Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 50
  1. #1
    GFPC is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    3,525
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,145
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 673 Posts

    Default Bewinners a Sponsor at the Dublin SuperShow?

    I just viewed the Igaming SuperShow site and noticed something weird.

    Bewinners is a Sponsor and Exibitor????

    I recall many months back we were told due to contractual obligations they were forced to be allowed to attend London but that things would be looked at and a decision to ban them from Dublin and Future events due to Rogue Predatory behavour.

    You mean to tell me they can still attend and benefit from affiliates???????

    Even after being Suspended from GPWA and CAP, GAU, AGD!

    I hope I am mistaken and its just an errror as I cant think of the organizers benefiting financially from such a rogue group who has been banned from all Affiliate forums.

    Anyone care to explain? If they are allowed to participate after what we all discussed last year and all the trouble they have caused, this is just a HUGE SLAP in our faces!

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to GFPC For This Useful Post:

    GamTrak (26 April 2011), kwblue (6 May 2011), mojo (5 May 2011), RBS (26 April 2011)

  3. #2
    GamTrak's Avatar
    GamTrak is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,261
    Thanks
    1,678
    Thanked 890 Times in 629 Posts

    Default

    Thanks for informing us of this Steve.

    I'm interested to hear the outcome and just how this happened after all the BS that went down regarding Bewinners.

    What's up IGB folks?

  4. #3
    Engineer's Avatar
    Engineer is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2007
    Posts
    524
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 437 Times in 211 Posts

    Default

    This is outrageous if true. WTF?!

  5. #4
    GFPC is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    3,525
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,145
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 673 Posts

    Default

    Just for clarity this was the post you made Alex in November.

    Quote Originally Posted by alexpratt View Post
    Hey Steve - From our side i.e. the events -

    So background first to get context - As mentioned in the other thread I am this meeting is happening next week with all the forums, associations etc with the aim that there will be an agreement where everyone deicdes on almost a code of conduct and then if a program breaks this and we are all in agreement we all move on mass and on our part this means we will not let that company exhibit or sponsor at a show but will let them attend for a number of reasons i.e. meeting with people to sort the actual problem and its impossible to police. This as mentioned in the other thread makes it a lot more logical and easier for us as a business and means we can support the market

    So Specifics - bwin already have a contract signed for London this was done yonks ago, however they do not have a stand booked for the Super Show in Dublin ...I think (I am on paternity and this isn't my job anymore) - Once this meeting occurs next week and there is a formal code of conduct and if the vote is that bwin is breaking it we wil of course honour what I promised and not allow them to exhibit or sponsor along with all the other forums.
    I am not sure what happened in that meeting or if it did happen - but my consensus was if all groups agreed and banned them you would follow as well in supporting the rest of the community.

    AGD - Rogued Bewinners
    GPWA - Suspended their Sponsorship
    CAP - Suspended them
    PAL (Jeremy Enke) was in support of the cause
    GAU rogued them
    Casino Meister - N0 can Do List.

    Plus we saw 100s of affiliates list them on their sites as blacklisted - we had a community dedicated to stopping them from this Rogue Behaviour. I know at the time you felt they were in their right as long as they did not retroactive the change for old affiliates. But the fact remains that term of theirs and their terms were all retroactive, Its affecting many affiliates who have had their accounts shut down - affiliates continue to lose life time revenues for their players and this company is continuing business as usual.

    With all this support I am not sure why they would be allowed to attend and be both a SPonsor and Exhibitor based on the IGB site on this page here

    http://www.igamingsupershow.com/content/sponsors/2011

    I know you were forced to accept contractual agreements for LONDON - but based on your words above I am hoping its just an error and they will be removed from said event to go in line with what you agreed and said.

  6. #5
    GFPC is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    3,525
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,145
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 673 Posts

    Default

    A quick bump on this since i know Alex has been around yesterday and today. Lets hope he responds soon on this crucial matter.

  7. #6
    alexpratt's Avatar
    alexpratt is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    August 2006
    Posts
    1,429
    Blog Entries
    3
    Thanks
    151
    Thanked 717 Times in 423 Posts

    Default

    Hey There-I am on holiday at the moment and so is 90% of our office due to the bunch of holidays we currently have here in the UK - We will be back in on Tues so I will catch up with the team then and get back to you on this although you may have to wait till Thurs as its eGR Live on Tues/Wed and I have a new head of marketinging starting Tues.

    This is important but just managing your expectations on the reply and there is some detail I need to collate from various people in order to answer this properly
    iGB Affiliate - The biggest magazine and events for affiliates in igaming

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to alexpratt For This Useful Post:

    GFPC (27 April 2011), graham (27 April 2011), grem (27 April 2011)

  9. #7
    GFPC is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    3,525
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,145
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 673 Posts

    Default

    Thanks Alex - Enjoy your vacation! I look forward to seeing Bewinners removed on Thursday when things are back to normal

  10. #8
    Betpartners's Avatar
    Betpartners is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    January 2009
    Posts
    1,597
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks
    315
    Thanked 784 Times in 419 Posts

    Default

    Really annoyed now, spent bloody ages responding here and for some reason it gets lost and does not post.

    I am not going to rewrite it all but will say the following

    Bwin did not at any stage promise life time commission or a set rev share, can anyone show me where they did? I will revise my opinion if they can, but to date that has not happened.

    If Alex tries to ban Bwin expect a law suit from Bwin and rightfully so, you cannot enter in to contracts and then without any grounds break that contract, Alex company is not dumb, I suspect they know full well they have no legal recourse whatsoever on this and from that point of view this is all mute, Bwin cannot be banned, no matter the clamour to have them.

    I also cannot understand why Bwin, where was the support for that one member on here a while back that had a problem with I think Sunderbet, no one gave a damn, why? why Bwin and RA and not programs that are far smaller, that commit far bigger crimes but are not utilised by the most vocal members on here, why is it that a program like Bwin is picked on when they did not and i repeat did not make any promises on life time commission and set rev share.

    Why is it that the fact that Bwin did not make these promises but they are still being attacked as rogue, despite all the hullaballoo I have yet to see that smoking gun of a document.

    I did see a Mexican Bwin terms and conditions for CPA and a Dutch one also and guess what? no promises or guarantees were made at all.

    This campaign is far from widely supported, same with the RA issue, most affiliates, the quiet ones, unlike myself, keep themselves to themselves and do not want to enter in to debates on here because of the reaction anyone gets that dares stand up and gives an opinion against the "crowd"

    European affiliates that I have met and spoken with over the last few months simply do not support this campaign, like me, they cannot understand the specific crime, documented fact, that Bwin are being accused of.

    Why is it that affiliates are expected to be united on this campaign and not others, why is it that this campaign is given such vocal encouragement and not against other companies that have actually done wrong and not some imagined crime, why are the quiet members on here that make just a few posts making a complaint disregarded out of hand but his support no doubt is expected on other campaigns.

    Why are we, as affiliates, expected to be united when we cannot support ALL affiliates as opposed to the affiliates that make the most noise about a program and that is not a dig at any vocal member, damn I am one of those vocal ones, but the question is valid, why is it that the big mouths on here (again myself included) are given support, even if the case that is being made is seriously flawed, but the little quiet introverted affiliate is ignored, if its wrong, its wrong, no matter the size or locality or even the amount of affiliates effected, if its wrong, its wrong, but on the GPWA it is wrong (even when its not) if you shout enough, make enough noise, make enough dismissive posts etc.

    Why is it that affiliates that know of this campaign, that choose to remain with Bwin (like myself) are not allowed to read what Bwin have to say on the forum, why is it that this campaign has reached such a degree that fellow affiliates that have made their choice to stay with Bwin are unable to interact with Bwin on this forum because every single post made by them is attacked, how is that uniting affiliates, how is that treating other affiliates with respect that want to read what Bwin have to say, how can treating your fellow affiliates with such disdain be viewed as anything other than rogue behavious towards your fellow affiliates.

    Affiliates on here know of the campaign against Bwin, it is impossible to miss it and yet there are many affiliates that are happy to work with Bwin, but they are simply not allowed to publicly because of this campaign, how the hell is that ethical? it is not, not in any sense, this campaign has made its point and by continually attacking every thread by Bwin you not only stop Bwin but you also stop your fellow affiliates, is that the goal? is that what this campaign is all about? hope not.

    The first step in uniting affiliates is by respecting them, that has not happened, sorry to say that but its true and until affiliates respect themselves and each other they will always remain divided.

    Next we will be going after programs that dont actually change their terms and conditions, have had the same terms and conditions for years etc but we decide now that we don't like their terms, oh silly me, that is already underway.

    Look, don't get me wrong, I don't want to be in the minority on the GPWA, i hate forum arguments, I really do, it does not make the GPWA fun at all and I have hardly posted in the last few months, one of the reasons is that this forum has become just such a place, members that I speak with regular and they know who they are and there are quite a few of you, do not post much anymore or at all, the reason is the reaction they get, almost always negative, occassionally insulting, occasional outright lies and slander, something I myself was subjected to only recently and from what I can see it is not just affiliates being driven away but some programs as well.

    Alex should not be expected to ban Bwin, it is very wrong IMO to even ask that, it is not right that affiliates should demand of another business how to conduct their business, how far is one really going to go with this, attacking Bwin by extension, will one refuse to subscribe to a certain televison network because they may show games sponsored by Bwin or carry adverts by Bwin, will all the advertising companies and the hundreds, if not thousands of suppliers to Bwin be boycotted, will we see a mass burning of Lady Gaga poker face dvds, surely if Alex is targeted in such a manner then other companies also doing business with Bwin then they should be targeted, I somehow doubt that will happen at all.

    It is also very very wrong for one affiliate or program or anyone in this industry to preach to others who they should ban and who they should not ban, surely if Alex can be asked to ban Bwin then the affiliates that support that call should also ban Bwin from their sites, has that been done? no it has not and I would suggest that before any affiliates or organisation asks Alex to ban anyone, they should actually walk the walk and talk the talk and ban Bwin themselves from their own sites, just a suggestion.

    In conclusion I support Alex on this, that is if he stands his ground of course, he should honour his contracts, would set a terrible precedent if Alex all of a sudden becomes unreliable and cannot be trusted.

    But even if Alex does succumb to the expected pressure I still hold him with respect and a very decent chap and I feel for him, it is awful to know in advance that you are about to be subjected to a relentless campaign on the GPWA unless you do what is being demanded, Alex's time on here I suspect will not be pleasant at all in the coming weeks, but there are many of us that will support Alex, even if they do not say so vocally because of the way the GPWA has degenerated in recent time and basically has become an agency for bullying.

    I won't be attending Dublin, however if I was, I would have looked forward to seeing Bwin at the conference, anything less would be immoral, unethical and of course downright illegal.

    I do not expect this post to be popular, why would it be? it hardly helps the bandwagon along and I mean no disrespect and I in fact stopped commenting on the Bwin situation, there was simply no point when facts were being ignored, so I kept my mouth shut, kept myself to myself and hoped that this forum would become a more friendlier place, it has not and because Alex is a friend I simply cannot keep my shut on this one, Alex deserves his friends to stand up for him on this one, he should not be subjected to any attacks because his company will not break the law.

    If others want to keep the Bwin campaign going, that is up to them, I wont get involved for the most part, fed up with it all, to me it is such a non starter, however we all have friends on here, people we respect and we should stand up next to them, shoulder to shoulder when they are about to be involved in what I suspect will be a brutal thread.

    Alex has done nothing wrong (if he had I would remove my support) and this is just wrong.
    Arthritis Care

    To find true bravery and courage all one need do is look in to the eyes of a sick child - A humble parent

  11. #9
    Engineer's Avatar
    Engineer is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2007
    Posts
    524
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 437 Times in 211 Posts

    Default

    Bwin introduced a retroactive quota into their T&Cs which allowed them to confiscate residual income owed to affiliates. That is completely unacceptable.

    For many, the quota is simply unachievable. I wonder if you would be singing a different tune if bwin now required you to send 1,000 new depositors per month in order to continue earning residuals on players you sent in the past.

    1,000 might not be attainable for you, and for smaller affiliates, 10 new depositors is similarly unattainable.

    bwin is certainly free to change their T&Cs from a certain date moving forward, but they cannot retroactively change the contract unless both parties agree.

    You said this yourself:

    you cannot enter in to contracts and then without any grounds break that contract,
    And yet, that is exactly what bwin did.

    Alex should not be expected to ban Bwin, it is very wrong IMO to even ask that,
    I respectfully disagree. IMO, rogue companies like bwin, Grand Prive, Gambling Wages, Cpays, etc. should absolutely not be allowed to recruit new affiliates at conferences.

    I do expect Alex's company to ban bwin from the Dublin show, and I think many affiliates are patiently waiting for a statement about this.

  12. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Engineer For This Useful Post:

    Dominique (3 May 2011), GFPC (5 May 2011), kwblue (6 May 2011), mojo (3 May 2011), TheGamblingGuru (6 May 2011)

  13. #10
    Dominique's Avatar
    Dominique is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2002
    Location
    The Boonies
    Posts
    4,777
    Thanks
    452
    Thanked 724 Times in 299 Posts

    Default

    I would be very unhappy to see that Bwin is allowed to exhibit at an AFFILIATE convention after all AFFILIATE organizations have agreed that Bwin acted unethically by breaching contract with existing affiliates. Breach of contract IS illegal, anyplace in the world. Except on the internet it seems.

    Same goes for Grand Prive who still owes me $xx,xxx.xx and who knows what they owe elsewhere.

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dominique For This Useful Post:

    Engineer (3 May 2011), GFPC (5 May 2011), kwblue (6 May 2011), mojo (3 May 2011), TheGamblingGuru (7 May 2011)

  15. #11
    Simmo! is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2004
    Posts
    893
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked 406 Times in 226 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dominique View Post
    I would be very unhappy to see that Bwin is allowed to exhibit at an AFFILIATE convention after all AFFILIATE organizations have agreed that Bwin acted unethically by breaching contract with existing affiliates.
    I'm still a believer that conference organisers are merely facilitators which is a very different role to that of an affiliate organization where, in most cases, they have a degree of responsibility because they are often seen as endorsing programs they represent.

    No-one goes go a conference or exhibition thinking the conference organisers endorse the exhibitors. It's down to attendees to decide who they do and don't work with and a facilitator's role is simply to provide the introduction. If an affiliate decides to represent a company without doing their research then that's their lookout IMO.

  16. #12
    Christoff is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2007
    Location
    Dunmow
    Posts
    337
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 79 Times in 55 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simmo! View Post
    I'm still a believer that conference organisers are merely facilitators which is a very different role to that of an affiliate organization where, in most cases, they have a degree of responsibility because they are often seen as endorsing programs they represent.

    No-one goes go a conference or exhibition thinking the conference organisers endorse the exhibitors. It's down to attendees to decide who they do and don't work with and a facilitator's role is simply to provide the introduction. If an affiliate decides to represent a company without doing their research then that's their lookout IMO.
    I actually agree with Simmo here - whilst I think what bwin has done/is doing is disgraceful, affiliates need to look into their partners themselves. Research is key.

    In some ways new affiliates adding predatory programmes like bwinners is good - they will get burned and teach them a valuable lesson going forward. The affiliate will become wiser and more focused as a result. Just my opinion (sorry if I offend anyone).

    No-one could of predicted bwin would react like this (from their past actions) but if you are too cautious, you wouldn't promote anyone. A reputable company could be bought tomorrow and new owners could add predatory terms the day after.

    All in all, bwin should be avoided at the conference and affiliates should vent their frustrations/opinions/views when there.

  17. #13
    alexpratt's Avatar
    alexpratt is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    August 2006
    Posts
    1,429
    Blog Entries
    3
    Thanks
    151
    Thanked 717 Times in 423 Posts

    Default

    OK - Thanks for your patience. Please see below what is happening with bwin at our events, I know this is a very hot topic or was back in December and not so much for the last 4 months so I expect a gazzilion replies but I really don't want to enter into the world of forum debates again as we will just go in circles so this will be the only post I put in this thread

    So I will try and lay this out clearly:

    Firstly as per your quote above GFPC, that meeting in Vegas never happened, I don't know why, I did enquire the week before and the week after but unfortunately it didn't happen which is irritating as this would have set up a formal system which all the media companies could buy into and something I could easily use to justify decisions to the powers above me.

    Next - bwin are exhibiting at the Super Show which I know is controversial but it wasn't a decision made quickly, it was thought through and I believe we are correct in what we are doing - Some reasons why are:

    Firstly as Simmo said, we are not a .org, an association or union of any kind. We are a media company that delivers information and facilitates relationships; we are not and never presented ourselves as a watchdog or union. The attendees are all over 18 and are business people who should be sensible enough to do due diligence on who they work with whether this is a google search or something deeper. I think it is incredibly patronising to think we have "lost puppies" walking round signing up with whoever exhibits without checking terms or details of the program...... An easy example of another company in this market is Clarion who organise ICE and who have many exhibitors that you would deem rogue such as jurisdictions, payment companies and software providers but again they trust their delegates would not do a deal with these people without checking them out first.

    In London I sat with a number of big sportsbook affiliates, industry leaders, other programs and bwin themselves and I believe the following to be true

    a) They have not broken the terms of their contract - As BetPartners said if you look at the contract it never promises lifetime revenue share and also allows them to retroactively apply changes.....People may not agree with what they did but they are within their rights so are not rogue

    b) Other programs said this is the route many programs will be going down extremely soon re lifetime revenue share as the current system is not sustainable. In their words "We can now advertise on TV, buy media, do PPC, and although affiliates are important they need to understand it has to be more of a partnership going forward" - he went on but you get the idea - bwin's model is not unique and will be replicated. Again many people won't like this but its a fact of life and this is industry is changing and with regulation in Europe and America it will continue to change and we have to all adapt our businesses.

    c) Most big sportsbook affiliates actually still promote bwin and don't see them as rogue Ė Just look at the posts in the previous bwin thread and see how many big sportsbook affiliates posted. Who are you to decide that bwin should be banned so they canít meet with their AM

    d) A large number of industry thought leaders do not believe we should ban bwin for a number of reasons such as we are media and not an association, it stops a line of communication at the events, it is not an area we should get involved in...Genuinely most people I spoke to did not think we should or in fact have the right to ban them.

    So in conclusion you may not like what bwin have done but they are not rogue, they have not broken their T&C's and are very transparent in terms of what they offer so if you don't like it, don't promote them. Secondly I don't think we should police who exhibits to a degree, i.e. we wouldn't let the real rogues in that are genuinely and very obviously stealing players or aren't paying affiliates, but we will work with programs that some people don't like and others do which is in fact very common, just look at amount of hate and love threads across this forum for various programs.

    I hope that represents our position and I understand some will support this and others won't but it is what it is. If you believe I am wrong then please email me on alex@igamingbusiness.com

    Oh and lastly if you are keen to pursue this line why are you not addressing the mags?? These go to thousands of affiliates regularly (far more than an event) and actually just about all mags I have seen are carrying bwin advertisements including some surprising ones!
    iGB Affiliate - The biggest magazine and events for affiliates in igaming

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to alexpratt For This Useful Post:

    davemerry (4 May 2011), Renee (5 May 2011)

  19. #14
    GamTrak's Avatar
    GamTrak is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,261
    Thanks
    1,678
    Thanked 890 Times in 629 Posts

    Default

    So in other words affiliates are basically left to defend for themselves and should not count on conference facilitators to assist in our effort for fair working conditions and treatment. Thanks for the information.

    Atlease now we know the position being taken by IGB. For the record just because some feel this way DOES NOT make it right, but so be it. Just another example of how most igaming companies our all about themselves and screw everyone else.

    This will also be my last post on the subject as it's no use beating a dead horse. I'll just not support it and I'm sure that I will not be alone! Good luck.

  20. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to GamTrak For This Useful Post:

    Dominique (5 May 2011), Engineer (5 May 2011), GFPC (5 May 2011), mojo (5 May 2011), Smoking (5 May 2011), TheGamblingGuru (6 May 2011), xecutable (5 May 2011)

  21. #15
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,985
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,883 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default

    Thanks for speaking up Robin.

    Since I last spoke on this subject, IGB bought out Affiliate Media (CAP).

    Board of Electric
    Word is pleased to announce the buyout of its partner Affiliate Media Inc, in the igaming
    affiliate events and publishing business (the "Buyout"), for a cash
    consideration of £1.05 million.
    Source

    Make no mistake. There are millions of dollars floating through the IGB world. It's not about affiliates at all. I do not support IGB.

    I'm with you Robin. No sense carrying on about this. It's crystal clear.

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mojo For This Useful Post:

    GamTrak (5 May 2011), GFPC (5 May 2011)

  23. #16
    GFPC is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    3,525
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,145
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 673 Posts

    Default

    I'm with my two sisters on this one! (Mojo and Gametrak) - we have spoken several times over the last couple of years either via phone or email about certain issues.- I think were all on the same page with this. Its crystal clear for all of us!! Nothing really needs to be said.

    As they say " The writing is on the wall " - we all know what this means!

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GFPC For This Useful Post:

    GamTrak (5 May 2011), mojo (5 May 2011)

  25. #17
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,985
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,883 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GamTrak View Post
    Atlease now we know the position being taken by IGB. For the record just because some feel this way DOES NOT make it right, but so be it. Just another example of how most igaming companies our all about themselves and screw everyone else.

    I'll just not support it and I'm sure that I will not be alone! Good luck.
    Excellent post GamTrak.

    You are not alone. I thought this was an AFFILIATE event. Not so.

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mojo For This Useful Post:

    GamTrak (5 May 2011), GFPC (6 May 2011)

  27. #18
    GFPC is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    3,525
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,145
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 673 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Engineer View Post
    I respectfully disagree. IMO, rogue companies like bwin, Grand Prive, Gambling Wages, Cpays, etc. should absolutely not be allowed to recruit new affiliates at conferences. .
    I totally agree - but do not be surprised if you see Grand Prive show up (heard it through the Grape Vine).

  28. #19
    Christoff is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2007
    Location
    Dunmow
    Posts
    337
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 79 Times in 55 Posts

    Default

    to be fair about Grand Prive, they could register as affiliates with fake domains and have AMs (who are not known).

    It's impossible to stop them turning up.

  29. #20
    GFPC is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    3,525
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,145
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 673 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christoff View Post
    to be fair about Grand Prive, they could register as affiliates with fake domains and have AMs (who are not known).

    It's impossible to stop them turning up.
    Or better yet they could just buy a sponsorship. Bwin did!
    I'm sure they would be accepted.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •