Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 238
  1. #61
    BestBonusBets's Avatar
    BestBonusBets is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2016
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    3,025
    Thanked 89 Times in 65 Posts

    Default

    This thread alone has cost Condor 4.5k+ in refferals from the webmasters here. Not to mention all the other forums which have been talking about this issue as well. Scammers never win.

    Pay up.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to BestBonusBets For This Useful Post:

    Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  3. #62
    Gosu's Avatar
    Gosu is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    June 2017
    Posts
    137
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 110 Times in 51 Posts

    Default

    Anyone surprised its Friday and still no comment?

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gosu For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  5. #63
    -Shay- is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2012
    Posts
    3,060
    Thanks
    12,188
    Thanked 3,159 Times in 1,693 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gosu View Post
    Anyone surprised its Friday and still no comment?
    No surprise here. I'd be surprised if there was a comment from the program directly prior to the end of the month.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

    Gosu (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  7. #64
    Gosu's Avatar
    Gosu is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    June 2017
    Posts
    137
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 110 Times in 51 Posts

    Default

    Tell me friends, do you have original contracts with the companies your working with in addition to the standard when you sign up with an affiliate program? In order to prevent from something like this to happen? I guess even that will not be a guarantee but might help at least a little? I mean there must be a way, we as affiliate marketers have to pay our bills, feed our families, pay our co-workers if we have those optionally and so on as well, dont we?

    Sorry maybe this should be a seperate thread.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gosu For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  9. #65
    MichaelCorfman's Avatar
    MichaelCorfman is offline GPWA Executive Director
    Join Date
    June 2004
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    4,083
    Thanks
    807
    Thanked 5,153 Times in 1,672 Posts

    Default

    Just a quick note to say that Condor replied to Dirk on Thursday just before 5am EST and that I was copied on the reply.

    In the email Condor states that they have concerns regarding the risk of a charge back from the player involved. I knew this was the case from the meeting held with Condor at the Amsterdam Affiliate Conference, and do understand some of the reasons for the concern. If I were in Condor's shoes I believe I would also share those concerns.

    Condor has offered to pay the balance into escrow with the GPWA, for immediate distribution to the affiliate upon expiration of the charge back risk period. While the GPWA is not in the business of acting as an escrow agent, we are in the business of trying to ensure affiliates are treated fairly and are compensated properly. And so in this specific case I agreed to have the GPWA act as an escrow agent, pending the affiliate's acceptance of Condor's proposal that we do so.

    Michael
    GPWA Executive Director, Casino City CEO, Friend to the Village Idiot

    Resources for Affiliates: iGamingDirectory.com, iGamingAffiliatePrograms.com, GamingMeets.com

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MichaelCorfman For This Useful Post:

    Gosu (28 July 2017), TheGooner (28 July 2017)

  11. #66
    Redbush54's Avatar
    Redbush54 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Some US state
    Posts
    653
    Thanks
    406
    Thanked 406 Times in 221 Posts

    Default

    So why didn't they just tell him that to begin with instead of dragging this out with no real communication?

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Redbush54 For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Gosu (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  13. #67
    Gosu's Avatar
    Gosu is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    June 2017
    Posts
    137
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 110 Times in 51 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelCorfman View Post
    Just a quick note to say that Condor replied to Dirk on Thursday just before 5am EST and that I was copied on the reply.

    In the email Condor states that they have concerns regarding the risk of a charge back from the player involved. I knew this was the case from the meeting held with Condor at the Amsterdam Affiliate Conference, and do understand some of the reasons for the concern. If I were in Condor's shoes I believe I would also share those concerns.

    Condor has offered to pay the balance into escrow with the GPWA, for immediate distribution to the affiliate upon expiration of the charge back risk period. While the GPWA is not in the business of acting as an escrow agent, we are in the business of trying to ensure affiliates are treated fairly and are compensated properly. And so in this specific case I agreed to have the GPWA act as an escrow agent, pending the affiliate's acceptance of Condor's proposal that we do so.

    Michael
    Without going too much into detail - those "concerns"... are they the affiliate´s problems? I mean its been what - 90 days by now?! Hello? They run a business arent they? $4.5k of such importance they wouldnt be able to survive if there was a chargeback after more than 90 days by now? Seriously I start to have no words for all thats happening... Pardon me if what I say is technically not correct - I have no clue about the exact possibility of charge backs, time frame etc. I am speaking like a regular man here. This just makes no sense to me from a business perspective - I mean to say the least - this doesnt give you confidence to work with a partner like that, does it?

    Also as a side note: Imagine something like this in the "real business world"... unthinkable in my opinion. We affiliates really are completely out of control and just cant do anything, disturbing really. Maybe its really the time to think of a new business model - flat fee for everything... after all, bad enough the aff. programs are getting FREE brand visibility/advertising/media anyway even if they dont pay you a dime.

    P.S. I am not willing to offend anyone. This is just my two cents.
    Last edited by Gosu; 28 July 2017 at 2:04 pm. Reason: more

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Gosu For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017), star (28 July 2017)

  15. #68
    -Shay- is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2012
    Posts
    3,060
    Thanks
    12,188
    Thanked 3,159 Times in 1,693 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelCorfman View Post
    Just a quick note to say that Condor replied to Dirk on Thursday just before 5am EST and that I was copied on the reply.

    In the email Condor states that they have concerns regarding the risk of a charge back from the player involved. I knew this was the case from the meeting held with Condor at the Amsterdam Affiliate Conference, and do understand some of the reasons for the concern. If I were in Condor's shoes I believe I would also share those concerns.

    Condor has offered to pay the balance into escrow with the GPWA, for immediate distribution to the affiliate upon expiration of the charge back risk period. While the GPWA is not in the business of acting as an escrow agent, we are in the business of trying to ensure affiliates are treated fairly and are compensated properly. And so in this specific case I agreed to have the GPWA act as an escrow agent, pending the affiliate's acceptance of Condor's proposal that we do so.

    Michael
    What exact timeframe are they proposing for this affiliate?

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

    Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  17. #69
    MichaelCorfman's Avatar
    MichaelCorfman is offline GPWA Executive Director
    Join Date
    June 2004
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    4,083
    Thanks
    807
    Thanked 5,153 Times in 1,672 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by -Shay- View Post
    What exact timeframe are they proposing for this affiliate?
    According to Condor's email, the charge back risk period ends on October 4th. So Condor has offered to send the funds to us now with our being authorized to forward the funds to the affiliate then, provided no charge back takes place.

    Michael
    GPWA Executive Director, Casino City CEO, Friend to the Village Idiot

    Resources for Affiliates: iGamingDirectory.com, iGamingAffiliatePrograms.com, GamingMeets.com

  18. #70
    Progger's Avatar
    Progger is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,422
    Thanks
    283
    Thanked 940 Times in 587 Posts

    Default

    Cheap excuse - nothing more.

    Chargebacks are possible up to 120 days...but dont think this way is easy.

    Pay him !

  19. #71
    dirk20 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2016
    Posts
    55
    Thanks
    41
    Thanked 188 Times in 51 Posts

    Default

    Hello Michael,
    could you please inform me about the concerns Condor has and which you share in this case? I seriously don't get it, please be frank and honest to me and explain this. I still feel like being treated like a criminal. You might as well write a private message, whatever you prefer.

    Since I don't trust Condor one inch, how do I prevent the following scenario? Condor failed to steal my share till now but what if they think about another method that works like this: Some day till Oct 4th they will announce that the money got charged-back and therefore eliminate my earnings. I will ask for proof about the charge-back but Condor could either deny providing proof or simply invest some time in faking evidence for this (which they have a lot until October).

    Besides that, in general, is it the affiliates problem if charge-backs occur? In such a case, every business needs to (legally) pursue the respective player in order to get their money, don't they? Why am I involved in this kind of risk, I'm the advertiser referring customers, nothing more.

    I asked Condor yesterday via email which kind of deposit method allows 6 months charge-backs since I don't know any such thing. What are the odds that Condor will actually answer this question!? Michael, could you find out somehow where the zero-answer-policy from Condor comes from?

    Has anybody here ever had a 6 months freezing money period with any bookmaker in the world? Sounds like this must occur regularly then; but I cannot recall that the recent 12 years ...

  20. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dirk20 For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Gosu (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  21. #72
    Gosu's Avatar
    Gosu is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    June 2017
    Posts
    137
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 110 Times in 51 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dirk20 View Post
    Hello Michael,
    could you please inform me about the concerns Condor has and which you share in this case? I seriously don't get it, please be frank and honest to me and explain this. I still feel like being treated like a criminal. You might as well write a private message, whatever you prefer.

    Since I don't trust Condor one inch, how do I prevent the following scenario? Condor failed to steal my share till now but what if they think about another method that works like this: Some day till Oct 4th they will announce that the money got charged-back and therefore eliminate my earnings. I will ask for proof about the charge-back but Condor could either deny providing proof or simply invest some time in faking evidence for this (which they have a lot until October).

    Besides that, in general, is it the affiliates problem if charge-backs occur? In such a case, every business needs to (legally) pursue the respective player in order to get their money, don't they? Why am I involved in this kind of risk, I'm the advertiser referring customers, nothing more.

    I asked Condor yesterday via email which kind of deposit method allows 6 months charge-backs since I don't know any such thing. What are the odds that Condor will actually answer this question!? Michael, could you find out somehow where the zero-answer-policy from Condor comes from?

    Has anybody here ever had a 6 months freezing money period with any bookmaker in the world? Sounds like this must occur regularly then; but I cannot recall that the recent 12 years ...
    Exactly my thoughts Dirk, I´m all with you and while I love being a part of this community, I am kind of confused this seems so "normal" to you Michael? Again, please dont feel offended. I would like to understand...

    Actually... I think if I told my friend who is a lawyer about this, he might very well say that this is an operation that should be forced to close for illegal behaviour. Sorry for my bad English, I am afraid my English words dont mean exactly what I want to say in my language.
    Last edited by Gosu; 28 July 2017 at 3:31 pm. Reason: more

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gosu For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  23. #73
    MichaelCorfman's Avatar
    MichaelCorfman is offline GPWA Executive Director
    Join Date
    June 2004
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    4,083
    Thanks
    807
    Thanked 5,153 Times in 1,672 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dirk20 View Post
    Hello Michael,
    could you please inform me about the concerns Condor has and which you share in this case? I seriously don't get it, please be frank and honest to me and explain this. I still feel like being treated like a criminal. You might as well write a private message, whatever you prefer.
    I don't believe you are being treated like a criminal. I do believe you are being treated as if the risk profile for a charge back from the player is larger than typical. I believe contributing factors revolve largely around some characteristics of the player and the amount wagered that fall outside of the usual parameters

    Quote Originally Posted by dirk20 View Post
    Since I don't trust Condor one inch, how do I prevent the following scenario? Condor failed to steal my share till now but what if they think about another method that works like this: Some day till Oct 4th they will announce that the money got charged-back and therefore eliminate my earnings. I will ask for proof about the charge-back but Condor could either deny providing proof or simply invest some time in faking evidence for this (which they have a lot until October).
    In the scenario that Condor states there has been a charge back, the evidence they provide would have to be such that I view it as convincing since I would be acting as the escrow agent, and would be placed in a position where I would need to defend the actions taken to members of this forum. There is documentation provided when there is a charge back dispute, and to be convinced there was a charge back I would need to see appropriate documentation from the payment processor to demonstrate a charge back did indeed take place.

    Quote Originally Posted by dirk20 View Post
    Besides that, in general, is it the affiliates problem if charge-backs occur? In such a case, every business needs to (legally) pursue the respective player in order to get their money, don't they? Why am I involved in this kind of risk, I'm the advertiser referring customers, nothing more.
    Yes, I believe charge back risk is generally assumed by the affiliate, the affiliate program, and the operator. If there is a charge back then there is no revenue for the affiliate program to share with the affiliate.

    Quote Originally Posted by dirk20 View Post
    I asked Condor yesterday via email which kind of deposit method allows 6 months charge-backs since I don't know any such thing. What are the odds that Condor will actually answer this question!? Michael, could you find out somehow where the zero-answer-policy from Condor comes from?
    I'm not a payment processing expert myself. I do know that even for non-gambling related transactions a five month period is not unusual. You had indicated you would copy me on future email messages to Condor, but I do not have any record of being copied on such an email. If you resend the email to Condor copying me, I will require that they answer it appropriately as a condition of moving forward as an escrow agent.

    Quote Originally Posted by dirk20 View Post
    Has anybody here ever had a 6 months freezing money period with any bookmaker in the world? Sounds like this must occur regularly then; but I cannot recall that the recent 12 years ...
    It is common for affiliate programs to absorb the risk of charge back and then to deduct any charge backs from future earnings when they do occur. However, that is typically done in the context of a relationship where the charge back risk is small in the context of the typical earnings of the affiliate. Affiliate programs can and do sometimes follow different rules when they are not certain ongoing revenue from the relationship will cover potential future charge backs. Affiliate programs tend to be much more conservative in this area if they cannot positively confirm there is no relationship between the player and the affiliate.

    Michael
    GPWA Executive Director, Casino City CEO, Friend to the Village Idiot

    Resources for Affiliates: iGamingDirectory.com, iGamingAffiliatePrograms.com, GamingMeets.com

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to MichaelCorfman For This Useful Post:

    TheGooner (28 July 2017)

  25. #74
    Triple7 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    January 2015
    Posts
    2,702
    Thanks
    2,000
    Thanked 2,381 Times in 1,277 Posts

    Default

    And why it took so long to communicate this to a third party instead of communicating clear with the affiliate? It also seems that Condor is transfering their business risk to an affiliate.

    It's very simple. They have to pay out if it's not fraud. If there will be a charge back, they have a claim on the player and if they somehow can proof that the affiliate is involved too, they have a claim on him too.

    But not like this. Very poor communication of Condor.

  26. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Triple7 For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Gosu (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  27. #75
    allfreechips's Avatar
    allfreechips is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    August 2010
    Location
    Ohio - The taxing state
    Posts
    1,025
    Thanks
    122
    Thanked 601 Times in 353 Posts

    Default

    I wouldn't touch this program. Once again all the liability is placed on the affiliates. What to say they can say we wont pay for a 4 year period as the player may sue us in that time frame? Seriously this is costing them way more than 4K in bad press to say the least as the credibility is shot if they have to do all this for this amount.
    Allfreechips online casino guide offers online casino reviews from our members. Also our exclusive No Deposit casino bonuses are always up to date. See the latest slot machine reviews at Hotslot and exclusive no deposit casino bonuses as well with a good dose of daily online gambling news to learn about pokies

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to allfreechips For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Gosu (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  29. #76
    Gosu's Avatar
    Gosu is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    June 2017
    Posts
    137
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 110 Times in 51 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allfreechips View Post
    I wouldn't touch this program. Once again all the liability is placed on the affiliates. What to say they can say we wont pay for a 4 year period as the player may sue us in that time frame? Seriously this is costing them way more than 4K in bad press to say the least as the credibility is shot if they have to do all this for this amount.
    Hey, they can afford showing up at the affiliate conference at least! ^^ complete joke rly

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Gosu For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017), star (29 July 2017)

  31. #77
    TheGooner's Avatar
    TheGooner is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,180
    Thanks
    1,901
    Thanked 4,121 Times in 1,955 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gosu View Post
    Without going too much into detail - those "concerns"... are they the affiliate´s problems?
    Have you read the whole thread?

    SITUATION SUMMARY :
    For whatever reason, Condor Affiliates believes that the player is a "related player", possibly even the same person or living in the same house as the affiliate. They clearly do not believe that the player is an arms length player - and quote suspicious login patterns between player and affiliate as evidence.

    The affiliate denounces this as not being true. But with a remote relationship, and little goodwill in the partnership, it's impossible for the two parties to agree. So we have a standoff.

    Of course, this is all "he said / he said" stuff for us - we cannot tell - we never see any of the "evidence" - so we simply have to acknowledge the two sides of the truth as it has been outlined to us - and try to negotiate a settlement.

    SOLUTION SUMMARY :
    Accordingly, my suggestion on page one was to use an escrow situation and terminate the agreement - and at the time it appeared that the OP (Dirk) found it acceptable simply to have the matter resolved with a known payment date in the future.

    This NOW is the situation. What is the problem?

    CREDIT CARD CHARGEBACKS :
    As someone who worked in a banks IT area for 12 years, specialising in Card Systems for ATMs and EFTPOS devices, and therefore had a lot of dealings with the Credit Card group and fraud recovery, I can provide some light on these systems.

    Credit card chargebacks from customers usually have a time deadline of 60 to 120 days depending on the reason for chargeback ... after that time it is very, very unlikely that ANY chargeback will be accepted.

    See this mastercard list :
    https://chargeback.com/mastercard-ch...k-time-limits/

    Which is very similar to this Visa list :
    https://chargeback.com/visa-chargeback-time-limits/

    AFFILIATE RELATIONSHIP WITH CHARGEBACKS :

    Dirk ask whether other affiliates have been affected by chargebacks - the answer is of course yes. I certainly note regular deductions for chargebacks at several affiliate groups. Every month we see some deductions at one program or another.

    This is usually at "grey market" properties - as they do not have a direct credit card relationship - and use 3rd party merchants who mask that the credit card is being used for gambling. As such the 3rd party merchant has no interest in disputing the charge - so the player chargeback wins.

    Dirk asks why chargebacks are the affiliate problem - and the answer is simple if we are on a rev-share agreement ... we are on a share of the profits from the player. If there is not profit - there is no payment. Affiliates are not just advertisers, if we were then we'd be paid a few dollars a month based on impressions. We do not have an advertising deal on impressions, we have a profit sharing deal - and as such chargebacks are part of the risk we take with most of our partners.

    -----------------------

    CONDOR AFFILIATES :
    Of course, I understand that some affiliates are not happy with the attitude and approach of Condor Affiliates. You may feel that they were over-bearing, and abused their dominant information position to attempt to slow-pay and/or no-pay the affiliate.

    You may feel that there is no way you will work with this group, and that their attitude has devalued their brand in the eyes of most affiliates ...
    You may very well feel that way (But of course I could not possbily comment)


    OVERALL :
    Overall, it seems that the GPWA has met with Condor Affiliates, and has worked out a satisfactory agreement that will see the affiliate get a (delayed) payment for the full amount that he is owed. This is a good situation - and far cleaner / quicker than the legal option that Dirk was proposing (that would have taken years and got nowhere.

    So, other than some hassle of posting a forum thread, and a bit of waiting ... WTF is the problem?
    What is with the continual whine? FFS guys - this is a positive resolution.

    Accept this as a good resolution - and an eye-opener as to how not all partnerships are equal - and move on.

  32. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TheGooner For This Useful Post:

    elgoog (6 August 2017), freakspin (29 July 2017), PlayHunter (1 November 2017), Renee (30 July 2017), universal4 (28 July 2017)

  33. #78
    -Shay- is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2012
    Posts
    3,060
    Thanks
    12,188
    Thanked 3,159 Times in 1,693 Posts

    Default

    Affiliates do not pass along the risk of their ppc campaigns, so I am not sure why the affiliate program feels justified in any fashion to withhold commissions earned in fear of a charge back. The risk is priced into the model already. Moreover, I do not get how industry watchdogs of sorts can condone this.

    Pay the affiliate now and if there is a charge back before 4 October, create a negative balance in his account for his appropriate share. Of course, there is a risk that this affiliate will not earn an amount equal to the charge back (if there is one), but I think that could be largely due to the way this **** show was handled.

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

    Gosu (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  35. #79
    Gosu's Avatar
    Gosu is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    June 2017
    Posts
    137
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 110 Times in 51 Posts

    Default

    I did read the thread... To be honest though... since they werent able to bring up any proof, so what?! Also, one has to realize that they hold back Dirks earned money but of course keep all the profit of that player referred by Dirk... Sry but this doesnt look good at all. Actually its not even reasonable in my opinion. You know, how do financial guys say, they are working with that money or better say, the money is working for them. If you want, Dirk should get his money plus interest.

    The problem is that he has been waiting for more than 3 months already for his money while they just keep it in addition to bad, at most times no communication at all. I believe what Dirk is writing and you can see they have shifted from one excuse to another to hold from paying, didnt they? Seriously, I am such a small time guy but even I would just have paid instead of this drama here... this is just unreal.

    Regarding affiliate relationship with chargebacks and the argumentation we are on rev share deals. Okay then, if something like that happens, deduct it when it happens but dont act like we have seen here - in advance in fear of this to happen? Sorry, thats bad... You cannot run a real business like that either! Also, very good point. Maybe we should start with ad deals on impressions if this is going to get the norm... To repeat again though - I understand partly sharing the risk, only a very little I could understand this, but this would mean to find a solution (deduct the amount X) when it happens.

    Anyway, I am out of this thread.

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to Gosu For This Useful Post:

    Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

  37. #80
    -Shay- is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2012
    Posts
    3,060
    Thanks
    12,188
    Thanked 3,159 Times in 1,693 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gosu View Post
    I did read the thread... To be honest though... since they werent able to bring up any proof, so what?! Also, one has to realize that they hold back Dirks earned money but of course keep all the profit of that player referred by Dirk... Sry but this doesnt look good at all. Actually its not even reasonable in my opinion. You know, how do financial guys say, they are working with that money or better say, the money is working for them. If you want, Dirk should get his money plus interest.

    The problem is that he has been waiting for more than 3 months already for his money while they just keep it in addition to bad, at most times no communication at all. I believe what Dirk is writing and you can see they have shifted from one excuse to another to hold from paying, didnt they? Seriously, I am such a small time guy but even I would just have paid instead of this drama here... this is just unreal.

    Regarding affiliate relationship with chargebacks and the argumentation we are on rev share deals. Okay then, if something like that happens, deduct it when it happens but dont act like we have seen here - in advance in fear of this to happen? Sorry, thats bad... You cannot run a real business like that either! Also, very good point. Maybe we should start with ad deals on impressions if this is going to get the norm... To repeat again though - I understand partly sharing the risk, only a very little I could understand this, but this would mean to find a solution (deduct the amount X) when it happens.

    Anyway, I am out of this thread.
    Unless it is a 50/50 partnership in terms of revenue share, the risk of charge back is already priced into the rev share agreement (hint: ask a program why they can't give you 50/50 sometime. "Cost of doing business" will come up. The risk of a chargeback is one such "cost" and when the chargeback happens, it will certainly (and fairly) be shared appropriately with the affiliate.

  38. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

    celena (29 July 2017), Gosu (28 July 2017), Roulette Zeitung (29 July 2017)

Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •