Is the joining together of operators and affiliate programs good for affiliates?

[thepokerkeep]

And none of these 65 have ever given poor service?

I get on great with my AM also though after my opposition on here i may not get a birthday present

But i am prepared to bet that there are affiliates on here that dont have such great experience with some of the programs on the list

I bet that not all 65 offer a great customer service with quick responses to communication, in fact i would say the majority let themselves down in this area.

So then a board of directors made up of affiliates, programs and forum operators should be a good thing. A code of conduct that would be applied across all segments of the industry should help all affiliates, big or small.

The casinos/programs that are failing in one or more areas would have to shape up or be excluded from the forum/alliance/group.

I would also bet that those that bring in more money for the programs get better treatment than those that dont

My point is ones experience is subjective and that while one affiliate may have a great experience another one may not

This is typical in almost any business environment. The high earners/super affiliates should get special treatment and a few perks.

A code of conduct that ensures open/timely communication can only be good for the smaller/newer affiliates.

Communication from AM's is on a whole poor, that is the one thing that bugs me, always has and it is no different with this, i mean we are really being kept in the loop here aint we.

At this point in time, the programs are just putting together their agenda for this meeting. It makes perfect sense to me that they need to have an exclusive get together where they can hash out a plan. I don't see any way that holding an open meeting with affiliates and forum owners would be beneficial for anyone at this point.

Once they have an official plan/agenda, then it makes sense to bring in the other segments of the industry.

They did not have to make this meeting public at all. They could have simply met in private, made their decisions and then made an announcement after the fact. I think the fact they did announce their intentions and the fact that Shaun has been open and up front with us shows that they want us to be in the loop.

The agenda for this first meeting is mainly focused on; CAP (Lou and Warren), advertising (certification/sponsorship) fees, the number of conventions on the roster and the value of those conventions, and to develop a basic plan for the future.
The first three items mainly affect the programs so it makes sense that they don't want other parties taking part in this meeting.
Until they decide whether there is value or support for this group/association going into the future, there isn't much sense or need to bring us or the forum owners into the discussions.

But all that is beside the point anyway, when you have the police policing the police abuse happens no matter the initial intention.

My opposition to this is firming up by the second.

You're jumping to conclusions. Shaun has made it clear that if there is going to be any policing involved with this alliance, we will have some representation.

I see many positives in having a committee made up of members from each segment of the industry.

What I would like to see come out of this:

• Code of Conduct for affiliate programs and affiliates
• Representation for all affiliates, big or small
• An elected Board of Directors made up equally of members from each portion of the industry
• Independent (paid) mod/admin staff
• A certification system with a clear cut set of guidelines/requirements
• Enforcement mechanism for those who breach the code of conduct and/or the certification requirements

This Board could:

Compile and publish lists of rogue programs and rogue affiliates.
Handle disputes between affiliates and programs.
Etc....

So, as long as the programs listen to us and take what we're saying to heart, I have no problem supporting them.

One last thought:
Whatever comes out of this meeting, we will always have GPWA, PAL, AGD, etc. Worst case, we will still have the same voice and support system we always had. Best case, we will have a stronger, more reactive mechanism at our disposal.

If the programs decide to create their own exclusive forums, we really have no control over it. We (affiliates) have had similar forums for years now CAP, GPWA, AGD etc).
So, bottom line, I would rather show them support and offer suggestions that would be in the best interest of all involved. I see no sense in alienating them at this point.


Shaun,

If the group decides to go the "forum" route, I would suggest that Michael has already provided you with the perfect venue. This board has been set up for the exclusive use of affiliate managers. An alternative would be the AFA forums as they seem to be dormant at this time anyway.

[Betpartners]

An excellent response pokerkeep that does bring up some good points, if i may i shall repsond to each one and explain further why i am opposed to this in principle.

So then a board of directors made up of affiliates, programs and forum operators should be a good thing. A code of conduct that would be applied across all segments of the industry should help all affiliates, big or small.

The casinos/programs that are failing in one or more areas would have to shape up or be excluded from the forum/alliance/group.

I simply do not see that working, i would never imagine one of the major players like say ladbrokes being thrown to the kerb, just wont happen, their influence is far too big and carries too much weight and if they were thrown to the kerb because a commiteee voted them off despite the AM's voting to keep them it would render the commitee in the eyes of the bigger players worthless, they want this so they can control it.

If you read their mission statement is says they want to take their industry back.

This is typical in almost any business environment. The high earners/super affiliates should get special treatment and a few perks.

A code of conduct that ensures open/timely communication can only be good for the smaller/newer affiliates..

Oh i disagree, it should be the new affiliates that get the special treatment, the encouragement and such like, they are the ones that need the support, the super affiliates already have the highest CPA and revenue share, that is a given.

To give preference to them when they have already succedeed is for me fundamentally wrong, but you are right they are treated better because the AM's dont want to lose them, i accept that is the real world, its called looking after their own interests at the end of the day.

At this point in time, the programs are just putting together their agenda for this meeting. It makes perfect sense to me that they need to have an exclusive get together where they can hash out a plan. I don't see any way that holding an open meeting with affiliates and forum owners would be beneficial for anyone at this point.

Once they have an official plan/agenda, then it makes sense to bring in the other segments of the industry.

They did not have to make this meeting public at all. They could have simply met in private, made their decisions and then made an announcement after the fact. I think the fact they did announce their intentions and the fact that Shaun has been open and up front with us shows that they want us to be in the loop.

The agenda for this first meeting is mainly focused on; CAP (Lou and Warren), advertising (certification/sponsorship) fees, the number of conventions on the roster and the value of those conventions, and to develop a basic plan for the future.
The first three items mainly affect the programs so it makes sense that they don't want other parties taking part in this meeting.
Until they decide whether there is value or support for this group/association going into the future, there isn't much sense or need to bring us or the forum owners into the discussions.

Yes i can agree to that, that is not my biggest concern, my biggest concern is that it wont stop there, and i am afraid even if they come out with a statement that it would stop there i would find that hard to swallow, once they have that organised power they are not going to sit on it, today its conferences etc, tomorrow who knows what.

They are of course entitled to have their own association and decide these things in private in the same way affiliates do, the difference is that as affiliates when we are organised we can stop one bad program or a rule change or whatever, how effective would we be against 65,

If they have nothing to hide then surely there is no reason not to involve representatives from the affiliate world, we are part of the very same industry and therefore should be entitled at the very least to know what is being discussed, i have not to date seen an agenda, it is private.

.You're jumping to conclusions. Shaun has made it clear that if there is going to be any policing involved with this alliance, we will have some representation.

I see many positives in having a committee made up of members from each segment of the industry.

Sorry but Shaun has not made that clear, Shaun has already said that he has no idea if they even think its appropriate him discussing it here, Shaun has asked us what we think in relation to that and i did agree that it could be a good idea and acceptable, but thats just Shaun and he has made it clear that he is not speaking for the others.

This is what i mean pokerkeep, Shaun is the only one speaking about this and is not speaking for the group as a whole, we have no idea if this idea will be discussed or implemented, there has been zero communication from them apart from Shaun who i repeat is not their spokeman by his own admission.


Pokerkeep i dont disgree with this for the sake of it, but wheres the transparancy that CAP were vilified for not giving, why is acceptable for AM's to do this behind closed doors when it effects us directly.

Show me a single industry organisation that does not seek to influence how its industry is run, every union, every board, every whatever does, why shoud this be any different and that is what frightens me.

Becasue we are of the same industry but are not included, instead we will have to fall back on our own organisations in the same way unions do when employee organisations are organised.

I do not seee them allowing us in and if they do it will be in minor roles

This set up is for their own interests, which like i say they are entitled to do, just be nice if they would admit it and be open about it so we know were we stand.

we may well get on like a house on fire, but not the best start in my opinion

[Dominique]

Well, at this point I find it hard to comment, because everything is speculation really. All we know for a fact is that they are meeting, and that they plan to form some sort of association for the betterment of their section of the industry.

There is basically nothing wrong with that, most industries in the world have these associations.

What is a bit worrysome is that operators will have a united front, but affiliates are splintered into various groups that have a history of not cooperating (to put it mildly). Since we interact with operators and depend on them, we will need the same unified representation for ourselves.

By nature affiliates are individualistic, think outside the box and the more unique we are, the better we do with our sites. We are entrepreneurs, independent thinkers, and by our very nature, we will never agree on everything.

The operators are diverse also and won't agree on everything either. Yet they manage to come together to further their cause.

I think the appropriate reaction for us is to work on a cohesive collaboration of ALL affiliates.

[thepokerkeep]

I agree with you that if the programs go "power crazy" we'll have a rough ride for a while. But I think we have more power than you're giving us credit for.

I simply do not see that working, i would never imagine one of the major players like say ladbrokes being thrown to the kerb, just wont happen, their influence is far too big and carries too much weight and if they were thrown to the kerb because a commiteee voted them off despite the AM's voting to keep them it would render the commitee in the eyes of the bigger players worthless, they want this so they can control it.

I believe if the programs go off and do their own thing, the likelihood is high that the coalition would crumble before it could wreak much havoc. They need a system of checks and balances in place for it to work.

If some of them decide to try controlling commission/CPA rates I believe there is enough competition to ensure things remain fair. And if I'm wrong and they do attempt price fixing, etc...
CAP thought they could control the industry... look at them today. I think (hope) the programs have learned a lesson from it; we (the affiliates) are ready, willing and able to bring the big guys to their knees.

My source for this statement is solid:

The agenda for this first meeting is mainly focused on; CAP (Lou and Warren), advertising (certification/sponsorship) fees, the number of conventions on the roster and the value of those conventions, and to develop a basic plan for the future.

They are still compiling a list of agenda items but at this moment, these are the main topics. I doubt they'll even get through this list in the time period they have allotted for the meeting.

I think it will be many months (and several more meetings) before we have a completely clear picture of their vision of the future... it will take that long for them (if ever) to form a consensus. I don't see them asking for our input before then.

[wagerprofits]

Dominique

You have hit the nail on the head with the first part of your post

"All we know for a fact is that they are meeting, and that they plan to form some sort of association for the betterment of their section of the industry."

At this point that is it period.



[QUOTE=Dominique;531687]What is a bit worrysome is that operators will have a united front, but affiliates are splintered into various groups that have a history of not cooperating (to put it mildly). Since we interact with operators and depend on them, we will need the same unified representation for ourselves.


If this group is to go ahead i will be pushing for a board the board will be formed in my mind of 3 affiliates, 3 operators and 3 association ower. This way everybody has a voice.

Shaun

Well, at this point I find it hard to comment, because everything is speculation really. All we know for a fact is that they are meeting, and that they plan to form some sort of association for the betterment of their section of the industry.

There is basically nothing wrong with that, most industries in the world have these associations.

What is a bit worrysome is that operators will have a united front, but affiliates are splintered into various groups that have a history of not cooperating (to put it mildly). Since we interact with operators and depend on them, we will need the same unified representation for ourselves.

By nature affiliates are individualistic, think outside the box and the more unique we are, the better we do with our sites. We are entrepreneurs, independent thinkers, and by our very nature, we will never agree on everything.

The operators are diverse also and won't agree on everything either. Yet they manage to come together to further their cause.

I think the appropriate reaction for us is to work on a cohesive collaboration of ALL affiliates.

[wagerprofits]

You should be happy i am going to send you a gift.

Feel free to send me Spurs shirt my birtday is August at least by then the shirt will be cheaper due to relegation and no shirt sponsor...............



Shaun

See its started already, i open my mouth and the abuse and underhanded tricks begin, my day has been ruined now

[Chalkie]

You should be happy i am going to send you a gift.

Feel free to send me Spurs shirt my birtday is August at least by then the shirt will be cheaper due to relegation and no shirt sponsor...............



Shaun

Shaun in a Spurs shirt sponsored by Mansion

[AmCan]

I find it amazing how strongly negative this poll is going.

This is an industry almost entirely based on trust, especially for any american, there is pretty much no legal recourse if a program doesn't live upto it's terms.

People are entitled to their opinions and to be concerned, but this whole idea that creating a group suddenly jeopardizes us makes no sense to me. I've said earlier: If they set up a cartel, there are always those who aren't in the cartel. If they wanted to band together to create cartel to change terms, they don't need a "group", let alone tell us about it.

This group is basically a reaction to CAP and is mainly about reducing the cost of trade shows.

[Betpartners]

You should be happy i am going to send you a gift.

Feel free to send me Spurs shirt my birtday is August at least by then the shirt will be cheaper due to relegation and no shirt sponsor...............



Shaun

I cannot see any circumstances that i would even contemplate touching an Arsenal shirt nevermind buying one,

[Betpartners]

Ok there has been an influx of positive waves for this proposed group and i could easily counter each point made but its harping over old ground.

Guess its a case now of wait and see, in my case with trepidation

[wagerprofits]

Chalkie

At no point did I say I would wear it, i have a nice Range Rover that needs a good clean so I could think of nothing better to use, i would wash it after and then keep it next to toilet just in case we ever run out of bog paper....................

Shaun

Shaun in a Spurs shirt sponsored by Mansion

[wagerprofits]

AmCamn

I was kind of shocked that the poll was started but these days nothing should shock in this industry.

I can understand 100% why this poll looks so bad, simple reason the group made one public statment no fact or foundation as to how the association will be formed, people are being asked to trust the unknown.

Until things become clear i expect the poll to continue the way it is.

I hope that once CAC has happened we can post a new poll with the fiull facts and i would hope that it would get support, of course you will always get the die hards that will never want anything to do with it and will never support it but what can you do!!!!!!!!


Shaun

I find it amazing how strongly negative this poll is going.

This is an industry almost entirely based on trust, especially for any american, there is pretty much no legal recourse if a program doesn't live upto it's terms.

People are entitled to their opinions and to be concerned, but this whole idea that creating a group suddenly jeopardizes us makes no sense to me. I've said earlier: If they set up a cartel, there are always those who aren't in the cartel. If they wanted to band together to create cartel to change terms, they don't need a "group", let alone tell us about it.

This group is basically a reaction to CAP and is mainly about reducing the cost of trade shows.

[Betpartners]

Well i am a die hard at this point, but not an ignorant one, if after CAC, clarification is given and lays to rest the uneasiness of this then i will be the first to jump up and say this is a good thing.

But it works both ways and there are die hards on both sides.

You want the Spurs top Shaun to spice things up, i know

[arkyt]

Without knowing exactly what the groups missions / plans are its impossible to say good or bad ...

[mojo]

I still support this. I do not think the programs are trying to take over the world. They can't. We wouldn't let them.

There is nothing wrong with another venue for programs. We are still smarting and vulerable from CAP. I understand that. But the last thing we should do is assign the same power to one entity like we foolishly did with CAP. Whether GPWA, AGD or PAL or anyone. That kind of power should never be given to any one forum ever again.

Not that I wouldn't trust the GPWA to do an outstanding job. Unless Michaels' evil twin shows up and it is proven that Steven has multiple personalities like Sybil and they are both locked up in the basement...

I would have no problem with GPWA representing us.

However, I do not want ONE forum representing us! It's a recipe for disaster.

How do we decide who should be the big players here? It's by letting people who care TRY.

So let's let the programs and anyone else that wishes to try a forum have a go. In the end affilaites decide. We should not tell anyone, including programs, not to try. The next step we make as a group of affiliates should be thought out and considered.

Thank you for letting me rant.

[universal4]

proven that Steven has multiple personalities like Sybil and they are both locked up in the basement...

Shockingly, they haven't locked any of them up....



Rick
Universal4

[Nandakishore]

So let's let the programs and anyone else that wishes to try a forum have a go. In the end affilaites decide. We should not tell anyone, including programs, not to try. The next step we make as a group of affiliates should be thought out and considered.

The programs, the forums like GPWA and the affiliates are three distinct entities although there are obvious interdependencies between the three. There can be clash of interest also between the affiliates and the forums who depend on sponsoring as a source of income. But the forums, like the GPWA forum, are and will remain our main platform to bring forward our requirements and also to control the other two entitities. We are doing this already, otherwise the CS problem may not have surfaced at all. But we have to think about making this process more effective and sustainable.

[casinobonusguy]

And none of these 65 have ever given poor service?

I get on great with my AM also though after my opposition on here i may not get a birthday present

But i am prepared to bet that there are affiliates on here that dont have such great experience with some of the programs on the list

I bet that not all 65 offer a great customer service with quick responses to communication, in fact i would say the majority let themselves down in this area.

I would also bet that those that bring in more money for the programs get better treatment than those that dont

My point is ones experience is subjective and that while one affiliate may have a great experience another one may not

Communication from AM's is on a whole poor, that is the one thing that bugs me, always has and it is no different with this, i mean we are really being kept in the loop here aint we.

But all that is beside the point anyway, when you have the police policing the police abuse happens no matter the initial intention.

My opposition to this is firming up by the second.

I only deal with about 22 of the 65 and I have no issues with my partners.Only speaking for myself here as it is a POLL

[wagerprofits]

Hi Guys

As CAC is getting closer another PR has just been put out, so i thought to keep you all in the loop I would post it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

25 March 2009

Gambling Affiliate Programs First General Meeting at Casino Affiliate Convention in Amsterdam

March 25, 2009 – Gambling Affiliate Programs

(http://gamblingaffiliateprograms.org/) (a.k.a. GAP) is organising their first General Meeting for registered affiliate programs in advance of the Casino Affiliate Convention 2009 (http://www.cac2009.com) in Amsterdam. Over eighty programs have already registered for this important meeting, to discuss the major industry issues and needs. The meeting will take place at the NH Grand Krasnapolsky Hotel on Sunday March 29th, 2009.

In light of recent industry events, operators decided to come together and form Gambling Affiliate Programs. This alliance is a group of operators proactively joining forces to discuss ways in which they can create unification within the industry; to foster the development of relationships between operators and affiliates. The member programs have agreed upon an agenda for the general meeting, and intend to arrive at a consensus on the major industry issues, which include events and conferences, affiliate communities, certification and the role of GAP itself.

“The formation of GAP is a proactive step forward for the respected members of the online gaming affiliate industry,” said one of the Program Members. “The General Meeting will help attending programs to establish industry goals and standards, ensuring professionalism, accountability and transparency in this ever-growing sector. We at are looking forward to the meeting and the great potential it provides.”

Programs not yet registered are invited to do so at www.gamblingaffiliateprograms.org. GAP’s mission is to ensure that the online gaming industry will be managed and networked professionally and effectively in the future, and that operators, gaming affiliate programs and the affiliates themselves have a resource in place that best represents their needs and those of their business partners.

This first GAP General Meeting is being held in advance of the Casino Affiliate Convention 2009 (http://www.cac2009.com), in Amsterdam. CAC is taking place from March 30th until April 1st at the the NH Grand Krasnapolsky Hotel.

Registered Partners for GAP first General Meeting:

888
400Affiliates
Aced
affcorner
Affiliate lounge / Betsson
AffiliateClub
Affiliates United
Betfair Affiliates
Betsafe Affiliates
BetUK
Betway Partners, GNUF
Bingo
Bodog Affiliates
BrightShare
Buzzluck Affiliate Program
Cake Poker Affiliates
Casino Coins
Casinoblasters
Commission Account
CWC Affiliates (ClubWorldCasinos)
DoylesRoom
Earn United
EarnReal
EGO
Eurobet Affiliates
Everest Affiliates
Expekt
Fortune Affiliates
Gamingpromo
Golden Associate
Golden Matrix
Heaven Affiliates
Hollywood Affiliates
Income Access
Intertops
Ladbrokes
LuckyAcePartners
Mainstreet Affiliates
Mansion
Market-ace
MontelPartners
Paddy Power
Partnerlogic
PartyPartners and AffClub
PDC Affiliates
Pitbull Partners
PlayShare Partners
PokerStars
Regal Affiliates
Revenuex
Rome Partners
Roxy Affiliates
Scratch2Cash
Slotland Affiliates
Star Partner
Tower Affiliates
TwoLinx Affiliates
Uffiliates (88
Villento Affiliates
Virgin Games
Wager Profits

[Betpartners]

well i have joined up, i love the godfather films and in particular this line

"Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer"

Ok just joking a little, they are of course not the enemy

But i want to keep my nose in here as i do not see this in the same light as a lot of people, in fact i see this in a very dim light indeed

And sorry but could not help but laugh at this bit

“The General Meeting will help attending programs to establish industry goals and standards, ensuring professionalism, accountability and transparency in this ever-growing sector.

A quick look down that list and some of those programs are not considered professional at all, how you are going to convince everyone that you can attain these lofty goals is beyond me.

And i cant help thinking that this new forum is a way of bypassing all other forums.

But i will wait and see how this develops and hopefully i am proven to have been mistaken in my sceptism of all this

I hope so, i really do