Average player value (CPA vs Rev share)

[sipka]

I would run away with hysterical screaming if I had done CPA instead of rev share when I started out in this business. Seeing that I have a lot of players who are playing for almost 2 years now, making me $xx.xxx since they signed up, I don't think there is a program out there who would pay me that high CPA that would compensate me.

Sure if you need money quick, then choose a hybrid deal, but let the door open for some "annuity" from revenue share.

And if you look around, you will see that most of the complaints (from affiliates and programs alike) have CPA roots.

If you are on CPA but you have low value players then they will move you to rev share I'm sure (so programs don't lose out), if you have high value players, then you leave a lot of money on the table, and the program doesn't lose out again. In case of CPA one of the parties always loses out. IMHO it's not a win-win situation.

[casinojack]

All good points, Very nice thread. I think best one I have seen for the CPA vs Rev share debate.

[gamblingbutler]

Seriously flawed logic IMO in that it assumes that there is a finite supply of money - and the CPA is the only way to get the $200.

I do not see why you should accept $200 now for a $500 total payment (in a 12-18 month timeframe) and call it good business.

IF you've got a lead funnel that's that good that you can turn $200 to $500 then you should be getting a business loan for the cash (even at 8-10%pa) and using that instead as the cost of funds is much cheaper.

You should STILL be taking the rev-share and maximising revenues - it'll easily cover the costs of that business loan. And to be quite honest - most affiliate businesses are a cash cow after the breakthrough year aren't they?

There are people who can't get a loan and need money asap - that is just a another fact. I personally still think he has a point seeing certain circumstances.

And yes, of course he should do revshare to make more money in the long run if he can survive that long, I agree!

[Muppet]

They were just numbers I plucked out of my head but the logic isn't flawed. If you can take that $200, turn it into $500, turn the $500 into $1000 and so on .. there is no cut-off figure. If you're a beginner at this though, you likely have no idea what your IRR is, and would have little experience with all the different programs to know which ones have the best player value and retention.

Long term, rev share can make you more money than a flat cpa that is never reinvested, but players do stop playing, programs close down or go rogue, UIGEAs happen etc. All I am pointing out is that it is nowhere near as simple as the "always go revshare" crowd try to make it out to be.

Having said that, the vast majority of programs we deal with are on rev share, but we do make some exceptions based on program player value and other things - like I said horses for courses.

[TheGooner]

Having said that, the vast majority of programs we deal with are on rev share, but we do make some exceptions based on program player value and other things - like I said horses for courses.

Sure ... there are always exception and conditions.

As long as you acknowledge that the "course for CPA" is :
- an affiliate who has a rock-solid lead stream
- and it is a scaleable lead stream
- and it has an IRR of 250% plus
- and somehow despite this IRR and stream the affiliate is still cash poor
- and the affiliate has no access to capital any other way.

Then taking a CPA cash payment in the short term could be the best option.

Otherwise ... rev-share seems the best plan for the vast majority of affiliates at the vast majority of properties out there.

[Muppet]

If you are on CPA but you have low value players then they will move you to rev share I'm sure (so programs don't lose out), if you have high value players, then you leave a lot of money on the table, and the program doesn't lose out again. In case of CPA one of the parties always loses out. IMHO it's not a win-win situation.

Mostly true, however I disagree that one party always loses.

The program is effectively buying a discounted future revenue stream from the affiliate. Valuing that is difficult. Its very similar to buying a share in a company where the share price is theoretically the sum of the future income you will earn from the company.

Looking at it simplistically a share trade is not a win-win situation because for everyone that sells there is someone who buys, and they both cant be right. But then if you consider that the selling party (ie the affiliate) might use the money to invest in something else, pay taxes, or any number of other reasons, then such a sale can be mutually beneficial.

[baldidiot]

Hi, just to clarify, when Playboy Gaming shut down, all affiliated players were sent an email with a link to InterCasino containing the affiliate tracking of the affiliate that had referred them originally.

We tried our best to make sure the transition from Playboy Gaming to InterCasino was as smooth as possible for players, and also to maintain the integrity of affiliate tracking.

Regards,
Alex

Can I just say, I'm very impressed by this!

[casinojack]

So in my own amazing way of bottom lining this:

CPA is awesome for cash flow. If you don't need the flow that bad, and trust the program you with, rev share. Or my personal favorite, as I said before, hybrid.

[Rostick]

I didin`t read the replies as I am in a hurry so sorry If this has been allready said.

At first CPA looks more probable to bring you some cash but no doubt revenue share is better. I say stick with Rev Share and if you work hard it won`t be too long 'till clients start to register and play.

And as time passes you will have more and more clients (again, if you work hard) and then all their turnovers will be added up resulting solid amounts of money. Revenue share is no doubt the strategy that brings the money for online affiliates.

[seoweb2000]

Rev share is the way to go. Long term wise it should pay off as your business grows. I know people who are making $10k+ per month with very few new sign up just because they choose to go down the rev route.

[baldidiot]

What about sites who have a minimum quota in their terms - would that swing anybody to a CPA scheme? Or is the term hostile enough to make you simply not enter into any deals with affiliate programs that have such a term?

[universal4]

If a program has a quota and you would consider moving to cpa based upon the worry that you might not make commission because of the quota, then I would be also worried that the cpa payments might not be forthcoming from that group also.

Quotas are bad all the way around,...period.

Rick
Universal4

[baldidiot]

If a program has a quota and you would consider moving to cpa based upon the worry that you might not make commission because of the quota, then I would be also worried that the cpa payments might not be forthcoming from that group also.

Quotas are bad all the way around,...period.

Rick
Universal4

So would you say to not promote any sites with a quota?

[casinojack]

If you area serious affilaite, a 1 - 2 player a month quota is no bog deal. If this is a hobby for you then, yes, skip those programs.


Be aware also, if you choose CPA and your players dont do well , you may be dropped from CPA

[joeyl]

Players X cpa instead of revshare would have at the moment, cost me 60%, and they're still playing.

Definately a hobby category blogger though, no more.

[Matty]

I´ve used Revenue share for over a year now and it is a lot better than CPA, which I used before.

[tommyb]

I think it really depends on what type of players your site caters to.

For example, one of my sites caters strictly to the casino "pros" or just people who know how to win and take advantage of the casinos and there bonus schemes and so on. Rev share for me wouldn't do me any good here because I would be in the negatives month after month. For this site I use CPA because people sign up and deposit and I still get paid.

Now for my other site which is only a basic casino review site with some game strategies and such, I use rev share which has proved to be my best option.

If you can bring in 20-50 new players a month (each and every month) then CPA might do you good, depending on how you implement this in the long run.

Other than that, rev share is what people here make a living off of.

[baldidiot]

For example, one of my sites caters strictly to the casino "pros" or just people who know how to win and take advantage of the casinos and there bonus schemes and so on. Rev share for me wouldn't do me any good here because I would be in the negatives month after month. For this site I use CPA because people sign up and deposit and I still get paid.

Do the casinos not pick up on the type of player coming from your site? Or are their enough advantage players who are secretly closet gamblers to make it worthwhile for them?

[tommyb]

Do the casinos not pick up on the type of player coming from your site? Or are their enough advantage players who are secretly closet gamblers to make it worthwhile for them?

Along with newcomers I get plus the variance involved, I think I almost even out if I used rev share (probably in negatives still though). I keep close relationship with my affiliate managers as well so that keeps things nice. They know my site and know I have other sites that bring in +$$ in revenue so I think I'm doing alright for now. (I don't use duplicate account but have partners I team with)

I really don't see a difference in a person who shows strategies to win more than lose with an affiliate link than just a straight link with no affiliate tracker attached. I guess they lose a little bit from my CPA but I strategically (yep some strategy incolved) only use CPA for certain casinos/sportsbook/whatever (maybe they offer a VERY generous bonuses that I know my players will likely bank on) and I use Rev Share for mostly everyone else.

Say you have a website that ranks #1 in google for search term "casino of your choice review" or something, you can make good money either way CPA or Rev Share, just depends what your business model is I guess and if you use a good call-to-action on your site to get them to sign up right away from your link (long term would be rev share)

About 2 years ago I made over $1000 on ONE forum post from CPA in a matter of days (before I had my own site and even knew about GPWA). I basically stated how I found a good bonus and just said click here to check it out. I got so scared I deleted my post about 2 weeks later lol I was new I thought I was breaking a law or something seeing that much in my account so fast. Luckily that website allowed affiliate links but most don't anymore, plus it would be considered spamming in most eyes.

It really is basic Internet Marketing, find people who want something (in my case bonuses) and give it to them. You can tweak it around and scale it up but then you're probably lurking in blackhat seo territory which you don't want to do.

IMO: rev share for long term, CPA for short term (like basically everyone stated already)