Stanjames - Stole my commsissons and are kicking me out.

[thebookiesoffers]

Just to confirm, yes, Anthony has been in touch with Stan James. The plan after my post from before was that Anthony would have appropriate interactions with Stan James to understand what had transpired that led up this thread being started. Anthony did have such interactions, and did feel, at the end of those interactions, that he understood both what happened and why. Anthony has now made that information available to me.

Based on the information I have, I agree with Anthony's assessment that the picture painted in this thread at this point in time is both incomplete and misleading, and creates an impression that is very unfavorable to Stan James versus the impression created with all of the facts, as we understand them, made clear.

However, at this point in time, we are not certain which of the information given to us needs to be treated as confidential, and which information can be disclosed. Yesterday evening I sent an email message to Stan James requesting a phone call be scheduled to discuss the situation in greater detail, and also to clarify what information is acceptable to be posted in public. Currently I am awaiting a response to that email.

Michael

can I ask then if there is more to it in Betfinders case then than just being culled for low numbers as he put it?

[MichaelCorfman]

can I ask then if there is more to it in Betfinders case then than just being culled for low numbers as he put it?

Yes. But, since I have not yet clarified what information I have permission to disclose, I will leave it ambiguous as to whether the answer to your question is yes, or I am saying yes, you can ask the question.

Michael

[casinog]

I just like to say that after the initial contact in February that Stan James never paid me my commission, it was quite a lot of money.

They also never contacted me again nor did they do what they promised and even pay me for the interim months.

Conclusion: AVOID STAN JAMES

ps. I get the impression this policy is from the board of directors. So this company and brand is tainted.

[betfinder]

I have just recalled I did have a little 'situation' quite some time ago now with the Stan James affiliate team as somehow my affiliate link was suddenly ranking very high in Google (no.1 I think above theirs).

I have no idea how this happened, (surely that's down to Google) but it's like it had somehow got spidered and was attached to the no.1 result for a few weeks maybe, so they were probably getting a lot of search engine traffic via my link!

Anyway, the affiliate manager kind of hinted at foul play on my part had led to this and I had maybe somehow "manipulated" the search results. This was not the case at all, I wouldn't know how or even if that could be done. I was surprised as they were and the first I even knew about it was when they emailed me.

I explained to them I had no idea how my affiliate link was ranking higher than their own natural link, not sure they believed me. Don't know if it generated much revenue during this time but I think they said it would not be valid anyway. My memory is a bit vague , think I couldn't get into my stats anyway. I could maybe find the old emails.

But it just got me thinking there, that maybe this had something to do with why they got rid of me, maybe I got a black mark against my record or something, god knows. Just thought I would mention it anyway, for the record.

[ocreditor]

Thanks for sharing this 'betfinder', never heard about affiliate link reaching the search results... very strange indeed.
Is it just the link without a review page of your site ?
Is it the affiliate program link or your adv link ?

As strange as it might be, I've seen strange stuff going on with google all the time but what I still don't understand is, if the claim you somehow "manipulated" the results, where is the proof? maybe someone was trying to harm you ?...
Its a shame that affiliate programs are acting like this

[justbookies]

I have seen affiliate links ranking no.1 in bing before.
If you know how to manipulate that then do fire me a PM!

[-Shay-]

I've seen it for small poker rooms quite a few years ago (even had it happen once or twice). There was money in such a phenomenon back then and I'd suspect there would be now in the off chance that it happened.

[betfinder]

Thanks for sharing this 'betfinder', never heard about affiliate link reaching the search results... very strange indeed.
Is it just the link without a review page of your site ?
Is it the affiliate program link or your adv link ?

Yes it was just a link with my affiliate btag on it that led straight to SJ.

[ocreditor]

I see, I've done some research about this and it might be a temporary Google glitch which itself can happened from many reasons...
So it's not a 100% Google manipulation case for sure !

[Scampi]

Google has a database of affiliate companies, making the majority of no-follows unnecessary, however they will not have every single affiliate listed, and if the link hasn't been no-followed then it could rank.

[thebookiesoffers]

Google has a database of affiliate companies, making the majority of no-follows unnecessary, however they will not have every single affiliate listed, and if the link hasn't been no-followed then it could rank.

you what ?

[thebookiesoffers]

Anyway, hope GPWA haven't forgot about this

[ocreditor]

Google has a database of affiliate companies, making the majority of no-follows unnecessary, however they will not have every single affiliate listed, and if the link hasn't been no-followed then it could rank.

Thats right but forgetting to put no-follow is not enough to get this link indexed, you still need to "do" something to make it show on the results, otherwise why google think a link is as a page...

[Scampi]

It would be an interesting experiment, just not with your own Google accounts or computers.

[thebookiesoffers]

Anyway, hope GPWA haven't forgot about this

Bump Bump Bumpty Bump

[MichaelCorfman]

Anyway, hope GPWA haven't forgot about this

As you know, I replied with a pm to you on 9 October 2013 in which I stated the following:

Hi,

I just want you to know that I have not forgotten about Stan James. With all of the traveling I am doing I have just not sorted out the proper response yet. However, in a phone conversation I would be happy to share details with you, and could do that in greater depth than I will probably be able to post in the forum anyway. Let me know if you would like to have a phone chat once I am back in the states next week.

Michael

I have been back for a few days now, but I'm still buried with tasks from being out of the office for three weeks in a row. My offer to you to have a private phone call about the matter between now and when I make a proper post on the topic stands. And I am happy to extend that offer to others as well between now and when I make that post.

Michael

[thebookiesoffers]

As you know, I replied with a pm to you on 9 October 2013 in which I stated the following:



I have been back for a few days now, but I'm still buried with tasks from being out of the office for three weeks in a row. My offer to you to have a private phone call about the matter between now and when I make a proper post on the topic stands. And I am happy to extend that offer to others as well between now and when I make that post.

Michael

Like I said, sure you have better things to do that tell me about this on the phone

Just didn't want it to be forgotten as this has been going on for ages now

cheers for the update

[thebookiesoffers]

surely this is time for a public answer to this now?

[Zuga]

man this thread/issue has been dragging for too long. It really does not speak volumes of StanJames....

[MichaelCorfman]

surely this is time for a public answer to this now?

man this thread/issue has been dragging for too long. It really does not speak volumes of StanJames....

As I had stated before, I am happy to have a phone call with thebookieoffers about the issues, and the same applies to anyone else as well.

The issue at this time in terms of more information being posted in this thread is not with StanJames, it is with me.

The problem is that some of the information I know is confidential, so I cannot make that information public, and explaining matters without breaching confidentiality in a public post is something I cannot and will not do. However, there is some information I feel I can share in private conversations.

But the bigger issue is that while I intend to figure out how to make a public post that explains matters in an acceptable fashion, I have not yet had time to do that. I agree it has been too long, which is the primary reason I have offered private phone calls to explain the situation in the meantime to anyone concerned.

So, please pm me if you would like me to provide you with more information between now and when I make a public post or if you would like to nudge me about making that post.

Thank you.

Michael