CPA or Revenue Share

[gaffg]

Ever since Grand Prive pulled a 'grand prive', there have been many programs either closing their affiliate programs or simply changing their terms and conditions retroactively.

Do you prefer a CPA commission model over Revenue Share?

What would you recommend to new affiliates joining affiliate program?

[F-L-C]

I prefer flat fee plus rev share but as that wasn't on the list I voted rev share

[TravG]

I always go rev share especially if the casino has been established for a few years. The casino makes money in the long run and I want a peice of that. If they make money I make money. Out of curiousity which programs offers a flat fee + rev share?

[FictionNet]

I prefer revshare. I'm sure some affiliate managers would call 'BS' on that, because I often insist on at least an upfront payment for a new program, perhaps a hybrid of prepaid cpa/postpaid revshare, or a prepaid cpa, or a prepaid flat fee. Once I've run one or two successful campaigns with a prepaid client, and not had any incident or negative reports, I usually move them to standard postpaid revshare, because I prefer it in the long run. That said, right now my campaigns are a varied mixture of revshare, cpa, flat-fee, tenancy and hybrids and I rather like the safety of the spread.

[Elisha]

I prefer Rev Share as I am promoting Bingo and its hard to get High CPA's on it ..If I am lucky I get a high roller that can make good amount of money.

[Doolally]

Rev share for me every time although I can see why some would be changing to CPA with the amount of programs retroactively changing their Ts & Cs.

[mojo]

No matter the circumstances, I always see testiments that cpa ends in disaster. That's why I will never take that deal. Either you are in it for the long hall or you are not. If the long haul goes south, you have done all that you can. JMO.

[cass]

We prefer revenue share. As Rob said it will stand you in good stead in the long run on condition you're working with a reputable program. If your site does not perform on a flat fee basis most affiliate programs will negate on the deal and revert to a normal revenue share instead.

If it is a new program that wants top placements on our sites we'll take a flat fee and revenue share for a minimum of three months.

[bboyspyder]

I decide based on the site I promote. Both CPAs and Rev Share have their pros and cons you just have to decide yourself which is going to be more profitable.

[SlotsAff]

I always go for revenue share as I believe it's more profitable long term

[Anthony]

I always go for revenue share as I believe it's more profitable long term

I second that.

[Roulette Zeitung]

CPA only brings grief and sorrow. Revenue share is a fair deal for both sides.

[blendtec]

Rev share for me too, building a player base and residual income is very appealing.

[baldidiot]

Rev share without question, anything else just feels like I'm throwing money away.

[ocreditor]

We prefer: Revenue share. Our site visitors are of high value, they play and they play a lot, over time and with high value. A CPA that would grant us a fixed price per player delivered would not maximize profit. We're in it for the long run!

[MichaelCorfman]

I prefer flat fee plus rev share but as that wasn't on the list I voted rev share

I believe that "Hybrid CPA + Revenue Share" is the option you are after. That means there is a fixed flat fee payed on signup (most likely at a lower rate than would be the case with a pure CPA model) plus a revenue share over the longer term (most likely at a lower rate than would be the case with a pure revenue share model).

Michael

[thebookiesoffers]

I always try and go rev share, but have a couple of tenancy + rev share deals going at the moment.

I did speak to some one the other week and although not really fair to say who they are they are probably one of the biggest affiliates going, at least in sports betting anyway. He surprised me and said they always try and go CPA until a bookie proves they can manage players accounts and then they might go rev share

[MichaelCorfman]

For the most part, at Casino City, we participate in a revenue share arrangements with affiliate programs. We believe that is the best way to structure a long-term partnership with an affiliate program.

The one exception to that is programs associated with sites that do not refuse to take US players. While we do work with a few sites that do not exclude US players, our focus is really international, and we are not willing to engage in a revenue share arrangement when there is even a remote possibility that some of the payers whose activities we earn a revenue share on could end up being from the United States. In that situation we will only work on a CPA or CPM advertising basis.

In a weird sort of way, it is the passage of the UIGEA that allowed us to switch to operating predominantly on a revenue share basis in our current affiliate program relationships, given the conservative posture we take. That is because prior to UIGEA virtually all online gaming sites accepted US players. So prior to passage of the UIGEA we worked exclusively on a CPA or CPM advertising basis.

Michael

[Golan.WingateAff]

Yeah, totally agree with those who said CPA is the source to a lot of problems.
Glad to see the majority here prefer Revhsare

[Rakenews.com]

Revenue Share is the best option for a long term partnership.
We always looking for players that they like to bet huge amounts of $ !

Its a pity for someone to lose a good commision that usually is over $1000 because he got the CPA offer for $100.
Patience is needed at that option (rev. share) but will never regret for your decision.