Programs to avoid in 2013 - Based on Belosers.com opinion

[mojo]

\l

I think Income Access have around 1000 plus partners that that use the software platform and some companies like us have up to 14 products per skin so just for our three main sites they would need to have get daily 42 different batch reports direct from each supplier and that would be 14,000 batch reports for all sites this just screams total disaster to me.

Looks like a disater to me too. Thanks for the info Shaun.

It would be nice if IA would chime in on this thread.

According to Shaun, this 3rd party affiliate program is flawed and why would affiliates want to use it?

[mojo]

Bottom Line.

The OP is absolutely correct in putting a warning up!!! Use caution with IA!!

That is my opinion for what it's worth.

[-Shay-]

Affiliates should demand real time tracking and reporting - at minimum.

[Shaun O'neill]

Mojo

The software is not flawed the software is a top quality product.

The flaw is with some of the partners that use it, as people have pointed out some operators have not delivered he data some players have gone missing ect, but this problem is not just with IA look at the all of the other platform and you will find rouge operators, my view is you need to trust the partners that you work with 100% if you have any doubt what so ever then dont work with them.

Shaun

Looks like a disater to me too. Thanks for the info Shaun.

It would be nice if IA would chime in on this thread.

According to Shaun, this 3rd party affiliate program is flawed and why would affiliates want to use it?

[Shaun O'neill]

He is well within his rights to write that but as a company that uses that product and in my view has a 100% transparency with partners I would like to see a more balanced thread and highlight the software platform that have rouge operators working on the.

Just my view.

Shaun

Bottom Line.

The OP is absolutely correct in putting a warning up!!! Use caution with IA!!

That is my opinion for what it's worth.

[Income Access]

It would be nice if IA would chime in on this thread.

Hi Mojo,

We have been working with affiliates and affiliate programmes for 10 years (and have been an active member of this forum since 2002). Our partnerships and revenues stem from the work we do with affiliates.

It’s hard to understand why you think we would knowingly work with brands that wanted to rob the same people we see as business partners. We work very hard to establish and build close relationships with these partners, and have always been transparent and honest. We have, in fact, always encouraged affiliates to let us know when they have an issue with any of our partners. We can then address this issue and help try to resolve it.

It’s important to remember that we are an independent company that works with both affiliates and operators. Both sides are our business partners, and because of that, we have no interest in helping one take advantage of the other.

It is our responsibility to provide reliable tracking and accurate reporting. It is our clients’ responsibility, meanwhile, to ensure that we have accurate data, and that affiliates are rewarded for their legitimate referrals. We place great emphasis on data integrity and advise you to always test your links (we carry out regular tests and audits).

Our clients are honest, credible, professional, and reputable companies – just like our affiliates. To brand them all as being dishonest when some experience a problem is unfair, just as it would be to brand all affiliates as dishonest because of the actions of a few fraudsters.

Granted, we may work with programmes that experience issues, and when they arise, it impacts us all, and we do our best to work through them. If a resolution can’t be found, however, we part ways. That is a last option.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinions, but we wanted to make it clear where we stand and what our business ethos is. Ultimately, our industry benefits from trustworthy partnerships and this is what we always work hard to achieve.

Many thanks.

Sarafina

[SlotsAff]

I have dealt with Income Access for 8 years and I do believe they are honest, transparent and good to work with.

I've been on the operator side using IA and as an affiliate and I do trust them - they are some bad apples using IA of course (same with NetRefer/MyAffiliates etc) but they shouldn't be tarnished as a result.

We might as well call out all software companies too because some Playtech, Microgaming, NetEnt etc etc powered casinos have scammed affiliates and players alike.

Just my opinion - maybe I've just been lucky (don't shoot me down)

Have a good weekend everyone!

[universal4]

The problem is that when you act in the capacity of "the affiliate program" then YOU are the affiliate program and become financially responsible to the affiliate.

If you do not want to take that role, then do not take that role.

This is not specific to IA alone, but any affiliate program that assumes that role be it direct or third party.

This has traditionally always been the problem that we see arise with any third party programs, a provider will have problems, decide to pull out, or decide to not pay the third party, then the third party says "We can't pay you because we didn't get paid, but why don't you promote this other product WE have?"

From the affiliate's perspective, they are not working with the provider but the third party, and their agreement is with the third party, so they feel they should be paid since they held up their side of the agreement but the third party did not.

If the third party does not provide the affiliate much in the way of protection, there is less incentive for the affiliate to work with third parties.

There certainly needs to be a way to improve the protection, just sitting back and saying "trust us" is NOT enough since there have been COUNTLESS time when those words actually did NOTHING to protect the affiliate financially when problems arose.

Rick
Universal4

[mojo]

Hi Sarafina,

Thank you for taking the time out to reply.

It’s hard to understand why you think we would knowingly work with brands that wanted to rob the same people we see as business partners.

That is not what I said or think. I will try to make it clearer because I must not be explaining well and I really do have a question for you.

I will give an example. Several years ago my house was broken into. When the police came they told me my locks weren't very good. They said if people want to break in they will but that I should and could make it harder for them. The way it stood, it was like I left the door open for them. I since have improved the locks of course and happy to say no one has broken in since.

It has been established that IA allows programs to easily remove players. Therefore, you are leaving the door wide open. We are not talking about MGS or PT or programs or anything else. We are talking about IA.

I never said that it was intentional or I don't think anyone is honest or anything like that.Or that IA is responsible for converstions. Seems to be words put in my mouth that I never said. I never said dodgy, shoddy or anything like that! We seem to be getting sidetracked with that.

I did say that it could be a positive to be able to have a Q&A to understand in this thread. Instead I feel like I'm getting a run around and everything is deflected to programs, operators and other software.

So my question is, specifically for IA, is there a way to tighten the locks so that programs cannot remove our players?

Thank you for listening.

[Income Access]

It has been established that IA allows programs to easily remove players.

So my question is, specifically for IA, is there a way to tighten the locks so that programs cannot remove our players?

Hi Mojo,

We are always here to listen and learn.

To answer your question, programmes cannot remove players tagged to affiliates once they have been imported into our reports. They do not have access to do so and it is against our policy remove players from affiliates.

Just to let you know, in all our years, we have never once been asked by any programme to remove a player from their affiliate's account, with the exception of test accounts tagged in error whilst testing an affiliate's tracking link. We also have alerts in place to flag any player that may be tagged to more than one affiliate account so that the original referrer is upheld.

In cases where a player may ask an operator to self exclude, for instance, you will still be able see the previous data in your reports, and will be able to keep track of them and all other referrals as our reports can be broken down to a player level.

Hope this addresses your question and concern.

Rick, we hear and understand your concerns as well, and whilst our clients are responsible for making funds available to pay affiliates for their referrals, we have put in place systems and process such as getting payment in advance and taking quick action with programmes that delay payment, to help minimise risk and exposure for both our affiliates and us. We take every effort to avoid such scenarios and strive to pay our affiliates in a timely manner.

Thanks again, and appreciate your feedback and dialogue.

Have a great weekend.

Sarafina

[slotplayer]

Hi Mojo,

We are always here to listen and learn.

To answer your question, programmes cannot remove players tagged to affiliates once they have been imported into our reports. They do not have access to do so and it is against our policy remove players from affiliates.

Just to let you know, in all our years, we have never once been asked by any programme to remove a player from their affiliate's account, with the exception of test accounts tagged in error whilst testing an affiliate's tracking link. We also have alerts in place to flag any player that may be tagged to more than one affiliate account so that the original referrer is upheld.

In cases where a player may ask an operator to self exclude, for instance, you will still be able see the previous data in your reports, and will be able to keep track of them and all other referrals as our reports can be broken down to a player level.

Hope this addresses your question and concern.

Rick, we hear and understand your concerns as well, and whilst our clients are responsible for making funds available to pay affiliates for their referrals, we have put in place systems and process such as getting payment in advance and taking quick action with programmes that delay payment, to help minimise risk and exposure for both our affiliates and us. We take every effort to avoid such scenarios and strive to pay our affiliates in a timely manner.

Thanks again, and appreciate your feedback and dialogue.

Have a great weekend.

Sarafina

those are my concerns. last year I had a player that was said to be self-excluded, then a couple months ago they reappeared, so I inquired and within 48-72 hours they stopped playing. Although it certainly could just be coincidence I was somewhat alarmed by the timing.

Also while it may not be possible to remove the player history entirely from the reports, do programs have the ability to suspend the players activity from being displayed in the affiliate reports?

thanks

[Pmig]

Everything is possible disregarding what software used to made tracking and reporting.

If a company (casino/bookmaker/poker room/you name it) decide to remove a player from the affiliate ou shaving on commissions is just a matter or changing the feed the software use.

So even without a "affiliate software" permits bad practices it's very easy to do that at import level.

So the base is the trust, if you don't trust on a company, simple move on... there's a plenty programs out there.

[universal4]

Rick, we hear and understand your concerns as well, and whilst our clients are responsible for making funds available to pay affiliates for their referrals, we have put in place systems and process such as getting payment in advance and taking quick action with programmes that delay payment, to help minimise risk and exposure for both our affiliates and us. We take every effort to avoid such scenarios and strive to pay our affiliates in a timely manner.

I am intrigued by this statement and what plans have been put into place. Are you now requiring a bond to be posted or??

Rick
Universal4

[-Shay-]

Hi Mojo,

We are always here to listen and learn.

1. To answer your question, programmes cannot remove players tagged to affiliates once they have been imported into our reports. They do not have access to do so and it is against our policy remove players from affiliates.

2. Just to let you know, in all our years, we have never once been asked by any programme to remove a player from their affiliate's account, with the exception of test accounts tagged in error whilst testing an affiliate's tracking link. We also have alerts in place to flag any player that may be tagged to more than one affiliate account so that the original referrer is upheld.

In cases where a player may ask an operator to self exclude, for instance, you will still be able see the previous data in your reports, and will be able to keep track of them and all other referrals as our reports can be broken down to a player level.

Hope this addresses your question and concern.

3. Rick, we hear and understand your concerns as well, and whilst our clients are responsible for making funds available to pay affiliates for their referrals, we have put in place systems and process such as getting payment in advance and taking quick action with programmes that delay payment, to help minimise risk and exposure for both our affiliates and us. We take every effort to avoid such scenarios and strive to pay our affiliates in a timely manner.

Thanks again, and appreciate your feedback and dialogue.

Have a great weekend.

Sarafina

Sarafina,

Thank you for entering into a dialogue with those of us who have questions and/or concerns regarding the in's and out's of the Income Access software and Income Access as a business model. In fairness to the context of my questions, they may be more appropriately asked in a separate thread, as my questions are not revolving around "avoiding any programs". However, the bulk of the questions are inspired from discussions in this thread. I've quoted Sarafina above so that if a moderator deems it appropriate, they can move this to another thread. I've also numbered the quote to show what specifically I have questions about, as I didn't want to under quote her or misquote her.

1. You say that programs do not have access to remove players once they've made it "into" the system. Someone has suggested there is a data pull at midnight (I'm not sure if this is accurate or not). If it is accurate that there is a single data pull (at midnight) or even say four data pulls daily, does the data you receive 100% come directly from the network or is it sent from network to program and then from program to you? I ask this to find out if it is possible for a white label to manipulate the data or remove tagging BEFORE the information has made it into your system.

2. In regards to number two, if I sell a website (and with it, I also sell the individual trackers from the various programs that site actively promotes), I'm either asking for players under certain trackers to be re-tagged to another affiliate or for the tracker simply to be moved to another affiliate's account.

I strongly suspect one of the two can be done. Based on what you've said in regards to untagged/retagged players, does this also mean that I will be able to see the players continued activity in my account if I drill down far enough in the reporting even though they have been moved by mutual consent?

3. Can you elaborate more on the safety measures that are in place to protect both IA and the affiliates in terms of payments? I don't want to jump to conclusions on what "safety measures" means.

Additional questions:

4. I have a question regarding a quote in a different thread, which in the interest of full disclosure, the OP probably started this thread as a result of Everest's migration - so it is totally relevant to the discussions in this thread.

Hi everyone - sorry for the late response to this thread, which I've just become aware of. I head up the poker department at Everest and I just wanted to reassure you that we are aware of the concerns raised above and are working hard to resolve at our end, as this isn't an Income Access related issue.

We have a fix in place for the negative balance bug and that will be reflected in your month end numbers. In addition, if you aren't seeing your players in reporting, encourage them to complete the Everest migration process to iPoker. They will choose a new nickname as part of that process and will appear on your reporting from that point.

I managed a large UK based affiliate business prior to taking this role and I know how important it is that you have confidence in our product and team. To that end I hope you'll give us a chance to work with you and your players in the future.

Thanks,

Des.

In his quote, he acknowledges problems with the data that affiliates are seeing (or not seeing in their respective reports. He goes on to say that this is "not an Income Access related issue".

To me, Income Access seems like they are a very "hands-on" company - meaning that if I purchased reporting software from Income Access to use as a white label affiliate program, you would not just hand me the software and leave it completely up to me and my IT team to figure out how to install it and get it working.

By Des saying that "this is not an Income Access issue", it really implies that Income Access has left Everest on their own or allowed for half-assed installation and both of those statements do not match what I understand Income Access to do. More to the point, I cannot see IA leaving reports in place that are simply not accurate and it is known by them that the reports aren't accurate. Sure, scenarios like this do happen and it is beyond anyone's control - but if this has happened, I cannot imagine IA just "leaving it" without a preemptive email blast or even a message on the website that clarifies "there is a migration and reporting issue, IA and white label is aware of it, and all are working diligently to fix it. Contact your AM for accurate data or with any questions/concerns."

I do not see Income Access as a rogue or unethical company. However, as a service provider to a service provider - there is plenty of opportunity to hide behind one another (meaning Everest can come out and say oh, it is an issue with the data migration - which implies the issue is with you guys) and then you guys come out and say it is not with us. In this instance specifically, a joint statement should be made (in my opinion) so that the good name and integrity of Income Access is protected - especially when your company does have direct customers in the operator realm and also in the affiliate realm.

I close this thread maintaining that I do not think IA is unethical. Nor do I think they are rogue, shady, liars, or cheaters. I do, however, think that the nature of the Income Access business model is often taken advantage of by programs that do not wish to or are unable to "do the right thing" as they know you cannot comment on specifics to us in regards to them. Note, I am speaking in general and not about Everest. Thus, please understand there is no hostility behind my post.

Cheers

[Income Access]

Hi Mojo,

The data imported into our reports come from an operator's data warehouse or their software provider. If there was no affiliate tag to a player at the source, naturally, that player would not appear in your reports.

It is in the best interest of our partners to report their player referrals accurately as in addition to affiliate-referred players, we also track and report on players’ referred through media, PPC, offline and organic traffic for our clients. As such, our clients have the benefit of analysing all their channels in one platform for an accurate assessment of all their marketing campaigns. The same benefit is available to you as an affiliate as well.

As Pmig rightfully said, anything is possible and our partnerships are based on trust and honesty, and accurate data being supplied.

Rick, happy to elaborate. What the changes we have implemented mean is that in the past, where all programmes in our network were responsible for independently issuing their own affiliate payments each month, we now aggregate the commissions for affiliates in our network. This means, instead of receiving multiple payments, you now get one payment each month for all commissions earned across all brands in the network.

It also means that we work closely with our partners to get funds for their affiliate payments in advance through the use of a Payment Estimate report, accessible in the backend, so we facilitate making the payments.

All our partners, whether they are in our network or use our platform, or use our affiliate management services, understand that it is their responsibility to pay affiliates for their referrals. This is never in question and is stated in our agreements. Using our services as a marketing agency to provide affiliate management service, or to run PPC campaigns, or to run media campaigns, on their behalf does not abrogate them from this responsibility.

We have taken action against programmes that did not pay their affiliates, and will continue to do so after exhausting all efforts to try and get the funds. I'm afraid there are things that are beyond our control and impact us all, however we can assure you that we do not condone programmes who deliberately take advantage of affiliates. That is why we encourage dialogue and invite affiliates to let us know when they have a problem with any of our partners so we can work collectively to address them and have a positive outcome.

Thanks again and we are always happy to have a chat with you or anyone to discuss further.

Best regards,

Sarafina

[Income Access]

Hi Shay,

This is brilliant and very productive. Happy to address your questions. I will put my comments below in blue.....although red is my colour and we have a derby game at lunch time, which i am hoping will not leave me "singing the blues". Yes, I am an optimistic gooner for all my sins.

1. You say that programs do not have access to remove players once they've made it "into" the system. Someone has suggested there is a data pull at midnight (I'm not sure if this is accurate or not). If it is accurate that there is a single data pull (at midnight) or even say four data pulls daily, does the data you receive 100% come directly from the network or is it sent from network to program and then from program to you? I ask this to find out if it is possible for a white label to manipulate the data or remove tagging BEFORE the information has made it into your system.

We can import data up to once an hour although most programmes update their data once a day as is the norm in our industry. The times for the imports vary from client to client as we service a global industry. As mentioned in my reply earlier, the data source is either a client's data warehouse or their software provider. The same applies to a white label, and will depend on where the source of their data lays.

2. In regards to number two, if I sell a website (and with it, I also sell the individual trackers from the various programs that site actively promotes), I'm either asking for players under certain trackers to be re-tagged to another affiliate or for the tracker simply to be moved to another affiliate's account.

In such cases, if you chose to merge the activity from the purchased site to your existing account, we would move the trackers to your account, which is the same practice when there are multiple affiliate accounts that belong to the same affiliate. We do not move the players, they remain associated to the campaign ids they were originally tagged to. We simply merge the campaign ids or site ids as they are commonly referred to in our platform, so you are able to see each one separately.

I strongly suspect one of the two can be done. Based on what you've said in regards to untagged/retagged players, does this also mean that I will be able to see the players continued activity in my account if I drill down far enough in the reporting even though they have been moved by mutual consent?

Yes, once merged into your account, you can see the history of all the players' activity in your reports.

3. Can you elaborate more on the safety measures that are in place to protect both IA and the affiliates in terms of payments? I don't want to jump to conclusions on what "safety measures" means.

I elaborated this in my response earlier. Hope this helped to address it more clearly.

Additional questions:

4. I have a question regarding a quote in a different thread, which in the interest of full disclosure, the OP probably started this thread as a result of Everest's migration - so it is totally relevant to the discussions in this thread.



In his quote, he acknowledges problems with the data that affiliates are seeing (or not seeing in their respective reports. He goes on to say that this is "not an Income Access related issue".

To me, Income Access seems like they are a very "hands-on" company - meaning that if I purchased reporting software from Income Access to use as a white label affiliate program, you would not just hand me the software and leave it completely up to me and my IT team to figure out how to install it and get it working.

By Des saying that "this is not an Income Access issue", it really implies that Income Access has left Everest on their own or allowed for half-assed installation and both of those statements do not match what I understand Income Access to do. More to the point, I cannot see IA leaving reports in place that are simply not accurate and it is known by them that the reports aren't accurate. Sure, scenarios like this do happen and it is beyond anyone's control - but if this has happened, I cannot imagine IA just "leaving it" without a preemptive email blast or even a message on the website that clarifies "there is a migration and reporting issue, IA and white label is aware of it, and all are working diligently to fix it. Contact your AM for accurate data or with any questions/concerns."

What Des is referring to is that Everest are in the process of migrating their gaming platform, as has been recently published in the news, and this is independent of the affiliate programme migration.

I do not see Income Access as a rogue or unethical company. However, as a service provider to a service provider - there is plenty of opportunity to hide behind one another (meaning Everest can come out and say oh, it is an issue with the data migration - which implies the issue is with you guys) and then you guys come out and say it is not with us. In this instance specifically, a joint statement should be made (in my opinion) so that the good name and integrity of Income Access is protected - especially when your company does have direct customers in the operator realm and also in the affiliate realm.

Again, it is important to understand what each of our responsibilities are. I am certain that the Everest team will keep their affiliates informed. We have carried out numerous migrations successfully, and we like you, believe that communications is key. As Des mentioned, they are working through the issues, and he and his team are committed to resolving them. We too are committed to supporting them so they are able to migrate their programme successfully.

I close this thread maintaining that I do not think IA is unethical. Nor do I think they are rogue, shady, liars, or cheaters. I do, however, think that the nature of the Income Access business model is often taken advantage of by programs that do not wish to or are unable to "do the right thing" as they know you cannot comment on specifics to us in regards to them. Note, I am speaking in general and not about Everest. Thus, please understand there is no hostility behind my post.

No hostility taken.

Cheers

Many thanks,

Sarafina

[slotplayer]

I'm not sure my questions were addressed.
The reason I ask is because I read this on the IA site a while back:

Furthermore, clients maintain complete control over the program interface, defining which fields and reports their affiliates will see

I'm surprised the operator data is sent in csv format considering the nature of it.

[Income Access]

Hi Slotplayer,

As mentioned before, we can customise our platform to suit our clients' business needs. The interface refers to the look and feel, as well as certain features of the software such as language settings, reports, affiliate registration and login, and so on. You will see variations of these from client to client. This is because our platform is built to be flexible to accommodate different needs.

For instance, our reports have several additional columns that can be used in addition to the standard columns so programmes can take advantage of reporting on various marketing strategies such as keyword reporting for PPC campaign analysis, sms and offline codes for mobile and offline campaigns, points for loyalty programmes and refer-a-friend schemes, and several others. They can also be customised to report player registration, wagering activity and revenues generated by product for deeper analysis on acquisition channels, or include player country for analysis of different markets. These settings are controlled from the admin interface so each programme can determine their preferred settings.

As for the data, as mentioned before, we have a detailed and secure technical integration process to receive data from our clients, be it from their data warehouse or from their software provider directly. The format is defined as part of the process.

Hope this helps to address your questions.

Many thanks,

Sarafina

[mojo]

Thank you Sarafina for your answers and excellent posts addressing concerns.

There were earlier posts in this thread from a client of yours, who is currently running an honest program that was talking about an earlier experience with RTG:

I have worked with RTG in the past and we exported the data from them to our data warehouse and then to Income Access, so if we had wanted to we could have chopped a player removed a large loss for example , so in my view it is impossible to change the system unless you ship the data direct from the supplier.

Herein lies the problem.

It is clear that programs can remove players before the data gets to IA. I believe you when you say players cannot be removed once they are on your system. Thanks for clearing that up.

Unless the data comes directly from the supplier, as quoted here, there is a lot of room for loss for the affiliate.

My next question(s) becomes:

1. Can you close this hole that allows programs to 'chop' players from affiliates before they send the data to IA?

2. Can you provide real time stats to affiliates?

3. If there is such a large opportunity for programs to remove players before they send data, whether every hour, 24, 48 hours to IA, why do affiliates want to use IA and not go directly to the supplier? Are affiliates at further risk than the terrible challanges we already face not using a 3rd party? What protection do you provide?

I'm not trying to put anyone on the spot or accuse anyone of anything. Please believe that. This is a learning experience for me and I imagine for others. From what I see, IA has earned trust and that's not easy!

Thank you Sarafina.

[-Shay-]

I second Mojo's call for live reporting of stats should be "industry standard" not just a sign of an exceptional affiliate program. This goes for any program, not just IA. For me, the way stats are reported (and my confidence in them) often settles a "tiebreaker" on which program to give better placement to. I can think of one in particular that gets quite favourable placement even though they do not convert well for me - but I trust them, thus they've earned placement regardless of whether they are converting well for me.

Cheers