Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47
  1. #21
    Shaun O'neill is offline Former Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    June 2009
    Location
    Malta
    Posts
    1,320
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 247 Times in 192 Posts

    Default

    Martyn

    You are right the cost is high remove the shaddy companies and the price goes and in turn less will attend and the befor eyou know you create CAC Amsterdam which to be honest sucked as a conferance the best part of that was the networking parties Alex and PAL arranged, if i had paid for a stand i would have been gutted.

    Thanks

    Shaun

    Quote Originally Posted by CWC-Martyn View Post
    Does it make any difference if they are there or not?

    Thing is, affiliates have their own mind on who to deal with and who not to deal with. If they are there, simply dont go talk to them.

    Another thing on this, if they are banned a large chunk of revenue would be removed which in turn would cause prices to increase, which Alex would not want to do (right Alex?), and attendance would be lowered as a result.

    It's already expensive to get to these things when you consider travel and hotels and the rest of it, but the success of the trip all depends on what you make of it.

    Mojo, I am not in any way stoking the fire here but if you attend these then the argument would be stronger but my point still stands....don't visit their booth, don't arrange a meet with them and tell your affiliate friends your experiences. Just because they are there doesn't mean you can't avoid them.

    If noone visits their booth then I am pretty sure they would get the message in the long run anyway.

    Like I say, this is in no way personal here or sticking up for any shady operation, just a few points I thought I would share.

  2. #22
    Shaun O'neill is offline Former Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    June 2009
    Location
    Malta
    Posts
    1,320
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 247 Times in 192 Posts

    Default

    Alex

    I like the AGD idea, but I dont hav ethe AGD logo so does that mean i am a rougue.....

    How about you create a a rougues corner have a couple of security let people through some ropes and tell them they enter at there own risk.....

    Shaun



    Quote Originally Posted by alexpratt View Post
    Outright banning is definitely not the way to go in my opinion because as Shaun says you then lose an opportunity to sit down with these guys and talk things through which is exactly what J Todd and Michael did in Budapest. I think we can also all agree that based on pas experiences banning is not a solution that helps anyone

    Restricting sponsorship or expo opportunities could be an option - If the operator is genuinely rogue and unethical I would be happy to assist in using the platforms we have for leverage but I will only do this if they are 100% doing something wrong and if I have some solid concrete changes that need to be made rather than simply "they stole my player" etc etc as I need this to be solid and clear.

    Another more simple idea is that if programs are AGD certified we could put the logo on their badge and on their stand shell scheme signage really big and in colour.

    Mojo - Could you drop me an email (alex AT igamingbusiness.com) or PM me the details of any programs you feel shouldn't be at the conference and why and I will discuss with Michael, J Todd, Casinomeister, AGD etc. about what will be the best way forward as they may well be already in ongoing conversations with them

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Shaun O'neill For This Useful Post:

    mojo (18 September 2009)

  4. #23
    alexpratt's Avatar
    alexpratt is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    August 2006
    Posts
    1,429
    Blog Entries
    3
    Thanks
    151
    Thanked 717 Times in 423 Posts

    Default

    These are good points - In my mind it is the really dodgy programs we would be talking about who are unlikely to pay us anyway even if they did choose to exhibit which the bulk don't at the moment.

    Its a difficult thing and not at all simple. I see both sides of the argument because afterall we wouldn't have a show if it wasn't for affiliates attending and a large bulk of those are new affiliates that have little to no knowledge of the industry. Although we are far from watchdogs and are simply an events and publishing company I believe we have a responsibility to ensure the content we publish, the sponsors/adverts we carry and the speakers we have are all beneficial to our delegates.

    I am sure there is a solution that can work both ways and isn't hugely agressive and detrimental but ensures the events are still successful and costs don't increase at the same time as ensuring affiliates meet with "good" programs or are at least educated as to who they should be dealing with
    iGB Affiliate - The biggest magazine and events for affiliates in igaming

  5. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to alexpratt For This Useful Post:

    giggles7p (18 September 2009), mojo (18 September 2009)

  6. #24
    pgaming's Avatar
    pgaming is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2005
    Posts
    2,854
    Thanks
    414
    Thanked 215 Times in 164 Posts

    Default

    You can not expect Alex to drop 3 companies from events due to retro changes.

    So if you want Alex to take a moral high ground he should not allow any operator that has ever changed there T&C and he should not allow any site that allows US players or players from Turkey, should he also stop black hatters content theifs ect ect.

    So events in the future will be very boring with about 6 stands and 20 affiliates......

    Come on.

    Shaun
    Say what? Of course not but there are common Rogue operations that should not be able to part take at conferences. What are we Shark Bait?

    I like the AGD idea, but I dont hav ethe AGD logo so does that mean i am a rougue.....
    How about you create a a rougues corner have a couple of security let people through some ropes and tell them they enter at there own risk.....
    *Do you not think it maybe time you grab yourself one? A rogue corner not a bad idea maybe they can attend just to repent. So where is Mojo's cash from Playshare on a yacht somewhere in the Caribbean?

    greek39

  7. #25
    Shaun O'neill is offline Former Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    June 2009
    Location
    Malta
    Posts
    1,320
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 247 Times in 192 Posts

    Default

    Greek

    I have been live for 3 weeks and Andy has seen the T&CS but we have both been very busy to finalize tings.

    As for Mojos cash I hav eno idea where it is.

    Shaun

    Quote Originally Posted by greek39 View Post
    Say what? Of course not but there are common Rogue operations that should not be able to part take at conferences. What are we Shark Bait?

    *Do you not think it maybe time you grab yourself one? A rogue corner not a bad idea maybe they can attend just to repent. So where is Mojo's cash from Playshare on a yacht somewhere in the Caribbean?

    greek39

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Shaun O'neill For This Useful Post:


  9. #26
    pgaming's Avatar
    pgaming is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2005
    Posts
    2,854
    Thanks
    414
    Thanked 215 Times in 164 Posts

    Default

    I have been live for 3 weeks and Andy has seen the T&CS but we have both been very busy to finalize tings.
    Shaun,

    A good step in the right direction I rely heavily on the AGD so do many others.

    greek39

  10. #27
    Shaun O'neill is offline Former Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    June 2009
    Location
    Malta
    Posts
    1,320
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 247 Times in 192 Posts

    Default

    I understand that, hence the reason i sent my T&Cs to Andy prior to even going live.

    Also when I was at my previous company I work with AGD on a couple things and his thoughts where and are a huge help.

    Thanks


    Shaun


    Quote Originally Posted by greek39 View Post
    Shaun,

    A good step in the right direction I rely heavily on the AGD so do many others.

    greek39

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Shaun O'neill For This Useful Post:

    giggles7p (18 September 2009)

  12. #28
    Simmo! is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2004
    Posts
    893
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked 406 Times in 226 Posts

    Default

    You can't really stop bad operators from turning up at conferences to be honest, even if they don't exhibit they are still there and I'm sure it's not difficult to borrow a badge or fake a name for entry. Just schmoozing is enough anyway.

    Also, I don't think it's a bad thing - if they go then there is a better chance that they will appreciate more how they are seen by the community. And as Shaun has tried to subtlely point out, where do you draw the line?

    Bottom line is, while there will always be the odd "good-casino-done-bad" scenario, it's down to affiliates to do their own due diligence on who to promote and who not to. And most of the good casinos listen via forums anyway as they don't want a bad reputation. And it's not exactly difficult to spot a potential problem company once you've done this for a bit.

    Cheers,

    Simmo!

  13. #29
    arkyt's Avatar
    arkyt is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    March 2002
    Posts
    1,504
    Thanks
    171
    Thanked 235 Times in 164 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simmo! View Post
    You can't really stop bad operators from turning up at conferences...

    Bottom line is, while there will always be the odd "good-casino-done-bad" scenario, it's down to affiliates to do their own due diligence on who to promote and who not to.
    Agreed - it would be pretty difficult to totally prevent any program and/or individual from visiting a conference location and participating in networking activities. BUT that’s entirely different than accepting monies from them for a booth where they are permitted to masquerade next to reputable outfits as if they are equals.

    Thats where the conference organizers need to take a more proactive approach, do their homework and not accept money just for the sake of taking more money in!

    While I do agree that at the end of the day its the affiliates responsibility to do their own homework. I also fully understand how a relative newbie could go to a conference and listen to a smooth talk from a bad program and get drawn into promoting crap. Conisdering that - why should we be ok with letting these outfits pay for booths at conferences?

    You also have to consider that fact that with regards to the total sum of all affiliates, I would guess that a small percentage actually visit GPWA/CAP/AGD ... while they may offer a medium to get the word out about bad programs; its not a sure thing that the word will be spread.

    As for bad programs that just showed up anyway without booths - affiliates at conferences could assist in getting the word out - creating/making "Program XYZ is Rogue" buttons and wearing them in masses may very well be affective - they are fairly cheap!

  14. #30
    Simmo! is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2004
    Posts
    893
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked 406 Times in 226 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arkyt View Post
    Thats where the conference organizers need to take a more proactive approach, do their homework and not accept money just for the sake of taking more money in!
    Hmmm, disagree with you there arkyt. Affiliates should not expect conference organisers to police the industry for us. It doesn't happen in any other market where the role of a conference organiser is to bring people together, simples. These issues are 100% our issues and 100% our responsibility to sort out IMO.

    As for newbies getting sold to, well call me hard, but that's how you learn. If you get taken in by nice chat and big $$ without finding out who you are dealing with first, then it's hardly fair to blame the conference organiser.
    Last edited by Simmo!; 18 September 2009 at 1:39 pm.

  15. #31
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,985
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,882 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simmo! View Post
    Hmmm, disagree with you there arkyt. Affiliates should not expect conference organisers to police the industry for us. It doesn't happen in any other market where the role of a conference organiser is to bring people together, simples. These issues are 100% our issues and 100% our responsibility to sort out IMO.

    As for newbies getting sold to, well call me hard, but that's how you learn. If you get taken in by nice chat and big $$ without finding out who you are dealing with first, then it's hardly fair to blame the conference organiser.
    I'll have to disagree with that Simmo!. I think from reading Alex response he is also on the same page with a desire to help the industry with whatever power he has to do so. I think that if we all did our little part we would be in a much better place.

    Hats off to Alex.

    A very disturbing element is the newbies. I feel as seasoned affs we have a duty to try to do what we can. There is also the duty to players as it has a trickle down effect.

    To me it's common sense. Like I said before, one doesn't invite Bernie Madoff to a brokers conference, or Michael Vick to a pitbull conference.

    Fortunatly, we have AGD to look to for who's who.

  16. #32
    arkyt's Avatar
    arkyt is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    March 2002
    Posts
    1,504
    Thanks
    171
    Thanked 235 Times in 164 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simmo! View Post
    Hmmm, disagree with you there arkyt. Affiliates should not expect conference organisers to police the industry for us.
    I'm not asking them to police the industry for anyone - what I would expect them to do is police their own event - thats to say, know who they are accepting money from etc.

  17. #33
    Simmo! is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2004
    Posts
    893
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked 406 Times in 226 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arkyt View Post
    I'm not asking them to police the industry for anyone - what I would expect them to do is police their own event - thats to say, know who they are accepting money from etc.
    But to "know who they are accepting money from" they would have to investigate and then make a judgement on every complaint made against each of their delegates and exhibitors. That's where battle lines become fuzzy.

    You'll have the world and his affiliate claiming X casino did Y to them and should be banned from conferences. They don't pay me, paid me late, changed their terms, cross-marketed to players, sold a mailing list, are suspected of shaving, closed my account, lied to me...etc etc etc. Some will use the threat of a conference ban as blackmail like we see players do with Casinomeister so regularly.

    IMO, conference organisers should be left to organise conferences, bring people together and give them the platform to talk face to face. The rest is down to us.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Simmo! For This Useful Post:

    bonustreak (22 September 2009)

  19. #34
    offyourface is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    February 2007
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    103
    Thanked 127 Times in 71 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mojo View Post
    A very disturbing element is the newbies. I feel as seasoned affs we have a duty to try to do what we can. There is also the duty to players as it has a trickle down effect.
    I think our industry needs a genuine area that affiliates can go to and vote on programs. A simple star rating, 5 stars down to 0 stars that would help illustrate an overall affiliate consensus towards specific programs which will also give new affiliates a genuine snap shot of who we as affiliates trust. Just a simple rating system having the highest rated at the top and the lowest rated at the bottom.

    Right now new affiliates don't know what to think towards certain programs when they see words like gold and platinum beside the names of programs since this doesn't represent our sentiments. It just gets really confusing for them, so if they had one place they could go to and get genuine ratings towards various programs then that should help to eliminate all these newer affiliates falling into the same traps many of us did when we started out and were not seasoned enough to know the good from the bad.

    There is just so much information to take in as a new affiliate and it can be difficult to get a genuine affiliate perspective because you have to sift through so much information and threads just to get an overall consensus. I think this would be an invaluable resource for new affiliates.

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

    giggles7p (18 September 2009), mojo (18 September 2009)

  21. #35
    Simmo! is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2004
    Posts
    893
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked 406 Times in 226 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by offyourface View Post
    I think our industry needs a genuine area that affiliates can go to and vote on programs. A simple star rating, 5 stars down to 0 stars that would help illustrate an overall affiliate consensus towards specific programs.
    I like that idea Would need to make sure only affiliates could rate them, and that it was highly visible to new affiliates.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to Simmo! For This Useful Post:

    giggles7p (18 September 2009)

  23. #36
    sparky1 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    July 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    213
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts

    Default

    I think the easiest way to deal with the rogues who attend is simply to approach thm, advise them of your distatse in the way they operate, advise them that you have them designated as a rogue casino operator and that you will share your opinion with every other affiliate you speak to.

    If enough affiliates take that approach eventually those rogue operators will get the point and either take the proper actions to correct the errors of thier ways or will simply stop attending as they will not recieve any real benifit from being there.

    The bottom line is we as affiliates, can make a difference and can do it in a manner that is better to get results versus no results based on disallowing rogue programs. The above suggestion will have far better results as then it is in thier face versus not.

    Just my opinion anyway....if it counts...lol

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to sparky1 For This Useful Post:

    bonustreak (22 September 2009)

  25. #37
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,985
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,882 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simmo! View Post

    You'll have the world and his affiliate claiming X casino did Y to them and should be banned from conferences. They don't pay me, paid me late, changed their terms, cross-marketed to players, sold a mailing list, are suspected of shaving, closed my account, lied to me...etc etc etc. Some will use the threat of a conference ban as blackmail like we see players do with Casinomeister so regularly.
    A program need only to stay off the AGD and CM rogue/predatory list. That way no one can threaten anything. The programs then control their own destiny by remaining in good standing in the affiliate community.

    I don't think it would be to much to ask because they should be doing that anyway. It also gives them added incentive to do the right thing.

  26. #38
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,985
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,882 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by casinobonusrus View Post
    I think the easiest way to deal with the rogues who attend is simply to approach thm, advise them of your distatse in the way they operate, advise them that you have them designated as a rogue casino operator and that you will share your opinion with every other affiliate you speak to.

    If enough affiliates take that approach eventually those rogue operators will get the point and either take the proper actions to correct the errors of thier ways or will simply stop attending as they will not recieve any real benifit from being there.

    The bottom line is we as affiliates, can make a difference and can do it in a manner that is better to get results versus no results based on disallowing rogue programs. The above suggestion will have far better results as then it is in thier face versus not.

    Just my opinion anyway....if it counts...lol
    I think that's a good way to look at it too. Some affiliates want that opportunity.

    I think there are some great ideas like marking these programs, or roping them off or something. I love the button idea!

    So another option is to allow these baddies but to make sure everyone is aware. That way it also doesn't hurt anyones wallet.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to mojo For This Useful Post:


  28. #39
    Nandakishore's Avatar
    Nandakishore is offline In Memorium, 1935-2014
    Join Date
    December 2006
    Location
    In Germany near Munich
    Posts
    2,104
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks
    931
    Thanked 496 Times in 367 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mojo View Post
    A very disturbing element is the newbies. I feel as seasoned affs we have a duty to try to do what we can. There is also the duty to players as it has a trickle down effect.
    I think the best way to help newbies visiting such conferences will be to conduct some kind of podium discussions about the problem casino operators, even if they refuse to take part in such a discussion. This can be IMO informative for newbies and others and an offensive and effective way to deal with such organizations openly and before, I hope, a more or less big audience, including press representatives.
    Last edited by universal4; 18 September 2009 at 6:54 pm. Reason: fix quote tags

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to Nandakishore For This Useful Post:


  30. #40
    sparky1 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    July 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    213
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts

    Default

    The problem with that, while although a good idea, would be that most operators would worry about being victimized under such aplatform and therefoe you would see a reduction in decent operators attending as well.

    The goal is to single out those rogues who do attend by all affiliates viocing thier disgust by thier actions and letting them know first hand that will not work them, be it paid advertising or not, add them to a prominant blacklist on all sites and then simply walk away.

    If you see other affiliates talking to them you make sure to approach those affiliates, give them a hand out regrding those rogue opertors and do so clearly in front of those operators.

    If they see enough affiliates taking a stand, not promoting them, advising other affiliates by giving links/info to information as to why, IMO I think it would be far more productive and effective.

  31. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sparky1 For This Useful Post:

    bonustreak (22 September 2009), Dominique (18 September 2009), Nandakishore (18 September 2009)

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •