their behaviour.