The United Commissions Purge Begins

[Madz]

Had an email today from United Commissions. Take a look through just what they now expect all affiliates to adhere to and what is expected from their websites.

At first I was quite worried reading through the list, then I realised I have made about a fiver with these guys in the last year!

Dear Partner,

We hope that this email finds you well.

As an active partner with the United Commissions Affiliate Programme, we value your business and partnership in promoting our brands. We are getting in touch today to circulate the latest version of the Affiliate Marketing Compliance Guidelines.

The United Commissions (UC) guidelines have been designed to outline marketing regulatory requirements for the UK & IE Markets where our brands can be promoted. These guidelines are updated in accordance with UKGC (Gambling Commission United Kingdom) with notifications & obligations.

Please click here for the latest version of the Affiliate Marketing Compliance Guidelines. The same information can be found on the UC website - www.unitedcommissions.com

For affiliates that work with PPC (Pay Per Click), we kindly remind you to NOT bid on any problematic, harmful or 'Responsible Gambling' related keywords. Find the latest list of Negative Keywords here.

If you are in doubt regarding your commitments & obligations under the United Commissions T&Cs or under UKGC legal requirements, please liaise with your account manager or reach out to us at: affiliates@unitedcommissions.com

Kind regards,
The United Commissions Team

[Mattbar]

This is very similar to what EGO asked for a few weeks back (covered here: https://www.gpwa.org/forum/uk-gambli...os-252948.html).

Looks like this is becoming a thing now, in terms of the logos in the footer, advertising disclaimers, etc. I would expect more to start asking for this, including Rank given UC are part of them.

[PromoteCasino]

Happening more and more nowadays. It would be nice if they were all interpreting the regulations the same but alas that is not the case.

With affiliates having to abide by strict rules when it comes to the promotion of offers so that customers cannot be misled, is it not time that affiliate brands are held accountable when it comes to misleading rev share. i.e 50% when in fact it works out to be a much smaller share.

[Mattbar]

It would be nice if they were all interpreting the regulations the same but alas that is not the case.

Yeah this is the issue, by being compliant with one interpretation you may make yourself not compliant with another. We need one of the big boys to lead with this, e.g. when 365 started compliance stuff two years ago everyone else fell in line with them.

EGO, for example, are asking for a UKGC logo whereas United Commissions want hyperlinked text. If you comply with everyone you will have 20 different links and logos in your footer.

Did you also notice in the United Commission screenshot example of a compliant site that they display the logo for GameStop not GamStop.




I mean if they can't even get that right.....

[PromoteCasino]

Did you also notice in the United Commission screenshot example of a compliant site that they display the logo for GameStop not GamStop.

I missed it but LOLS