New Stargames terms&conditiones, is this a part of it?

[marvel]

Hi Nicole,

some of my partners got this mail today... is this a part of your new terms? What means no activity... no registration or no players aktive? Means the first option than is your program no more better some other program here!! If this true you do one of the badest rule in your terms.

Good afternoon,

I am writing to you on behalf of Star Games and in reference to your xxxx account, and have noticed that there has been no activity in over 1 year.


Our affiliate are encouraged to continuously push our casino and in turn generate a steady flow of new depositing, and unfortunately this is no longer happening.


Should you terminate your promotions of Star Games you'll appreciate that this collaboration is no longer mutually beneficial.


I would therefore be grateful if you would indicate you intend on immediately promoting our casino again in order to make amend for the past poor performance. However should no reply be forthcoming this account shall be earmarkeed for deativation.




Kind regards
josh

[Nicole Sims]

Hi Marvel,

Recently we have updated our terms, and at the same time we now have a larger affiliate team. At the moment contacting all our affiliates, and some of them have lapsed are no longer active. We are working hard to reactive those affiliates, which in the end will benefit both parties.

If your partner has received this mail please have them contact their Affiliate Manager immediately.

[marvel]

Hi Nicole,

What you will do if a Account no active because is on old partner-network account, can´t promote but the players are active... difficult!!

Here the new terms....

6. Terms of Payment

[...]


3.


[...]


The operator reserves the right to change an affiliate’s commission payment plan towards future referrals, and if needed existing user referrals, for any of the following reasons but not limited to: (i) Non-performance, (ii) Inactivity

Is the same like you can do what you want, right!!!

Thanks for your replay Nicole,
think for me is time to be end of promote your casino. Never will promote a casino of this rule.

[Nicole Sims]

The plan could change on future referrals, but will not effect your past referrals. If you are working with your Affiliate Manager something can be worked out that is beneficial for both parties.

[Nicole Sims]

The plan could change on future referrals, but will not effect your past referrals. If you are working with your Affiliate Manager something can be worked out that is beneficial for both parties.

I need to clarify what I wrote earlier this week. A commission change could happen on past referrals, BUT only in extreme cases. If your affiliate manager is emailing you to make contact, please respond to him to work out a good solution that is beneficial for both parties.

Your are important to us, and we do want to work with you.

[gameignani]

Dear Nicole,

please define "extreme cases" and how that will affect European contract law.
Furthermore, please explain what "commission change" means & explain the consequences for affiliate firms working for your company.

Thanks in advance.

[universal4]

Recently we have updated our terms,

Are you saying the quota did not exist previously but does now?

Are you also saying that past agreements are not being honored and all affiliates must work under the new terms which are not what current affiliates agreed to when they signed up?

Rick
Universal4

[Nicole Sims]

Hi gameignani,

All companies update their terms and conditions. For example; Google , Apple and etc.

Rick we don’t have quotas – but we do want to remind affiliates that do not perform to the performance based on their set deal and their agreement that we may change the deal.

We will always first contact and have a discussion with our affiliate, before any changes are made. We strive to continue working long term with our affiliate partners, and always in a professional manner.

I hope I answered your questions clearly.

[universal4]

Changing the "deal" based upon number of depositers or whatever IS A QUOTA. (meeting any kind of performance numbers, guideline or whatever is a quota)

And I would like to know whether the "terms" say 6 or 8 or 10 months ago mentioned this quota, and if not, will those affiliates that signed up based upon the terms that were in effect BEFORE THE CHANGE be able to work under the stated agreement that was in effect at the time they signed up, or are the terms changes you mentioned above retroactive for all affiliate both old and new?

Rick
Universal4

[gameignani]

Changing the "deal" based upon number of depositers or whatever IS A QUOTA. (meeting any kind of performance numbers, guideline or whatever is a quota)

And I would like to know whether the "terms" say 6 or 8 or 10 months ago mentioned this quota, and if not, will those affiliates that signed up based upon the terms that were in effect BEFORE THE CHANGE be able to work under the stated agreement that was in effect at the time they signed up, or are the terms changes you mentioned above retroactive for all affiliate both old and new?

Rick
Universal4

Are you saying the quota did not exist previously but does now?

Are you also saying that past agreements are not being honored and all affiliates must work under the new terms which are not what current affiliates agreed to when they signed up?

Rick
Universal4

To make it a lttle easier for me to understand: If a company whose business model consists of sending your company new customers / players / sales agents or subaffiliates (wich should be the primarily income source for gaming operators) therebey not only happily gives you around 70% of his own profits to make your company grow bigger - let alone douzens of awareness campaigns running right now simply by showing your advertisements on affiliated webprojects and even more by the high amount of pounds which bigger advertising agencies are currently literaturily flooting in mulitilingunational campaigns for basically every market that they might find saturated or eve out to be profitable.
We had a few similar cases before and right now it seems that the industry is putting all its strengths towards destroying the AFFILIATES, selfemployed webmasters and their marketers and therfore stealing what doesnt belong to them.

PWIN, Affiliates United, Betsson, Starpartners... seems as if the flagship brands from yesterday in 2014 completely forgot the originate idea behind joint venture structures. To be fair: outsourcing, e.g. the advertising and many parts indirectly related to it to third party companies is a wonderful strategy if both partners stick to the rules while a big part of risk is mostly transferred to the affiliate operators.

Now many times, when certain operators slowly see the money rolling in and their brands become more famous (even worse if they suddenly face saturated, they're more and more likey to switch their additudes against the once so important partners by introducing new monthly acquisition rules, reducing revshare to percentages that are simply hilarious in a bad sense or simply shaving wales from accounts simply because they feel like they should. Again, don't get more wrong: I agree that especially small affiliate operators might even have an interest to do the latter but it should only happen if both sides agree. Minimum player requirements may in some cases be legit as well (they're wide-known and legally competent in many industries as well) but - just to give you an example - if someone used to successfuly work as an insurance agent for let's say 20 years, at one day or another the districs(s) allocated to him are completely saturated (let's ignore the possibility that around 27% insured parties already died or switched to another company until then). The very beauty in businesses that ultra-tough is definitely the chance to retire earlier then regular 9 to 5 office workers do and spend the remaining part of your life living off your monthly provisions that you worked for so hard.

Furthermore, especially if a company indirectly violates agreements entered to and therefore existing obligation by changing terms & conditions (which is indeed legal if that option has clearly been mentioned and explained as Nicole already remarked) from my perspective - (with few exceptions, e.g. companies leaving the market (same CEO simply rebranding it or even worde by only giving out whitelabels while keep working with the original databases to crossmarket easier doesn't count of course) legal issues such as changes in national regulation policies... must be ovserved.

Though I must admit that the original idea of Revshare is still a through and through fair-minded way that holds potential to ensure that both performance / quality of work and financial rewards correlate beyond argument I'm nothing less than schocked how common sense between business people more and more becomes a faux if that trend continues I'm eager to see how international judicature will pass judgements accordingly.

To got down to the wire

[Nicole Sims]

These terms and conditions are needed, and have to be updated to keep up to date on changes within our industry.

For example when a new restricted country comes into effect like Spain last year, this applies to all affiliates regardless who signs up when.

Terms are rules, and rules can change by the operator when the need arises. We don't have quotas we just give custom deals to affiliates and should affiliates not perform as they were to ask/receive a better deal, than its only its just as understandable that deals would be lowered with the same respect.

If we do change a deal its for just new player sign ups. We change the old player sign ups as mentioned in the past is for extreme cases only.

We always contact and have a discussion with affiliates before any changes have been made.

Changing the "deal" based upon number of depositers or whatever IS A QUOTA. (meeting any kind of performance numbers, guideline or whatever is a quota)

And I would like to know whether the "terms" say 6 or 8 or 10 months ago mentioned this quota, and if not, will those affiliates that signed up based upon the terms that were in effect BEFORE THE CHANGE be able to work under the stated agreement that was in effect at the time they signed up, or are the terms changes you mentioned above retroactive for all affiliate both old and new?

Rick
Universal4

[universal4]

So, changes ARE retroactive on old affiliates for new players, and terms that had nothing to do with quotas are gone and you now have a quota on all affiliates, even though past affiliates joined and promoted your group and properties since you agreed to work with them without a quota.

Rick
Universal4

[gameignani]

So, changes ARE retroactive on old affiliates for new players, and terms that had nothing to do with quotas are gone and you now have a quota on all affiliates, even though past affiliates joined and promoted your group and properties since you agreed to work with them without a quota.

Rick
Universal4

As long as "extreme cases" aren't clearly defined, that could as well mean anything.
So if there's a market potential of e.g. 500k players in a certain country and one affiliate company brought 499k to your brand and is not able to send any more customers to your brand your company reserves the right to retroactive change terms on the referred customers which means that if a media buying agency that invests thousands of Euros into campaigns to help your business grow can never be sure that the revenue share percentage that both parties agreed on before can be used to calculate how profitable (or not) these investments will turn out to be. Comparable to a bank that agrees on paying you 5% interest on your money but reserves the right to charge you -20%

[Nicole Sims]

We only contact the affiliates that have received an exclusive offer and they hadn't fulfilled the deal. Again, we discuss with the affiliate first before any changes to the deal are made. There haven't been any extreme cases, but it is there if needed...again, it must be extreme!

If a partner has the potential to send a brand 500k players, that affiliate could also come with his own agreement and terms to secure the deal if there isn't a already a relationship or trust in place. That isn't an unusual practice.

We are always working to build a trusting relationship that benefits both parties to ensure a successful partnership!!

Speaking of trust...we work well and we are open with all our affiliate partners, if we were not...I think they would be chiming in here. I think it is better that StarGames Affiliate team are proactive and in contact with our affiliates and always communicating openly. Which I feel is always the case!

We appreciate that you asked us here so we can explain further and hopefully reassure all our partners and potential partners about the changes that were made.

Please let us know if you have any further questions.

[-Shay-]

Hi Nicole,

I can say that you have a reputation for being a trustworthy affiliate manager. I think the problem people are having is that whilst your word states "only in extreme cases" and "only for exclusive deals" - which to be fair, all makes sense. But, the words of the terms gives the company a right to go further, as "exclusive deals" and "extreme cases" are neither mentioned nor defined in the terms.

Thus, perhaps people fear that the loose, vague term that is "necessary" "could" be exercised on them by powers above you or down the road by someone who is not as nice and trustworthy as you are.

Perhaps removing that term and reserving it for exclusive deals (which should have their own terms and carry a physical signature anyway) and/or going a bit further in defining "extreme cases" in the standard terms would squash any uprising.

[iGamingWriter]

Having had a quick look through this thread, I think this situation could easily be balanced.

If this action is specifically being taken to address issues with affiliates that have arranged deals over and above the standard contract, the term should reflect that. Other affiliates are completely within their rights to feel threatened by the current generic term. I'd suggest something along the lines of the following;

In instances where a partner has arranged an improved reward plan (or any reward plan that differs from that advertised at [INSERT RELEVANT URL]) StarGames reserves the right to review and discontinue such deals without notice, reverting to the standard revenue model, if agreed upon targets are not being met.

That would both allow you to do what you're looking to do and stop other affiliates viewing your terms as predatory and retroactive.

[Roulette Zeitung]

Ha ha ha!

How unmasking is this???

Some participants of this thread who are yelling loud ... I did not see only one of them last year at the days, where the little group of criminals from Russia (no longer member of GPWA!!!) tried to destroy Star Games.
I did not see a moderator or some other from this thread. Only Anthony took action behind the scene and I active in the threads to take care about Star Games.

Shay and ThePogg mean no harm, but this is it. Some of you should think what is the difference between a very small program that have direct competitors, working with unfair methods and who is a big program, that can give cake to everybody.

Personal animosities also from GPWA staff are more and more reasons for posts here on GPWA, and this year I will debunk all of them if this will not stop!

Substantial indemnification claims regarding regulations e.g. because of gamgling laws in countries can kill a small program with competitors who are lurking for an assassination. But to understand this you have to think twice.

Leopold