All 22 casinos in rewards player emails and links to CR website

[mojo]

Again, I don't like any chance for an affiliated player to stop earning for the affiliate that referred them.

Right now multiple players are attached to multiple affiliates.

So what is fair to affiliates?

Who do you think should get credit from a newsletter email

The first referring affiliate, the last, the one with the most deposits, the one with the most players?

Shouldn't this be a discussion about solutions?

As far as the property specific email GCG received, we are following up on that now.

Yes, solution.

Renee said here:

With our brands, multiple affiliates can send the same player to multiple casinos. Our tracking has always been that the player is tracked to the last source that sends them to the casino when they join. We have always felt this is the fairest way because otherwise your hard work might generate revenue for old non active affiliates. This system has been in place since the beginning (when we only had 3 brands) and has not changed. Having been in the industry for over 10 years we have a few players who are tagged to different affiliates across different brands.

A few suggestions have been made – tag them to the first affiliate who brought them in, the last, the most current etc etc. In the case where say I have sent someone to BJB 4 years ago and the player only purchased $50, then the same player came through a different tag last year to GT and has become a profitable good player it wouldn’t be fair that the player is tagged to the first affiliate on BJB seeing as the latest promotion and site has made the difference in making the income for the affiliate.

The current model gives the affiliate the opportunity to push a returning player to their site through to another brand as well. Furthermore and this is an important one, we use cookies, session variables and query strings to make sure all of the tracking is not lost. Because we use cookies a player who visits and does not join right then will still be tagged to that affiliate until they are sent to the site again via another affiliate.

Shouldn't there something in place already to tag the affiliate?

[arkyt]

Shouldn't there something in place already to tag the affiliate?

Well considering the fact that the player could very well have been referred to more than one casino in the group by more than one affiliate - which affiliate should be tagged? What about when an affiliate referred the player to one casino in the group, but the player found another of the casinos in the group on their own? Seriously, it sort of makes it a very difficult situation to do any tagging so we have quite the quandary don't we?

Considering all that, the best way IMO would be to simply remove all cross marketing links / promotions and cease all cross promoting to any player that as ever been referred by an affiliate, unless they can be properly tagged. If proper tagging/mapping can not be completed then the marketing should be considered questionable, if not bad, marketing practice.

[Anthony]

Yes that is the point. With all the variables it can be a daunting logistical task to sort it out.

I will relay all the suggestions that are posted here to Rewards.

[mojo]

Fortunately we have already been through this with the other progrm.

The 'other' program also had multiple brands. The solution, after much discussion, was to tag the player to the affiliate where the player was last referred. They claimed they also made good on untagged players generated from the mailers.

It can't be perfect with multiple affiliates bring multiple players to multiple casinos. But to throw up our hands and say just accept it is not an option.

[mojo]

I wanted to add, with the 'other' program, they actually did make good on untagged players from the mailers. I had forgotten about that. My partner received payment and players specifically from those untagged players the other program cross promoted.

My question goes back to this. Why can they do it but Rewards cannot?

[Dominique]

Well considering the fact that the player could very well have been referred to more than one casino in the group by more than one affiliate - which affiliate should be tagged? What about when an affiliate referred the player to one casino in the group, but the player found another of the casinos in the group on their own? Seriously, it sort of makes it a very difficult situation to do any tagging so we have quite the quandary don't we?

Considering all that, the best way IMO would be to simply remove all cross marketing links / promotions and cease all cross promoting to any player that as ever been referred by an affiliate, unless they can be properly tagged. If proper tagging/mapping can not be completed then the marketing should be considered questionable, if not bad, marketing practice.

There's not really a quandry since they have the "last referring affiliate" rule.

[GCG]

Dominique :
There's not really a quandry since they have the "last referring affiliate" rule.

This is not entirely correct the BTAG only carries for that particular casino IF the player has clicked on that particular casino affiliate link.

When the player decides to visit a different casino on casinorewards.com - for which affiliate link NOT has been clicked on by the player - the affiliate BTAG code will NOT carry through but will result in.

xxAffiliate ID: TYPEIN_ZC:http://www.casinorewards.com/main/index.asp

The affiliate will not be credited for leads to other casinos on casinorewards.com and mailers if the cookie for THAT particular casino is not present.

In general : affiliates will always lose out this way : with 20+ casinos there is always something which looks better or more tempting to the player.

Eg. :

Externally :
Affiliate Zeus refers player Sam to --> Casino Action --> Player Sam signs up and at CA and receives newsletter/promo emails with links to casinorewards.com and reads a winner testimonial of Nostalgia Casino --> Player Sam takes a look at the casinorewards.com site and finds Casino Nostalgia indeed very interesting and signs up --> Player Sam has not clicked on any Casino Nostalgia's affiliate links from affiliate Zeus' site, she has visted the day before --> Player Sam will now be tagged to CR and not the affiliate Zeus.

Internally
Affiliate Zeus refers player Sam to --> Casino Action --> but Sam wants to know more about the casino and is not convinced she has found the best offer --> Sam clicks on the about us page from Casino Action and reads there are also a lot of benefits to be found at Casinorewards.com site --> Sam also needs more information for making deposits and visits --> banking --> deposit helper --> and finds the xxhttp://www.casinorewards.com/main/banking.asp very helpful --> on that site she finds a lot of other casinos and but the top banner with the offer from Nostalgia looks very tempting and pays that casino a visit --> she decides this is the better choice and signs up --> Player Sam has not clicked on any Casino Nostalgia's affiliate links from affiliate Zeus' site, she has visted the day before --> Player Sam will now be tagged to CR and not the affiliate Zeus.

[Dominique]

I was responding on the proposed solution remark here:

Originally Posted by arkyt
Well considering the fact that the player could very well have been referred to more than one casino in the group by more than one affiliate - which affiliate should be tagged? What about when an affiliate referred the player to one casino in the group, but the player found another of the casinos in the group on their own? Seriously, it sort of makes it a very difficult situation to do any tagging so we have quite the quandary don't we?

I don't see a quandry in who to tag the player to, it would be the last referring affiliate since that is the rule at CR to start with. If the player found the casino without affiliate AND without cross promotion, it's a type-in.

[arkyt]

I don't see a quandry in who to tag the player to, it would be the last referring affiliate since that is the rule at CR to start with. If the player found the casino without affiliate AND without cross promotion, it's a type-in.

I understood the last referring affiliate clause as only applicable when an affiliate has referred a player to a particular casino EG each individual casino in the group stands on its own.

If affiliate A referred player 1 to Casino Share and affiliate B referred the same player 1 to Golden Tiger what tag should CR place in an email when promoting the other 20 casinos if neither affiliate A or B has ever referred this particular player to any of those other "individual" casinos? That would be the quandary. CRs last referrer rule doesn't seem to apply across the board - I read it as a casino by casino basis.

Thus one potential solution would be to remove any and all (both directly and indirectly) cross-promoting references where no affiliate tags could be provided in promotions to any player ever referred by an affiliate.

[bb1web]

don't see a quandry in who to tag the player to, it would be the last referring affiliate since that is the rule at CR to start with. If the player found the casino without affiliate AND without cross promotion, it's a type-in.

Here's part of what I wrote over at gap: you can read it all if you desire

CR was brilliantly thought out, whether they took this into consideration or not, is anybody's guess but back then things were not as complicated and I think that everything was done with no thought to anything but to retain.

However innocent intention or not, CR has always been in position to cross-promote without tagging ... (hold on Renee, I am not saying they did it to be unethical), but fact remains that every time someone goes into the casino rewards website to claim their loyalty points, they are made aware that there are other casinos in the network, that the loyalty kickbacks are good at any of the 20+ casinos in the network.

Now IMHO it makes sense that people who joined the first casino .... likely did not know about one of the other themes in the network, which the reason they joined that first casino was because it had the CR seal, meaning they pay and are fair.

but when you find out that a casino which has a theme you prefer ... is also in the same safe network ....

see where I am going with that?

CR doesn't need to cross-promote in the sense of the word where this accusation is headed.

(that they are purposefully leaving out tags), it just doesn't make wise business sense and that's something CR has always been capable, is taking the wiser approach than most. I know that doesn't explain everything away that was brought up, but I think it should be added into your consideration when assessing this.

[Dominique]

Geez, I hate that this defaults to quick reply, and that after the post is done you are sent to page one post one. - sorry, derail.

Anyway, CR is a good and reputable program and have been for a very long time and I have no issues with them then or now. I am totally convinced that there is absolutely no bad intent here whatsoever.

Still, I don't like the cross promotion without tags. It does steal players and their revenues who have been sent by affiliates who expect to be paid for their efforts.

[mojo]

Geez, I hate that this defaults to quick reply, and that after the post is done you are sent to page one post one. - sorry, derail.

Anyway, CR is a good and reputable program and have been for a very long time and I have no issues with them then or now. I am totally convinced that there is absolutely no bad intent here whatsoever.

Still, I don't like the cross promotion without tags. It does steal players and their revenues who have been sent by affiliates who expect to be paid for their efforts.

FWIW that is my feeling exactly as well.

Including the quickreply lol.

[arkyt]

Anyway, CR is a good and reputable program and have been for a very long time and I have no issues with them then or now. I am totally convinced that there is absolutely no bad intent here whatsoever.

Still, I don't like the cross promotion without tags. It does steal players and their revenues who have been sent by affiliates who expect to be paid for their efforts.

I am totally confused ... (not really, as I fully understand whats going on, but ...)

On one hand you state that Casino Rewards are stealing players and revenues from affiliates and on the other hand you say they are good and reputable. If your two hands aren't in direct contradiction of one another then nothing in this world is.

Anyway, I do have hope that they will do the right thing in the end; and if it turns out that they don't - then that above contradiction can not be allowed to stand - it will either be one way or the other.

[Dominique]

I am totally confused ... (not really, as I fully understand whats going on, but ...)

On one hand you state that Casino Rewards are stealing players and revenues from affiliates and on the other hand you say they are good and reputable. If your two hands aren't in direct contradiction of one another then nothing in this world is.

Anyway, I do have hope that they will do the right thing in the end; and if it turns out that they don't - then that above contradiction can not be allowed to stand - it will either be one way or the other.

The operative word here is "intent". A very important legal term, too.

If as small a percentage is affected as quoted earlier, it shouldn't be a big loss to CR to change this, except for man hours of course. (and woman hours, too!!)

[GCG]

Totally shocked to see that in the casino lobby the Casinorewards logo slides in when I click on promotions and also the fixed CasinoRewards logo top right is hurting my eyes.

When players start to receive newsletters & other casino promotions from "Loyalty CasinoRewards" as sender one can imagine players tend to digg further.

For branding this is EXCELLENT MARKETING to let players remember what site
to visit next time.

I also find it very fishy to get an email for a match bonus with download help to : xxhttp://www.cr-promos.com/cmc/partners.asp - as on this page ALL their casinos are listed (again)

BB1WEB : it just doesn't make wise business sense and that's something CR has always been capable, is taking the wiser approach than most.

Dominique : Anyway, CR is a good and reputable program and have been for a very long time and I have no issues with them then or now. I am totally convinced that there is absolutely no bad intent here whatsoever.

Still, I don't like the cross promotion without tags. It does steal players and their revenues who have been sent by affiliates who expect to be paid for their efforts.

This is not a mistake by Rewardsaffiliates they know EXACTLY what they are doing with our leads : using a VERY clever money saving and complex tool to shave affiliates : the Casinorewards.com site.

This is not a story about the good, the bad and the ugly.

It is about FACTS and we found them guilty of doing cross promotions.

When I signed up as an affiliate I was under the impression that CR was a honest program that would not do this to an affiliate, how wrong could I be.

I have been told a story once that they were not doing great money from players ; in fact they are and have enough money to buy other casinos too.

Affiliate mistakes : Do not believe stories that are too good to be true as usually these are not.

The Rewardsaffiliates concept is very clear to me : Let affiliates do the hard work to refer players and additionally expose as much players as possible to Casinorewards.com site with no credit for the affiliate.

FACTS :

YOU - the affiliate - get 35% wagershare for a RealMoneyPlayer who will be exposed to 22 casinos.

In fact they do not have to search for new players as YOU - the affiliate - will keep on sending them anyway as YOU -the affiliate - want to share profits. (again excellent affiliate marketing).

In order to keep earnings at the same levels or more : YOU - the affiliate - must send new traffic.

THE RESULT :

YOU - the affiliate - is building a healthy playersbase for CasinoRewards at very low costs to the program (thru their excellent branding and marketing strategy concept).

Advise : Read again and make sure you understand this and rethink why this program always has been good to me : ofcourse why wouldn't they ?!.

[arkyt]

The operative word here is "intent". A very important legal term, too.

Seriously? How do you know their true intent? If their intent was to lure players away would you really expect them to come out and admit that?

Heck no - it wont happen, so stick to the facts that we have in front of our faces - thats exactly what they are doing! If their intent is not to do that, then I would expect them to willingly come forth in a timely manner saying that they will cease the cross promotions without affiliate tags under all circumstances where a player has been previously referred by an affiliate.

Totally shocked to see that in the casino lobby the Casinorewards logo slides in when I click on promotions and also the fixed CasinoRewards logo top right is hurting my eyes.

David posted over on Steves site about a friend that joined CCC - apparently they are being bombarded with promotional material - some of it completely concocted and most importantly all of it carrying branding references that carry no affiliate tags.

I really want to give Casino Rewards the benefit of the doubt here, but seeing a large quantity of untagged branding its starting to look a bit sketchy.

[mojo]

I am totally confused ... (not really, as I fully understand whats going on, but ...)

On one hand you state that Casino Rewards are stealing players and revenues from affiliates and on the other hand you say they are good and reputable. If your two hands aren't in direct contradiction of one another then nothing in this world is.

There are a few things I know of that is the reason that there are two sides. Such as..

*Mapping over players with acquisitions. They do a great job and it's not like the norm when we lose half the players.

*Not periodically requiring us to change banners, again losing half our players

*Jumping in on unethical practices such as content theft by shutting down offending affiliate accounts without even being asked

*Players who have been dormant 2,3 - 5 years become active depositing players and still tagged to our accounts.

Those are a few of the things that make this program stand out. It doesn't mean I approve of the cross marketing but it makes me willing to have faith that this can be worked out.

That said, question to Anthony if that's ok. Is there a possible solution forthcoming? Meaning, what can we expect as far as halting the crossmarketing? Or are we being asked to accept this practice?

Thank you.

[arkyt]

There are a few things I know of that is the reason that there are two sides. Such as..

I agree in part - for all the reasons that you have outlined, and more, I too hold out hope that they will do the right thing here as well.

[Dominique]

Some of these mailings work for us also.

CR have the best stats of anyone IMO, and if you keep digging down you will find info like this for individual players:

Casino
Casino: Casino Classic
Registration: 21 December 2005
First Bet: 7 June 2010
Last Bet: 11 April 2011

This player registered in 2005 and never played until 2010, and has been playing ever since.

This is by no means an exception, I see quite a few players that have come back much later due to excellent retention efforts, and I also see players that have been playing regularly for years.

So it's not like every player gets snatched away, and they do put effort in retention.

There are a lot of good things about CR, and I always give credit where credit is due.

That does, however, not change that the untagged cross promotions need to be dealt with, they do hurt us.

[GCG]

This player registered in 2005 and never played until 2010, and has been playing ever since.

This is by no means an exception, I see quite a few players that have come back much later due to excellent retention efforts, and I also see players that have been playing regularly for years

I see this at more programs even Starpartner.

That does, however, not change that the untagged cross promotions need to be dealt with, they do hurt us.

More than you will ever can imagine !

I browsed thru the grand mondial site :

xxhttp://www.grandmondial.eu/promo/ --> xxhttp://www.grandmondial.eu/promo/loyalty.asp -->
VIP Club member please login here (xxhttp://www.casinorewards.com/members/vipclub_sm/login.asp)
Forgot pass click here xxhttp://www.casinorewards.com/members/vipclub_sm/forgot_pass.asp

xxhttp://www.grandmondial.eu/promo/newsletters.asp -->
xxhttp://www.casinorewards.com/main/newsletters.asp

xxhttp://www.grandmondial.eu/banking/deposit.asp -->
xxhttp://www.casinorewards.com/main/banking.asp
xxmailto:banking@casinorewards.com

xxhttp://www.grandmondial.eu/security/partners.asp -->
Be sure to check out all of the exciting online casino partners
xxhttp://www.casinorewards.com/main/partners.asp

I stopped as it is very clear to me ALL efforts are being made to guide the player to casinorewards.com (on which the partner casinos are not tracking affiliate links unless priviously clicked on the particular casino affiliate links).

This is undoubtedly on of the highest % of cross promotion sales you will ever find online.

I lost repect for this program once I found out, they have been stealing sales for years without us knowing and the crooks are not ashamed of it.