Bewinners a Sponsor at the Dublin SuperShow?

[Betpartners]

Hey Judy, personally I think that words are important, but for now thats not important, I do however have a quick question for you

Would you not think this particular term is far worse than anything that Bwin have done

XXXXXXXX has the right to monitor the Partner Site to ensure you are complying with the terms of this Agreement and you shall provide xxxxxxxxx with all data and information (including, but not limited to, passwords) to enable xxxxxxxx to perform such monitoring at no charge.

I do, in fact I find that one of the worst terms ever, in any affiliate program agreement

I have deliberatley replaced the name of the said affiliate program with a bunch of xxxxxxxxx, but I tell you this, I promote this company, you promote them, almost everyone promotes them, they are not rogue and have never been campaigned against to my knowledge and yet that term is outrageous.

That term allows the program in question to access your sites, by accepting that agreement that is in fact what we have all done, not just you and me Judy, but as far as I can see almost everyone that is against Bwin's terms,

At least Bwin do not have the right to demand passwords to your sites and remember refusal to provide your password is grounds for termination.

I cannot understand why affiliates promote programs with far worse terms and say absolutely nothing but go after programs and not just Bwin that do not have such outrageous terms.

There are some other beauties as well, this one is from an award winning program that we both promote and a hell of a lot of others do as well, a very well known brand

You shall incorporate and prominently and continually display the most up-to-date links provided by us on all pages of your website in a manner and location agreed by us and you shall not alter the form, location or operation of the links without our prior written consent. You are eligible for Referral Commissions based upon your continued promotion of Sports at xxxxxxxx, Casino at xxxxxxxx, Poker at xxxxxxxx, Games at xxxxxxxx or Bingo at xxxxxxxx. We reserve the right to reduce Referral Commission percentages if you reduce your efforts to recruit new Customers. Your reduced or suspended promotion of our sites will be deemed to represent your termination of this Agreement.

So in effect if you move a link, remove a link or just simply reduce promotions from this program they have the right to terminate the agreement, in effect the way you start to promote them has to be maintained otherwise they could close your account.

But they have to agree first on the location and it has to be on every page of your website lol, sorry have to laugh, and guess what both of us Judy have broken this term and have given this company grounds for termination.

I find that scandalous, but I love the program, I do very well from them and they are extremly popular, but those terms are bad, very bad.

I could go on time and time again, there are terms out there that have been accepted by affiliates that are far worse than Bwin's or come to that RA/CR.

If affiliates really want to remove and rogue such programs you will find that there will be just handful left for 10000's of affiliates to promote, the industry would just collapse.

Building relationships with affiliate managers and affiliate programs is the best defence, because seriously people if you think Bwin's terms are really that bad I can assure you, that you are promoting programs that are far worse.

Appears it is time for affiliates to start going through all terms and conditions with a fine tooth comb because it does seem that the watchdogs, unions, organisations etc that are so relied on by affiliates are just not catching these awful terms.

Finally, I have always been aware of these terms, I read the terms and I have to think that either my fellow affiliates have not read the terms, which is not the best way to conduct a business, or they have and have found these terms acceptable.

[casinobonusguy]

You should identify that program as i do not recall any password terms when i signed up but would like to know.I have maybe 3 programs i signed up since 2008.I think passwords to our servers ,ftps etc opens them up to a liability issue if anything went wrong and not really smart on their part .This thread is about BWIN so if you want to make an issue with the other program with terms above please start a new thread and I will join in discussion.

[Betpartners]

You should identify that program as i do not recall any password terms when i signed up but would like to know.I have maybe 3 programs i signed up since 2008.I think passwords to our servers ,ftps etc opens them up to a liability issue if anything went wrong and not really smart on their part .This thread is about BWIN so if you want to make an issue with the other program with terms above please start a new thread and I will join in discussion.

I agree Judy, this thread is about Bwin, that is why I never named the programs, I also have no interest in starting campaigns against these said programs, I was just pointing out that almost every single affiliate I know actively promotes programs with terms a lot worse than Bwin
and considering how many affiliates appear angry with Bwin it does bring up the question why?

Either terms and conditions have not been read or ignored on a wide scale basis and if that is the case one has to ask why Bwin? especially when no one can provide one bit of proof that I have requested time and time again.

I seriously question the motivation behind this Bwin campaign, it makes no sense if the terms are looked at with a professional and business attitude and especially when compared to other huge programs.

If I was campaigning against Bwin, I would make damn sure that I never had other programs with far worse terms on my sites.

I have now come to the conclusion, that if one is a member on here that is popular and vocal, that one can start a campaign against anyone one wants to and have them attacked at will, no proof is required, one can ignore facts, one can simply refuse to acknowledge common sense and just carry on making unsubstantiated allegations and you will still retain that core support.

That to me sends a clear message to programs that they can and probably will be targeted at some point no matter what their terms are, it simply does not matter as proof, evidence, call it what you want is not required, that will really instill confidence in programs on here I am sure, bet half the programs are secretly thing, for the grace of god there goes I.

But, you can have worse terms and conditions, in fact terrible terms and conditions, but if you are making money for the some members on here, they will not target you, regardless if your terms stink to high heaven.

Yes, I do seriously question the motivation.

[mojo]

I have now come to the conclusion, that if one is a member on here that is popular and vocal, that one can start a campaign against anyone one wants to and have them attacked at will, no proof is required, one can ignore facts, one can simply refuse to acknowledge common sense and just carry on making unsubstantiated allegations and you will still retain that core support.


Yes, I do seriously question the motivation.

You are now losing me on your argument Martin. I don't see how the above applies here.

This 'campaign' has been picked up accross many boards and orgs. I don't think we can credit (or admonish) any one popular person.

Take a look at AGD, if you haven't already. It explains in detail what the majority is upset about. Bwinners Rogue.

I know what you are going to say. That the program had it in their terms from the beginning that they could change their terms any time they want.

That isn't always the case.

Say you take your shirt to the cleaners and they ruin it. You go to pick it up and you are directed to a sign saying 'Not Responsible for Damaged Clothing'. Well, they can't do that and of course and would lose in a court of law. The sign does not exhonerate them on it's own. Mitigating circumstances will be looked at.

There was no negotiating between the parties. You either accept them or to bad for you. I don't think that would work with contract law either.

But we're not talking about law. All we have is the various groups on the same page as Steve mentioned. That's pretty awesome in itself and I agree with Steve that it is still a good day.

[Betpartners]

You are now losing me on your argument Martin. I don't see how the above applies here.

This 'campaign' has been picked up accross many boards and orgs. I don't think we can credit (or admonish) any one popular person.

Take a look at AGD, if you haven't already. It explains in detail what the majority is upset about. Bwinners Rogue.

I know what you are going to say. That the program had it in their terms from the beginning that they could change their terms any time they want.

That isn't always the case.

Say you take your shirt to the cleaners and they ruin it. You go to pick it up and you are directed to a sign saying 'Not Responsible for Damaged Clothing'. Well, they can't do that and of course and would lose in a court of law. The sign does not exhonerate them on it's own. Mitigating circumstances will be looked at.

There was no negotiating between the parties. You either accept them or to bad for you. I don't think that would work with contract law either.

But we're not talking about law. All we have is the various groups on the same page as Steve mentioned. That's pretty awesome in itself and I agree with Steve that it is still a good day.

Hey Paula, think in all fairness I never had you on the side of my point of view anyway, though your always welcome

It is not that evil clause that all programs have, the we can change at will etc etc when we want, that I place all my arguement in, though it does cover the retrocative quota clause, it is more the fact that there was absolutely nothing in the old terms and conditions about lifetime commission and the percentage of rev share.

The quota clause is worrying for me, I will admit, but it does not make them rogue because of that clause, it makes them predatory and for me this is important, I respectfully disagree with Judy in regards to the importance of words in this matter.

The other issues simply do not come in to it as they were never promised and are not retrocative, but again they are to a degree predatory.

I have read the AGD thread and wanted to post, but I am rather unpopular over there and felt it best not to, regardless, the AGD has a different standard by which it rogues programs, different from the GPWA as Michael will confirm and the GPWA have not rogued Bwin, they won't, because Bwin are not rogue in their eyes, GPWA have suspended Bwin for a contract violation, I believe Michael will confirm this.

With regards to negotiations between the parties, that indeed happened, far more than people are aware, you will have to take my word on that, but be assured, serious and lengthy negotiations did take place.

Those negotiations were for a large part scuppered by some of the actions that took place at that time, those actions did not serve the best interests of the affiliates, that you can take to the bank and progress was made and a negotiated deal was very close at hand, but you cannot conduct such a campaign as this, that on occasions became very vicious and personal and not expect a negative reaction.

Affiliate interests were not best served by some of the affiliates themselves, that is a cast iron fact and I am sorry to have to say all this.

It is ok affiliates patting themselves on the back for driving Bwin away from forums etc, but what about the affiliates that did not want that, what about the affiliates that want Bwin available on forums to serve them and the argument that new affiliates should be protected does not hold water with me, new affiliates should make sure they read the terms and conditions, as should experienced ones and then decide if they want to be apart of that program, affiliates cannot keep on complaining when they do not read terms and conditions, I am sorry but that should be affiliates first step before signing up for any program.

[mojo]

I don't use bwin but what concerned me more was the 5% drop after 3 years. Had affiliates been aware this would come down the pike, how many players do you think they would send? To me it's underhanded and speaks for itself.

At any rate, this has all been debated over and over so I won't rehash it all ad nauseam.

This thread actually was addressing IGB's inaction to the majority. If there is a 'silent' majority, they need to speak up lol.

We rarely see eye to eye Martin but I wouldn't say never. But I always enjoy a good debate with you. Sometimes I'm even persuaded to see the other side of things, though not in this case.

[PingPong]

have to agree with Betpartners. even dogs show loyalty, why affiliates can't? They should quietly accept every bone the master throws to them. If there is no bone, master doesn't need you - commit harakiri.

[xecutable]

have to agree with Betpartners. even dogs show loyalty, why affiliates can't? They should quietly accept every bone the master throws to them. If there is no bone, master doesn't need you - commit harakiri.

As useless your comment is, I will take the time to clarify a few things for you.

First of all, comparing affiliates to dogs or any kind of 4 legged animals is a bit inappropriate.

Second, no one is supposed to be the "master" in the partnership, you are supposed to be partners, hence care for each other for mutual benefits. That kind of a relationship differs a lot than the one between a "dog" and a "master".

And third, an attitude of "If you don't like it feel free to leave" has always proven to be bad for business, cause in the end every single source of revenue matters.

Have a good day.

Regards

[DaftDog]

have to agree with Betpartners. even dogs show loyalty, why affiliates can't? They should quietly accept every bone the master throws to them. If there is no bone, master doesn't need you - commit harakiri.

Dogs also smell each others arses.

[Betpartners]

I am wondering what he agrees with, whatever it is, it is unfair on dogs, would never treat a dog as a slave, for starters mine just ignore me anyway, in fact its is similar to being on here, I spout my mouth off and it makes no effect at all, probably a message there for me lol.