Printable View
Quotas in order to be paid are bad in almost ANY form.
I stated they were bad in 2005 (and was called crazy for that) and warned then that one day we would all see them get worse, and we ARE seeing that now.
Rick
Universal4
Side note: Reasonable minimum payment thresholds of $50 to $250 make logical sense and are not the same as minimum numbers of players in order to get paid.
Hi,Quote:
Originally Posted by happyfeet
Sorry but your statement is definitely incorrect, and I think most are confused here.
By 'active wagering players' I mean people who are placing their bets. These active players doesn't necessarily have to be depositing on a monthly basis to count as an 'active player'. Players deposit in different times - sometimes less frequently than we all hope for. For the benefit of everyone, please see an example below:
Sample Affiliate 'newbieaffiliate2016' starts promoting Dafabet and after doing so for the first 2 months, he was able to refer 7 sports players and their activities are the following:
Figure 1
Registration Date Player ID Deposit Turnover Gross Revenue Bonus Net Revenue Feb 1 Player 1 $ 100 $ 400 $ 200 $ 50 $ 150 Feb 5 Player 2 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Feb 11 Player 3 $ 50 $ 200 $ 100 $ 25 $ 75 Feb 16 Player 4 $ 150 $ 600 $ 300 $ 75 $ 225 Feb 21 Player 5 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Feb 22 Player 6 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Feb 29 Player 7 $ 200 $ 800 $ 400 $ 100 $ 300
For Figure 1, the affiliate does not qualify for payout for his 1st month since there are only 4 active players.
Figure 2
Registration Date Player ID Deposit Turnover Gross Revenue Bonus Net Revenue Feb 1 Player 1 $ 0 $ 200 $ 100 $ 50 $ 50 Feb 5 Player 2 $ 150 $ 500 $ 250 $ 125 $ 125 Feb 11 Player 3 $ 0 $ 100 $ 50 $ 0 $ 50 Feb 16 Player 4 $ 100 $ 400 $ 200 $ 100 $ 100 Feb 21 Player 5 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Feb 22 Player 6 $ 400 $ 1200 $ 600 $ 100 $ 500 Feb 29 Player 7 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Mar 2 Player 8 $ 100 $ 100 $ - 100 $ 50 $ - 150
For figure 2 - The affiliate was only able to refer 1 player and only had 4 depositing players BUT since there are 6 active players, he will be eligible for the commission for the month of March.
I hope I made it clear for you, happyfeet. If you have any questions and/or concerns, please don't hesitate to let me know.
Best regards,
Roland
Affiliate Manager
Dafabet Affiliates
Resurrecting this thread from the grave.
Is Dafabet reliable or still on shaky grounds, after all these years.
Well I'm waiting on Septembers commissions still.
Expecting 5 figures after being sometime between 5 active players.
Hopefully it will be sorted soon.
One (1) active player or five million (5,000,000) active players should be a moot point. Because if Daffa888 were genuinely honest, they'd pay commission to affiliates if and when, ANY referred/tagged player made Daffa888 income.Quote:
Originally Posted by rolandcinco.dafabet
To use terms to stop this process happening is dishonest. More so unethical and dodgy.
I have started with dafabet long ago and stopped afte few months, because :
- they did not have appropriate tracking, even with Netrefer.
- very poor and long-lasting communication.
- Only Rolando Cinco replied from their side and he left long ago.
- missing players, even ones who were active, were not tracked well.
- very retarded program, very . it is like we owe them money.
- they do not know in 500 % what affiliate marketing means and how affiliates shoud be treated right :(
- another prospect as a player, they have been cancelling 99 % of my live-bets.
Stay away from them...
I hate this 5 active players term which from some reason is the standard in almost all Asian operators, for a while now I'm no longer agree with this term when new asian brands are contacting me for partnerships, I tell them the only way we'll work together is if you'll waive this term completely otherwise we'll not work together. I advise you all to do the same !Quote:
Originally Posted by AussieDave
Not that I am telling this is ok. I think is reasonable to have this 5player rule for the start like bet365 has it. But I hope you guys understand that this is not just to screw small affiliates. The rule exists to protect themselves against fraud. Because Asians take large bets, they are always at risk of loss where someone makes himself an affiliate, then gets one account that bets 50K on EPL and makes instant profit of half of revenueshare regardless of the outcome of the game.
The Asians should make exception for established western websites, who will not rob them. Or they should make some other rules for big players.
I get the fraud prevention. BUT there's far better ways of ensure your not bitten.
Not paying an affiliate because of a "quota", isn't one of them.
I guess it is the Asian way and I respect it. They do not probably know how much traffic they lost and why their bookies with outstanding odds are not popular outside of Asia, but those stupid rules can be one of culprits. Dafabet was one of last bookies I bet at and the product itself is decent.
It would be nice if they waive the quota for old GPWA members or something like that.
100% agree with you on this one, there are so many other ways to handle this. The real problem is happening when you are working with an Asian operator for a long period and you sent them already a decent amount of players, and one day, they decide to close a market or separate a markets (like 138 did not so long ago) and they decided that the 5 active player is not applied on your account (as it was all this time) but per country... so now I'm sure they already know that after several years we're working together that I'm not a fraud but still they insist on this term which eventually caused to stop working with them.. and this is only one story of many.Quote:
Originally Posted by AussieDave
With 138 the accounts with all the player base just gone in a single day just like that after they decided to separate geos and closed some others.. so who will protect the affiliates from such fraud from the operator side?... that's the real question !
Yes, the minimum 5 player rule hurts the smallest of affiliates and those starting out.
Many operators that have that rule are steadfast with it, in that whether you have a player that does 100k in revenue or a few that do 500 bucks, no payments until the 5th one.
In some cases, this will increase the fraud a tiny amount, and affiliate that has 4 payers and is having trouble landing the 5th may well get a friend to sign up and deposit so he gets paid.
Although some will promote groups with those rules, some will choose to give more exposure to groups that pay on ALL players whether 1 or 100.
Rick
Universal4
Quotas are just a nonsense way for any affiliate program to go out of their way to not pay their affiliates. Whatever commission an affiliate earns is what they're supposed to get paid every month, without any strings attached. We as affiliates have no control over whether we bring in FTDs or not. It's something out of our hands. We can only promote their brands on our sites as best we can and they should at least give us credit for that and recognize us as affiliates, instead of holding back our money from us.
I'll go on to add, any "quota" which allows a program not to pay an affiliate his/her rightful earnings, can hurt any affiliate, new or seasoned. The 5 rule quota sucks, but the ongoing minimum FTD clauses used by some casino programs, is just plain roguish.Quote:
Originally Posted by universal4
You know the terms. Refer X number of FTD's within X months or get slashed back to 10%.
Or this pearler...
If you don't continue to refer X number of FTD's within X number of months, we wont pay you, and we may close your account.
A while back now (many many moons ago) but when these quotas started making an appearance, was told by an upper echelon contact, the sole objective of a "quota", was to force affiliates to continue to promote Brand Z. According to my source, they were growing tired of paying huge dollars to affiliates, who no longer promoted their brands.