View Poll Results: Should Predatory Programs be Allowed at Conferences?

Voters
21. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    9 42.86%
  • No

    12 57.14%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29
  1. #1
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,987
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,883 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default Should Predatory Programs go to Conferences?

    I wrote this big long thing but I think it would be better left to the Affiliates to say!

    There is some discussion here: https://www.gpwa.org/forum/programs-...tml#post558424

    My personal recommendation (I discussed with Alex Pratt) was that programs not approved at AGD and CM would be disallowed and AGD and CM would be the authority. If programs don't have the decency to adhere to these standards then naturally there should be not conference priveledges.

    Meanwhile they are hooking 500 other naive affiliates at conferences. That trickles down to our main concern, Players.
    Last edited by mojo; 22 September 2009 at 12:34 am. Reason: Should bad programs be at Conferences?

  2. #2
    joeyl's Avatar
    joeyl is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2003
    Location
    London
    Posts
    474
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    43
    Thanked 140 Times in 90 Posts

    Default When is boycott not a boycott?

    Conference organisers won't do the boycott thing "first" Mojo.

    The same people with blacklists and rogue pages, or those who make videos asking players and webmasters not to frequent this casino or that, do not believe in boycotts i'm told.

    You've got no chance i'm afraid.

    Sorry to say.

  3. #3
    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 joeyl View Post
    The same people with blacklists and rogue pages, or those who make videos asking players and webmasters not to frequent this casino or that, do not believe in boycotts i'm told.
    Can't burn bridges when they are sending money down the other lane. Its better to keep them at the table and look as if you are fighting the good fight. Accept free trips to foreign lands and gloss the big picture look really pretty. Yep; uh huh; thats the ticket.

    I voted no, and I posted in the original thread that IMO the event organizer should be held accountable for who they bring (accept money from) to their conference.
    Last edited by arkyt; 23 September 2009 at 10:17 am.

  4. #4
    joeyl's Avatar
    joeyl is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2003
    Location
    London
    Posts
    474
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    43
    Thanked 140 Times in 90 Posts

    Default

    I don't see it in such black & white terms Arkty.

    Those you ride so hard are'nt operating the controls. They are riding the same rollercoaster you are.

    It's a bumpy ride at the back. & it's scary up the front too.

    The controllers are who you really have a beef with. That's the casino managers, the software suppliers and the licensors.

  5. #5
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,987
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,883 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default

    I have every confidence that conference orgainizers have no desire to allow predatory programs at their conferences. It's hurtful to affiliates right? It is an AFFILIATE conference, right? They care, I know it!

    Let's let some affiliate conference orgainizers chime in here!

    The Safe and Fair Affiliate Initiative.

  6. #6
    casinobonusguy is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2006
    Posts
    1,997
    Thanks
    163
    Thanked 1,005 Times in 615 Posts

    Default

    I cannot agree on letting CM and AGD decide who should come to conferences.I deal with playshare ,commission warehouse,partnerlogic and unibet .These have predatory terms on AGD but together they pay us $xx,xxx monthly with no issue.I realise i am long term affiliate and protected on Some terms because of the age of my accounts.I do not think there is one blanet rule that should be applied when deciding who can come and who should not attend.
    Is there really anyone out there who does not know that these programs attend because they pay booth fees?
    It is impossible to police an event like this and if alex had to listen to different voices on this matter he would be left with just handful of programs.
    If you said ROGUE programs I would agree with you mojo but predatory means any casino with a negative carry over would not get to attend.

    Judy

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to casinobonusguy For This Useful Post:

    Nandakishore (27 September 2009), Shaun O'neill (28 September 2009), Webzcas (26 September 2009)

  8. #7
    matted's Avatar
    matted is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    June 2004
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    2,685
    Thanks
    118
    Thanked 328 Times in 222 Posts

    Default

    We are all independent businesses. It is up to us to decide who we speak to and don't speak to. As well as our own due diligence when promoting something. Part of that DD may be speaking with other affiliates who will give the honest truth. Any affiliate who blindly follows what every Aff Manager says wont be in business long.

    Having these programs at the generic conferences provides a venue for discussion. Shutting the door is a bad policy.
    Owner, Cognitive Powers, Inc.
    Soon to be ex-webmaster
    Facebook, Twitter, and Linked In

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to matted For This Useful Post:

    Shaun O'neill (28 September 2009)

  10. #8
    thepokerkeep's Avatar
    thepokerkeep is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2007
    Location
    London Canada
    Posts
    2,886
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    1,004
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 799 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by matted View Post
    Having these programs at the generic conferences provides a venue for discussion. Shutting the door is a bad policy.
    Shutting the door on rogue casinos is a good policy. If they truly want to discuss the issues, there are numerous venues for that - AGD, GPWA, Casinomeister....

    Permitting them to continue to prey on new affiliates through their presence at conferences does no one any good.

    The key word here is "rogue". As Judy pointed out, many programs have terms and conditions that "some" affiliates consider "predatory" while other affiliates find those same terms acceptable. If CM and AGD have "rogued" a program, there is obviously a good reason to avoid doing business with them. Those programs should be banned from setting up at the conferences.

    I posted the following thoughts in the other thread - cross posted here for those who missed it;

    In this industry it would be a simple process to vette the programs being allowed to participate at any given event.

    Using AGD and Casinmeister as a starting point, any program that has been rogued by either of these forums could easily be blacklisted. Additionally, polling a handful of respected affiliates from each sector of the industry (poker, casino, sportsbook, bingo, etc) would be quick, inexpensive and give a fairly accurate list of the worst programs in the biz.

    Of course, it's up to the event coordinator to want to take this road. There's no doubt that in the short term it would hurt the bottom line but the long term benefits could be huge.

    What are the benefits for the conference promoter??

    Trust, quality and value! High quality exhibitors will attract high quality affiliates!

    The event gains the trust of the affiliates and the programs. As an affiliate, knowing that the attending programs have been vetted would certainly encourage me to choose to attend conference A over conference B where there was no screening process.

    As a casino operator, I would feel much better about spending my budget on conferences where I won't be competing with rogue operations for the affiliate's time and business. A vetted conference adds value to any program in attendance. If I were an operator with a limited budget and could only afford to attend one conference this year, I would absolutely want to be at the one with the highest quality exhibitors.

    Does an event organizer have an obligation to screen his exhibitors?

    In my opinion, yes! Blacklisting rogues at all levels (including conferences) is in everyone's best interest. Protecting (new & veteran) affiliates from getting duped by fly by night operators should be a top priority for everyone in this business including event coordinators. If you want to run a quality event, you need quality exhibitors - period!

    In addition, each conference should include a session on 'rogue operators'. Having speakers such as Andy (AGD), Brian (Casinomeister) and/or J Todd (APCW) on hand to help educate new affiliates before they fall victim to the likes of Playshare or Rome. The agenda could/should also include a list of all the currently blacklisted programs...

    Benefits:
    New programs, such as Shaun's, would be allowed to attend since they are not on the 'blacklist'.

    Rogues would be encouraged to change their ways so they'd be removed from the 'blacklist' and be permitted to attend the next conference.

    Blacklisting and banning rogue operators from exhibiting would directly impact their profit margins due to lack of exposure. The fastest, most effective way to motivate rogues to change their ways is to impact their bottom line.

    Knowing that negative changes to T&C's could result in being blacklisted from future conferences, programs will be less likely to risk making those changes.

    Event organizers who take this approach instantly gain credibility and respect. A bi-product of this approach is 'loyalty'... I know I would choose to attend an event that was promoted by someone who had my best interests at heart over any other similar event.

    This approach is used in any industry where trade shows are held. Home shows, antiques shows, craft shows.... all the best ones are vetted.

    Saying that we need to allow these 'rogues' to attend so we have access to them is complete bull-****! They can come to AGD, Casinomeister or GPWA forums any time they want. Michael, Andy, Brian and J Todd are all accessible to them if they wish to correspond privately as well.
    **** Edited to add - the name of this thread should be changed to " Should ROGUED Programs Be Allowed to Display at Conferences?"
    Last edited by thepokerkeep; 27 September 2009 at 6:03 am.
    Terry - The Pokerkeep
    President / CEO - Gambling Affiliates Union

    Casino Affiliate Programs
    Affiliate Resources
    Gambling Affiliate Program Blacklist

    Email: admin @ thepokerkeep.com



  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to thepokerkeep For This Useful Post:

    GCG (27 September 2009), mojo (27 September 2009), TreasureChest (28 September 2009)

  12. #9
    GCG
    GCG is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    February 2009
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    1,249
    Thanks
    291
    Thanked 759 Times in 418 Posts

    Default

    Totally agree Pokerkeep

    If you are a bad boy you should not attend class but wait outside and think about your mistakes that have hurt others.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to GCG For This Useful Post:

    mojo (27 September 2009)

  14. #10
    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 casinobonusguy View Post
    I cannot agree on letting CM and AGD decide who should come to conferences.
    Exactly for this reason I have voted yes. I would have voted NO if the poll were for excluding rogue casinos.

  15. #11
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,987
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,883 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default

    If you are predatory you are thisclose to rogue.

    Would you recommend your best friend to a 'predatory' program? Do you want webmasters sucked into this or do programs have to kill someone first before we do anything about it.

    Predatory is not about having a negitive carryover. I use programs with neg c/o's. That's not the point. It's about retro terms without discussing it with us! Today it's negitive carryover that they slip in without telling us and guess what.. tomorrow they also add bundling. Again without telling us! Thank goodness for AGD. Scary!

    Should we start a new poll? Rogue only? I say no. Let's get programs to step it up!

    Edit to add: my mistake was posting this in public where predatory programs can vote.
    Last edited by mojo; 27 September 2009 at 9:32 pm. Reason: edit to add

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


  17. #12
    pgaming's Avatar
    pgaming is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2005
    Posts
    2,854
    Thanks
    414
    Thanked 215 Times in 164 Posts

    Default

    If we are bombed for promoting rogues then why are they allowed at conferences? Or why bother setting up rogue pages give them bad press only to have them show up.

    Just a thought

    greek39
    Last edited by pgaming; 28 September 2009 at 1:38 am. Reason: adding to post

  18. #13
    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

    Mojo

    Sorry to say that I have to disagree with you.

    With regards to CM i have spoken to Bryan once I had a beer with him in Amsterdam two CAC ago since then I have never spoken to him again.

    As far as I know my company (NordiCBet) has never featured on CM and we have been in business since 2002.

    My affiliate program had been love about 6 weeks so far and to date both myself and Andy have been to busy to sort out my seal so in your mind I should not attend a conferrance???

    I am sorry but that is 100% crazy, i understand you have issues with a couple of comapnies but to say things like this is crazy.

    I will be attending any events that I wish to, we have even gone as far as being the Silver Sponsor for the Affiliate Super Summit in Swden in Nov.

    Shaun


    Quote Originally Posted by mojo View Post
    I wrote this big long thing but I think it would be better left to the Affiliates to say!

    There is some discussion here: https://www.gpwa.org/forum/programs-...tml#post558424

    My personal recommendation (I discussed with Alex Pratt) was that programs not approved at AGD and CM would be disallowed and AGD and CM would be the authority. If programs don't have the decency to adhere to these standards then naturally there should be not conference priveledges.

    Meanwhile they are hooking 500 other naive affiliates at conferences. That trickles down to our main concern, Players.

  19. #14
    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

    Mojo

    I just though of another point that I wuld liek to add:

    If on your mind the CM and AGD are the voice does that mean that the GPWA have got it wrong a sthey took my cash??

    Thanks

    Shaun

    Quote Originally Posted by mojo View Post
    I wrote this big long thing but I think it would be better left to the Affiliates to say!

    There is some discussion here: https://www.gpwa.org/forum/programs-...tml#post558424

    My personal recommendation (I discussed with Alex Pratt) was that programs not approved at AGD and CM would be disallowed and AGD and CM would be the authority. If programs don't have the decency to adhere to these standards then naturally there should be not conference priveledges.

    Meanwhile they are hooking 500 other naive affiliates at conferences. That trickles down to our main concern, Players.

  20. #15
    thepokerkeep's Avatar
    thepokerkeep is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2007
    Location
    London Canada
    Posts
    2,886
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    1,004
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 799 Posts

    Default

    Just to clarify some points made earlier about conferences losing too much money by banning rogues...

    AGD has just 3 programs rogued.
    Red Hot Revenue, Gramd Prive and Villa Fortuna - Rogued!

    They have 8 marked as predatory.
    AU, Hot Pepper, Partner Logic, Unibet, CW, Hype, Playshre, VIP - Predatory!

    There are 67 AGD approved programs and 3 awaiting evaluation.

    CasinoMeister has a longer rogue list, but - the list is by casino not program - and many of them are out of business.

    Conclusion - Of the hundreds of programs in this industry, banning a handful of rogue casino programs will not cripple an event.
    Terry - The Pokerkeep
    President / CEO - Gambling Affiliates Union

    Casino Affiliate Programs
    Affiliate Resources
    Gambling Affiliate Program Blacklist

    Email: admin @ thepokerkeep.com



  21. #16
    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 think Alex may not agree some of those listed i think spend a fair bit.

    Also if it was up to Mojo I would not be allowed to attend an event....

    Shaun


    Quote Originally Posted by thepokerkeep View Post
    Just to clarify some points made earlier about conferences losing too much money by banning rogues...

    AGD has just 3 programs rogued.
    Red Hot Revenue, Gramd Prive and Villa Fortuna - Rogued!

    They have 8 marked as predatory.
    AU, Hot Pepper, Partner Logic, Unibet, CW, Hype, Playshre, VIP - Predatory!

    There are 67 AGD approved programs and 3 awaiting evaluation.

    CasinoMeister has a longer rogue list, but - the list is by casino not program - and many of them are out of business.

    Conclusion - Of the hundreds of programs in this industry, banning a handful of rogue casino programs will not cripple an event.

  22. #17
    thepokerkeep's Avatar
    thepokerkeep is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2007
    Location
    London Canada
    Posts
    2,886
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    1,004
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 799 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaun O'neill View Post
    I think Alex may not agree some of those listed i think spend a fair bit.

    Also if it was up to Mojo I would not be allowed to attend an event....

    Shaun
    Shaun,

    I disagree with Mojo about that point as well.

    In my opinion, this is not about hurting the little guy or the new programs that have not been evaluated yet. It's about taking action against the worst programs in the industry.

    That's why I propose that instead of allowing only approved programs to attend, ban programs that are clearly marked as rogues.
    Terry - The Pokerkeep
    President / CEO - Gambling Affiliates Union

    Casino Affiliate Programs
    Affiliate Resources
    Gambling Affiliate Program Blacklist

    Email: admin @ thepokerkeep.com



  23. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to thepokerkeep For This Useful Post:

    GamTrak (28 September 2009), giggles7p (28 September 2009), mojo (28 September 2009), Shaun O'neill (28 September 2009)

  24. #18
    pgaming's Avatar
    pgaming is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2005
    Posts
    2,854
    Thanks
    414
    Thanked 215 Times in 164 Posts

    Default

    Dam Pokerkeep you took the words right out of my mouth lol. I would certainly agree and you make some very valid points.

    Shawn I cannot see your program getting the axe thrown at it unless it was by accident. Throw me a PM this morning if you have time.

    I think were talking about the really severe rogue places Cpays comes to mind.

    greek39

  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to pgaming For This Useful Post:

    mojo (28 September 2009), thepokerkeep (28 September 2009)

  26. #19
    mojo's Avatar
    mojo is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    4,987
    Thanks
    1,933
    Thanked 1,883 Times in 1,222 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thepokerkeep View Post
    Shaun,

    I disagree with Mojo about that point as well.

    In my opinion, this is not about hurting the little guy or the new programs that have not been evaluated yet. It's about taking action against the worst programs in the industry.

    That's why I propose that instead of allowing only approved programs to attend, ban programs that are clearly marked as rogues.
    Sorry if I implied they would have to be approved by CM or AGD. That is not how I feel or what I meant at all. Rather what Terry says above. If one is not on the rogue list they are good to go.

    Also if it was up to Mojo I would not be allowed to attend an event....
    Not true, unless you are on a rogue list. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

  27. #20
    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

    Mojo


    You just wnat to rogue me and ban me from all events and you have not even met me yet.....


    Will you be in London???


    Shaun


    Quote Originally Posted by mojo View Post
    Sorry if I implied they would have to be approved by CM or AGD. That is not how I feel or what I meant at all. Rather what Terry says above. If one is not on the rogue list they are good to go.



    Not true, unless you are on a rogue list. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •