I can not understand where is the problem.

[pelninaudu]

Hi there.
I created a website which promotes to play with roullete method called "Black and red" (you probably know it).
I'm working with Revenue Share. This is my first month in gambling industry.

Here are the numbers for past 20 days:

1 field = First Deposits amount | 2 field = First Deposits Count | 3 field = All deposits Amount | 4 field= All deposits count |

$1,329.81

26

$3,270.39

49

The problem is that the players regularly win and my account balance is negative. Affiliate program runs with "Negative Carryover". In first week I had 1,400$ of pure revenue share in my pocket. I know you will say that "Somebody probably hit it big...". Ok, maybe it's truth, but I need solution for this cause my Revenue Share is -200$ for the moment.

Maybe I need to work with CPA? (economical situation isn't the best at my end)
Maybe the method isn't the best choice?
Somebody also promoting this method have ideas?

I just need suggestions...
Thank you for your attention.

[Fortune Palace]

Maybe you've found a Roulette strategy that works. Perhaps you should use it to play Roulette, rather than promote it to your players?

[pelninaudu]

I'm sure that this strategy is one of the worst for players... (Heard from some expert)

And what about CPA ?

[Doolally]

Stick with what you've got. You may not get paid every month but in the long term gamblers generally lose and you'll make money.

[Doolally]

Should have noted that if you run with a few affiliate programs, you'll decrease the risk of a complete losing month.

[pelninaudu]

I'm only working with this affiliate program. This website is totally local and should stay that way...

[JackTenSuited]

I'm sure that this strategy is one of the worst for players... (Heard from some expert)

And what about CPA ?

no strategy is any worse than the others, you can't change the 97% payout which it will always pay in the long run

[pelninaudu]

no strategy is any worse than the others, you can't change the 97% payout which it will always pay in the long run

Sorry, I didn't get the point... What you meant about 97% payout?

[louie.wilson]

You may want to go for a no negative carry over program (us? )
Or just be patient. Most players will end up losing. Most affiliates are happy when their players win, even though they '"lose'" money short term, a winner player is someone who may be loyal to your brand and site. And eventually lose some day.

[wettFORM.AT]

I would recommend to continue with revenue share - also the negative carryover is not a big problem. In long-term if the quality of your players is good you will definitely earn more with revenue share instead of CPA but it is a general question if you want know exactly what you can earn per month. If you are flexible then revenue share is the better option for sure.

[IhreConsulting]

I agree with all the comments above. You should try to spread your bets and have a few accounts where you can direct players. You should also try to work with those which do not have negative carryover. With rev share, you need to accept that you might get a few months where you earn nothing, but some months where you can earn much higher. If you are looking for a long term revenue stream, then stick with rev share. If you want shorter term goals or need the money to invest into your site, then you should go for a CPA.

[allfreechips]

I dont bother with negative carry casinos anymore, they sure wont get top positions for the few I have from legacy accounts. You definately need to spready it out though over a few different casinos that are not bundled together.

[BrownPelican]

While we're on this topic, do all online casinos pay based on the amount their customer's lose, or do some online casinos pay based on the amount a customer deposits? I'd rather associate with casinos that do the latter. It seems more ethical than attracting people to gamble and hoping they will lose it all.

[xecutable]

There's no hoping they will lose some day, because THEY ALL lose some day. Even traders! I've had a guy from the Netherlands, who's first deposit in a betting exchange market was 40k EUR. This guy was probably using a few books, but was staking 4-5k on the average each day. For 23 days he did not lose a single bet, lucky for me most of those were on exchange, but when they were on fixed odds, oh man.

Anyways long story short, eventually he went after fixed odds, recorded a few substantial losses and returned everything plus more. I don't see why be worried about winners. This business is not charity and the majority of players do not make money off it. If they did, pretty sure books wouldn't last long "giving out" money.

Of course an account in the negative might seem bad, especially for someone new counting on those money, but eventually when you stick around for a few years, it's quite normal and nothing to worry about.

[BrownPelican]

If I recall, there are several affiliates that do not carry negatives, but are they quality affiliates in comparison to the norm (I'm assuming the neg carry over is more the standard, please correct me if I'm wrong)?

xecutable - I do understand that any gambler who thinks they can beat the casino is kidding themselves. At least with some poker you're not playing the house, but if you gamble long enough you're more inclined to lose money. I had a buddy who won 30k US playing a no limit poker tourney. Funny, he didn't comment what he did with it. And he's good. On average he wins but it only takes one bad day - as what happened to your referral. I see your point. It would seem a payout based on deposit is less shady, but that's the casino covering their assests. can't blame them for that.

It's starting to make sense. TY

[JackTenSuited]

While we're on this topic, do all online casinos pay based on the amount their customer's lose, or do some online casinos pay based on the amount a customer deposits? I'd rather associate with casinos that do the latter. It seems more ethical than attracting people to gamble and hoping they will lose it all.

Nothing unethical about hoping your players lose money so you make money, it's unethical if you give bad advice or sport tips to generate rev share.

[F-L-C]

For most casinos the norm is no negative carryover but a lot of brands that have casino & sportsbook have negative carryover. I also don't think wanting your players to lose money is any more unethical than wanting them to deposit money! Especially considering what eventually happens to the money after they deposit it

[casasdeapostas.info]

To be honest, I didn't even know casinos accept this kind of websites. I thought their T&C doesn't allow this kind of "business". Promoting bullshit is not the best way to make money, in my opinion.. well, maybe it is and I'm "too honest" to sell roulette schemes.

[Mario The Gambler]

no strategy is any worse than the others, you can't change the 97% payout which it will always pay in the long run

Sorry, I didn't get the point... What you meant about 97% payout?

This means that...

English roulette (one zero roulette) has a 97.3% payout because the casino has an advantage of 2.7% (1 zero/37 numbers ). Players will earn only 97.3% of the money they will bet (over the long term).

American roulette (two zero roulette) has a 94.7 % payout because the casino has an advantage of 5.26% (2 zeros /38 numbers). Players will earn only 94.7% of the money they will bet (over the long term).

[Mario The Gambler]

To be honest, I didn't even know casinos accept this kind of websites. I thought their T&C doesn't allow this kind of "business". Promoting bullshit is not the best way to make money, in my opinion.. well, maybe it is and I'm "too honest" to sell roulette schemes.

I agree.

I think it's OK to speak about betting systems or "schemes" if we tell the truth.

We can say that these systems are fun to use, that they used to win in the short term (as a kind of loan) ... but that they fail in the long term because nothing can cancel the casino advantage.