Page 10 of 16 FirstFirst ... 67891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 301
  1. #181
    colin3005 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2015
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 196 Times in 97 Posts

    Default

    I'm not saying it isn't , what i mean is, it isn't 25% on all sales, its 25% on profit.
    Say John Lewis sell a tv for 1000 and you get 5% commission. You would get 50 obviously. Their profit is probably around 200 max, if they paid you 25% on profit only you would get 50.
    So theres not much difference, plus you have no chance of someone winning at debenhams and wiping out your commission from them and all your other customers that month.
    I just don't think a court would rule 5% unreasonable, and nor should they as that wouldn't be the issue. The issue would be, are they in breach of contract, promising 25% for life, then dropping that by 80%. I think a court would rule there is a breach.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to colin3005 For This Useful Post:

    JackTenSuited (25 October 2015)

  3. #182
    Sherlock's Avatar
    Sherlock is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    December 2013
    Location
    WC
    Posts
    3,662
    Thanks
    1,150
    Thanked 2,949 Times in 1,628 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGooner View Post
    Of course the reason for this is that it's a globally competitive market with low barriers for entry for a new gambling site. Commissions need to be attractive to retain affiliates ... as SKYBET will see as they lose significant market share with a 5% base rate.
    I wish this was true. But I think the barriers are very high. It only sees this is a competitive market, but in fact, it looks we deal with market of oligopolies that act like... arrogant oligopolies. The barriers of entry are the brands in human minds. The old school tv promotion is for sure very underestimated by us affiliates.

    For example I wish it was bwin stealing that caused their fading away. But I think it were just another stupid business decisions that cleaned the way for others.

    I think there are no new big gambling operators during last years at the European market. UK operators that tried to expand to Europe (last one is now Skybet) failed. For sure there are low barriers of entry like creating the website and hiring the people, but that is not all. The brand = conservativism in consumer's mind is the obstacle here.
    We are all bloodsucking ticks, hungry, devious
    each one latched on to the ass of the previous
    when the last and the first latch on it can be shown
    ass-blood sucked by the first from the last is his own

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Sherlock For This Useful Post:


  5. #183
    Caimino87 Guest

    Default

    This is a kick in the teeth, use a few affilaite sites, only came across this forum the other day. Any updates on this?

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Caimino87 For This Useful Post:


  7. #184
    TheGooner's Avatar
    TheGooner is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,186
    Thanks
    1,903
    Thanked 4,130 Times in 1,960 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherlock View Post
    I wish this was true. But I think the barriers are very high.
    I turn down multiple approaches each and every month from programs wanting to get on site ...
    There are plenty of brands out there that will pay a competitive rate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherlock View Post
    The old school tv promotion is for sure very underestimated by us affiliates.
    It's becoming less and less effective every year - TV broadcast is fragmenting - online is growing.
    And for a product that is consumed online like gambling - online recommendations are essential.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to TheGooner For This Useful Post:


  9. #185
    thebookiesoffers is offline Former Member
    Join Date
    November 2009
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    3,225
    Thanks
    414
    Thanked 1,764 Times in 1,009 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGooner View Post
    TV broadcast is fragmenting - online is growing
    online and tv go hand in hand, especially in the UK

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to thebookiesoffers For This Useful Post:


  11. #186
    colin3005 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2015
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 196 Times in 97 Posts

    Default

    Ok, so I've sent an email to skybet telling them I accept the new terms for customers signed up from 1st November 2015, but expect customers signed before that date to be paid at the 25% as specified in the contract at the time and have specifically stated I do not want the relationship terminated. If it isn't done then I will consider it a breach of contract and will take action.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to colin3005 For This Useful Post:

    BetSmartUK (2 November 2015), KasinoKing (3 November 2015), thebookiesoffers (2 November 2015)

  13. #187
    justbookies is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    September 2009
    Posts
    1,285
    Thanks
    520
    Thanked 863 Times in 512 Posts

    Default

    I think we have established that all talk of taking them to court appears to be total bullshit, despite various assurances of finance. In my case the first person or group of people who get to court will still get 1000 from me towards their costs, but the way this thread has gone cold suggests that money is safe.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to justbookies For This Useful Post:

    KasinoKing (3 November 2015), thebookiesoffers (2 November 2015)

  15. #188
    colin3005 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2015
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 196 Times in 97 Posts

    Default

    Well as far as I'm concerned its a breach of contract, and from what i know of contract law, I'm 100% sure a court will agree.
    If they breach the contract with me I have no problem whatsoever going to small claims, and i will, costs are fixed so very little risk to me, very high risk for Sky though as if they lose it wouldn't look good in any future cases.

    Sky are banking on people just rolling over and accepting this, as they most likely think people won't want to risk the income they get, even if it is only 5%.

    In case people think this comes across as 'me me me' from my point of view, small claims is the best option, as costs are capped, so even if I lose (which I won't) I won't get hit with a massive legal bill. If it is multiple claimants, it won't be suitable for small claims or fast track, and costs could be much higher, something I can't afford. However theres nothing stopping other affiliates taking the same course of action.

  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to colin3005 For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (2 November 2015), BetSmartUK (3 November 2015), KasinoKing (3 November 2015)

  17. #189
    justbookies is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    September 2009
    Posts
    1,285
    Thanks
    520
    Thanked 863 Times in 512 Posts

    Default

    I completely agree with you and I too believe you will win on that basis. Keep me in the loop, because it sounds like you might be the one I can contribute those expenses to.

    I don't think SkyBet actually thinks anyone can work for 5% or that they would settle for it - they are just stealing all players from small affiliates. What they are really counting on is nobody taking them to court.

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

    colin3005 (2 November 2015)

  19. #190
    JackTenSuited is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2004
    Posts
    1,014
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 340 Times in 208 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by colin3005 View Post
    Well as far as I'm concerned its a breach of contract, and from what i know of contract law, I'm 100% sure a court will agree.
    If they breach the contract with me I have no problem whatsoever going to small claims, and i will, costs are fixed so very little risk to me, very high risk for Sky though as if they lose it wouldn't look good in any future cases.

    Sky are banking on people just rolling over and accepting this, as they most likely think people won't want to risk the income they get, even if it is only 5%.

    In case people think this comes across as 'me me me' from my point of view, small claims is the best option, as costs are capped, so even if I lose (which I won't) I won't get hit with a massive legal bill. If it is multiple claimants, it won't be suitable for small claims or fast track, and costs could be much higher, something I can't afford. However theres nothing stopping other affiliates taking the same course of action.
    Don't you have to have an exact amount to take them to small claims court for? or would you go every month for 4x whatever they paid that month?

  20. #191
    colin3005 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2015
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 196 Times in 97 Posts

    Default

    No, you could go for unliquidated damages, you could also seek a performance order, there are a few remedies rather than a fixed amount that could be claimed.

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to colin3005 For This Useful Post:

    JackTenSuited (3 November 2015), Triple7 (3 November 2015)

  22. #192
    TheGooner's Avatar
    TheGooner is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,186
    Thanks
    1,903
    Thanked 4,130 Times in 1,960 Posts

    Default

    Good luck with this claim - please keep us updated with your results.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to TheGooner For This Useful Post:

    Triple7 (3 November 2015)

  24. #193
    colin3005 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2015
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 196 Times in 97 Posts

    Default

    Well theres no breach of contract as of yet, but if there is I certainly will

  25. #194
    RacingJim is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,856
    Thanks
    868
    Thanked 1,360 Times in 838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justbookies View Post
    I think we have established that all talk of taking them to court appears to be total bullshit, despite various assurances of finance. In my case the first person or group of people who get to court will still get 1000 from me towards their costs, but the way this thread has gone cold suggests that money is safe.
    It needs somebody who has enough to lose to take this and run with it. I don't make enough money from Skybet to make all the time, effort and bullshit worth my while. People saying they make decent money from Skybet should be the ones taking this on, just saying you'll chuck a grand at it isn't necessarily what this case needs.

  26. #195
    justbookies is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    September 2009
    Posts
    1,285
    Thanks
    520
    Thanked 863 Times in 512 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RacingJim View Post
    It needs somebody who has enough to lose to take this and run with it. I don't make enough money from Skybet to make all the time, effort and bullshit worth my while. People saying they make decent money from Skybet should be the ones taking this on, just saying you'll chuck a grand at it isn't necessarily what this case needs.
    I don't disagree. But as has already been explained in this thread earlier by myself and thebookiesoffers, we are in the situation where we have referred 1000s of players over a long period of time, so we are forced to work within this diabolical new framework or lose them all. Because we are still working with SkyBet we can't take them to court. We can only lend support. If SkyBet changed their terms again to make it such that I was forced to turn my back on 1000s of referred players, then I can assure you I would be taking them to court. Of course you say there is no incentive for small affiliates who lose little to take them to court. I understand that too. Hopefully there is someone in the middle who feels it is worthwhile taking them to court, like Colin. Whoever does will do our industry a major favour, especially if they do it properly and get proper contract law advice and win, as they should. The other point is that various people who were on the warpath and full of bluster in this thread at the start (amazingly one who has never even promoted skybet) have gone silent - I do call that bullshit.

  27. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to justbookies For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (3 November 2015), BetSmartUK (3 November 2015)

  28. #196
    colin3005 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2015
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 196 Times in 97 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justbookies View Post
    we are in the situation where we have referred 1000s of players over a long period of time, so we are forced to work within this diabolical new framework or lose them all. Because we are still working with SkyBet we can't take them to court.
    That is exactly what i meant earlier in the thread about sky replying on people just accepting the new terms, affiliates like yourself don't really have any option as the loss to your income would likely be massive, and i don't blame you one bit for doing what you're doing. If I was in the same position as you I would too. If you are confident of being able to give them 6 FTD every month then you would be a fool to risk your income. I can risk it as my income from them is low.

    I have looked at it from both sides, as opposed to what some people seem to be doing, I have considered what arguments they are likely to use, which I'm not going to put on the forum for obvious reasons, and am completely confident that I can quite easily counter them in court.

  29. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to colin3005 For This Useful Post:

    justbookies (3 November 2015), Triple7 (3 November 2015)

  30. #197
    RacingJim is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,856
    Thanks
    868
    Thanked 1,360 Times in 838 Posts

    Default

    Anyone with 1000+ customers, making 1000-10,000+ per month consistently with them, obviously you're going to do what needs to be done to get those 6 customers per month. Even if it meant spending 200 a month pushing Skybet on PPC to make sure you sent them enough signups or putting them in great positions for a time on your sites, you'd do it to keep the income going. I understand that, I agree it needs someone who is caught somewhere in the middle.

    At some point someone's got to stand up to them, that's where you'd hope something like GPWA would come in handy, but alas...chocolate fireguard comes to mind.

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

    -Shay- (3 November 2015), JackTenSuited (3 November 2015), Triple7 (3 November 2015)

  32. #198
    -Shay- is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2012
    Posts
    3,060
    Thanks
    12,189
    Thanked 3,159 Times in 1,693 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RacingJim View Post
    Anyone with 1000+ customers, making 1000-10,000+ per month consistently with them, obviously you're going to do what needs to be done to get those 6 customers per month. Even if it meant spending 200 a month pushing Skybet on PPC to make sure you sent them enough signups or putting them in great positions for a time on your sites, you'd do it to keep the income going. I understand that, I agree it needs someone who is caught somewhere in the middle.

    At some point someone's got to stand up to them, that's where you'd hope something like GPWA would come in handy, but alas...chocolate fireguard comes to mind.
    Post of the year.

  33. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

    Roulette Zeitung (4 September 2017), Triple7 (3 November 2015)

  34. #199
    -Shay- is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2012
    Posts
    3,060
    Thanks
    12,189
    Thanked 3,159 Times in 1,693 Posts

    Default

    This is not an isolated incident... If you think that this action by Affiliatehub does not affect you now - just wait... It will.

    We recently received notice that another program (bgo buddies) is doing something similar to the stunt that Sky has pulled by pulling the rug out from under us on the players we already sent them (under deal A) and applying new terms to those players after the fact. Here is more info...

  35. The Following User Says Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

    Roulette Zeitung (4 September 2017)

  36. #200
    colin3005 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2015
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 196 Times in 97 Posts

    Default

    Well I'm not getting anywhere fast, got a reply from Sky, and without going into detail, they obviously don't agree with my point of view.

    That was yesterday afternoon, I replied asking for a copy of the terms & conditions from the date I signed up, and to specifically highlight where it states the terms can be backdated.

    Pretty simple request but have had no reply as of yet.

  37. The Following User Says Thank You to colin3005 For This Useful Post:

    BetSmartUK (7 November 2015)

Page 10 of 16 FirstFirst ... 67891011121314 ... 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
  •