New Pacific Poker Affiliate Program

[PacificPoker]

Come and register to win USD200 per new depositing player at www.pacificpoker.com. No limits! No minimums!
www.pacificpoker.com

[VPJunkie]

Well this looks interesting, but I have a couple of questions -

From your T&C's

For these purposes a “Real New Player” shall be defined as a user without a prior account with Cassava Enterprises Ltd. (“Cassava”) which includes an account with Casino On Net and any other entity operated by Cassava who accesses the Casino On Net site through your site, opens a new user account and makes the required minimum deposit in such account.

CON has been around for a long time - a webmaster could not get credit for a lot of accounts opened by him/her because of this clause. This clause alone will make me pass on this offer unless you have something else to offer.

And for those that still want to chance it - what's the required minimum deposit?

[VPJunkie]

I want to note that Pacific Poker was here shortly after I posted these questions, and didn't respond. :-?

[PacificPoker]

Our experience has shown that Poker players are very different from Casino Players, and the vast majority have no history with Casino-on-Net, thus ensuring the most effective turnovers for all Poker Affiliates.
Furthermore, the high rate of $200 per player more than compensates the few small cases where Users have a history with Casino On Net.

[VPJunkie]

I understand the difference between the two, but I don't believe there's enough of a time history for online poker sales to really determine that, yet. Particularly when this segment of the market is just starting to heat up.

Casino On Net has been around for how many years now? 5? 6? That's a lot of existing accounts whether they're active or not. This is not an acceptable risk for me. :shake: You need to come up with a different plan.

[PacificPoker]

Pacific Poker has a lot of very satisfied Affiliate Partners, who benefit from the history and security of Casino-on-Net and Cassava Enterprises. We have not received complaints to date, and do not expect to, as Pacific Poker and Casino-on-Net are the most trustworthy and respectable gambling sites. I suggest that all webmasters make their own decision - those that are already working with us, have profited from the program!

[Pam712]

I must add that I feel the same way as Cindy - CON is one of the most marketed casinos on the planet - check out the ads on the London Underground for example. One of the reasons CON was able to do such high CPA deals was because of the exposure and market segment it has. It is going to be difficult to bring in players who have no prior exposure to CON. I dont necessarily agree with your statement that Poker players are a different breed.

I agree the bounty of $200 is nice - HOWEVER percentage of rake progs are accumulative for the life of the player. Poker players tend to be loyal and play a lot - good Poker players are going to earn me way more than $200 in the long term

[Oneguy2nv]

Our experience has shown that Poker players are very different from Casino Players, and the vast majority have no history with Casino-on-Net, thus ensuring the most effective turnovers for all Poker Affiliates.

Why bother having that clause if it has little effect and only scares potential affiliates?

Is there some good reason for it?

[peralis]

I have had CON on my site for 4 1/2 years now. The chances that a player that signs up at Pacific Poker has signed at CON previously from my site alone is way to high a risk for me to consider promoting it.

Naturally, I get new users to my site daily, but with so many portals around, the chance that the new user on my site has already been to different one and has probably see CON around.

Think for a minute.. ask almost any player around if they know CON.. most will say yes - then ask how many have played there before.. You will be shocked to find out just how many.. I would hazard a guess at well over half of them would have.

There are very few places on the net where CON has not been promoted let alone offline.

So - bottomline is .. Thanks, but no thanks..

[casinoglen]

I'll pass on this one as well

[Integrity]

Our experience has shown that Poker players are very different from Casino Players, and the vast majority have no history with Casino-on-Net...

Yea... that's just why you put that clause there.

Nice try... I commend your creativity...

PASS.

[LineResearch]

It's the same gambling crowd. Affiliates will just be giving away their traffic as long as this clause is effective and all affiliates should pass on this poker program.

If it was not the same gambling crowd, and affiliates were not losing that many sales, then CON and Pacific Poker would have no problem deleting the clause and changing the program.

And remember, CON is still using scumware so the deck is really stacked against affiliates. Pick one of the other poker programs to promote.

[former member 2]

I have just put up two new poker sites and am looking for more rooms to add, but what these folks say is much the reason I too would pass.


and like oneguy said: if it isn't that big of a deal, why not change that one little rule to swing our decisions your way?

[PacificPoker]

Thanks to your feedback, we have decided to make changes to our Pacific
Poker Affiliate Program, as follows:

1. New Members relate to all New Pacific Poker Members. Even if they had
previously registered with Casino-on-Net, you will still be paid!
2. Affiliates can now choose between Revenue Share and Cost per Acquisition.

Earn between 25-30% Net Revenue or $150-200 for all Members you bring to Pacific Poker!

For more information see our web-site PacificPoker (www.pacificpoker.com)

[fantasyb]

Just wondering what people's conversions have been like with Pacific Poker?
clicks -> deposits?
downloads -> deposits?

Thanks