WARNING: Velobet not paying 3,601€ CPA + account suspended after dispute

[onlycasino]

Hi GPWA community,

I'm posting this to warn other affiliates and to seek help resolving a serious dispute with Velobet (affiliate manager: Saba). Every claim below is backed by screenshots — attached directly in this post.

Straight to the point: Velobet's own dashboard confirms I earned 3,601€. Saba himself, in writing, admitted their management agreed to pay 2,000€. When I asked for a fair resolution, they retracted the 2,000€, suspended my account, and deleted all funds. This is textbook extortion.

THE ORIGINAL DEAL — May 12, 2026




Saba himself, in Teams, on May 12, 2026:
"Today, we will approve your account, and you can start campaign"
"account is ready"
"here is the tracking link" — https://track.velobetpartners.com/visit/?bta=
"you can start campaign"

Deal terms confirmed by Saba in writing:
▸ CPA: 130€ per FTD
▸ BL: 25 — and explicitly CUMULATIVE (Saba: "it's cumulative")
▸ Payment: request 3-8th every month, receive by the 15th
▸ Minimum payout: 100 EUR
▸ Method: crypto or wire transfer

NO re-deposit condition. NO "active player" requirement. NO KPI trigger threshold. The Baseline was CUMULATIVE — meaning any shortfall in one month rolls over. This eliminates their later excuse of "traffic wasn't profitable enough."

(In hindsight, being new to casino affiliation, I didn't have the reflex to demand every KPI and edge case in a detailed written contract — a lesson I now share with other beginners reading this.)


TRAFFIC DELIVERED — from THEIR own dashboard




Directly from track.velobetpartners.com (my ID: 42131 / loulou13):

▸ Period: May 12 – June 30, 2026
▸ Clicks: 142
▸ FTDs generated: 62
▸ Activity: 361 actions
▸ Net deposits: 1,288.98€
▸ Commission balance displayed: 3,601.02€

This is not contested data — it is Velobet's own tracking system confirming what I earned.

SABA VALIDATED THE TRAFFIC HIMSELF


This is critical. In JUNE, before refusing payment, Saba PERSONALLY confirmed my traffic quality — TWICE.

Friday, June 5, 2026:



Saba: "i see some improvements and good redeposits"
Saba: "hope it continues same"
Me: "J'espère que je serai payé à la fin du mois"
(I hope to be paid at the end of the month)
Saba: "Don't worry mate"
Saba: "we are not scammers or something like that"

Read that again. Saba, in writing, told me:
Traffic quality is good
Redeposits are happening
Don't worry about payment
"we are not scammers"

Friday, June 12, 2026:



Saba: "yes, traffic is slowly improving, that's nice"

Second confirmation of traffic quality — again from Saba himself, one week later.

THE BAD-FAITH TIMELINE — May delayed, June encouraged



Despite the reassurances above, when May payment was due, Saba suddenly wrote:

Saba: "well you can continue to bring traffic but about the commission we need to hold for 1 month till 1 July, it's a huge loss for us, we need to check players activity and push them for redeposits."

Reread the first six words: "you can continue to bring traffic."

This is Saba, on record, DELAYING May's payment while ACTIVELY ENCOURAGING me to keep sending traffic in June. If my traffic was truly problematic, they had a legal and ethical obligation to STOP me. Instead, they told me to keep going while they secretly built a rejection case.

The pattern is transparent:
1. Delay first month's payment.
2. Reassure the affiliate ("we are not scammers") to keep traffic flowing.
3. Wait until the total commission is significant.
4. Invent retroactive excuses (CPA Hunting) to refuse everything at once.

THE 180° TURN — Retroactive Refusal



Days after Saba's own "traffic is slowly improving that's nice" confirmation, the story changed completely:

Saba: "Unfortunately traffic didn't improve"
Saba: "there are one time depositors only"
Saba: "we can't pay 130 EUR CPA for 30 eur deposits"
Saba: "many players triggered your cpa and disappeared"
Saba: "we made exception and paying for two time deposits"
Saba: "i offer you to lower your cpa and continue working"

My response, quoted from Teams:
"Tu n'a jamais parler dans le deal un minimum de Kpi ou de re dépôt"
(You never mentioned a minimum KPI or re-deposit in the deal)

Correct. There was no KPI condition. Ever. Anywhere. In writing.

ON RETENTION — Full transparency

Yes, retention (redeposits per FTD) was mixed. I acknowledge this openly. But Velobet won't tell you the real reason:

MULTIPLE FRENCH PLAYERS I REFERRED COULD NOT WITHDRAW THEIR FIRST WINNINGS.

When a player deposits 30€, wins something, tries to withdraw, and gets blocked or ignored by Velobet's support — that player NEVER redeposits. Word spreads. Friends warn friends. Communities warn communities.

Velobet is complaining about low retention while directly CAUSING it by blocking legitimate withdrawals. You cannot build a healthy player lifecycle when the cashier is broken.

The affiliate delivered real FTDs. The operator failed to convert them — because THEIR OWN payout process kills trust on day one.

THE EXTORTION — verbatim



When I refused the 650€ retroactive offer, Saba wrote — direct copy-paste:

Saba: "Brother, The best i can offer you is to pay CPA for active players, which is 650 EUR"

Saba: "Brother, we can do the same; your traffic has possible CPA Hunting signs, and we have all the proof if necessary."

Saba: "best i can offer you is to pay 650 EUR. for active players"

Saba: "But if you decided to run an undeserved smear campaign against us, I don't think it will be possible to even pay you that 650 EUR."

The last sentence is verbatim extortion — pressuring an affiliate into silence under threat of losing even the reduced settlement.

Also note the CPA Hunting claim: "we have all the proof if necessary." Really? Then produce it. If Velobet had real evidence, they would have blocked my account weeks earlier — not offered 650€ at all, and certainly not raised the offer to 2,000€ (see next section). This is a made-up accusation to justify non-payment.

SABA ADMITS: Velobet's OWN MANAGEMENT agreed to pay 2,000€



In their own suspension message, Saba himself wrote:

Saba: "we were paying you 650 EUR, after speaking with management they agreed to 2000 EUR"

Read that again. Their OWN MANAGEMENT reviewed my case and agreed to raise the offer from 650€ to 2,000€. This is Velobet's internal decision, in writing.

This single admission destroys their entire defense:
▸ If my traffic was "CPA Hunting" — why would management pay 2,000€?
▸ If my traffic was "not profitable enough" — why would management pay 2,000€?
▸ If I had "violated" any KPI — why would management pay 2,000€?

Their own management admitted the traffic deserved 2,000€. Then they retracted even that offer as retaliation and suspended the account.

THE FINAL RETALIATION — Account suspension & funds deleted

Saba's exact words in the same message:

Saba: "our final decision is to suspend your account and delete all your funds, you are not getting any money from us"

Saba: "we will uplaod everything to your gpwa file"

3,601€ vanished — not "on hold," but explicitly deleted. Even in the suspension message, they continue the extortion pattern by threatening to upload "everything" to my GPWA file. Same intimidation tactic as before: silence me under threat.

PREEMPTIVE RESPONSE TO EXPECTED COUNTER-CLAIMS

I know how these disputes go on this forum. Velobet will make these claims — here are the facts:

CLAIM: "He sent people to insult us"

FACT: FALSE, with a nuance. One associate joined ONE conversation at my request as intermediary during the negotiation. He got emotionally frustrated in that moment and called Saba a "scammer" — a word I regret being used in that tone, and I apologize for the emotional escalation. However:

1. It was ONE conversation, not mass harassment.
2. No slurs, no threats, no personal attacks — just frustration expressed after weeks of unpaid work and moving goalposts.
3. The word "scammer" was used in a context where Velobet had just admitted their own management approved 2,000€ then retracted it. In plain terms, that IS what "scam" means: agreeing to pay, then unilaterally refusing.

I'm not defending the tone — I'm explaining the context. My associate got emotional. It happens when someone withholds 3,601€ that their own dashboard confirms is owed.

CLAIM: "He deleted messages / manipulated the conversation"

FACT: TECHNICALLY IMPOSSIBLE ON TEAMS. Microsoft Teams does not "make messages disappear." When a message is deleted on Teams, it stays visible in the conversation with the notation "This message was deleted." Both sides see it. There is no way to erase a message so cleanly that the other party can't see anything was there.

If Saba claims messages "disappeared," he is either:
▸ Misunderstanding how Teams works, or
▸ Fabricating the claim.

Any GPWA moderator can verify this Teams behavior in 30 seconds. My unedited chat logs are available on request.

CLAIM: "He tried to blackmail us / delete GPWA threads for money"

FACT: MISCHARACTERIZATION. Standard settlement wording: "pay what's owed, and I have no need to publish this dispute." This is how EVERY GPWA-mediated resolution works. If that's blackmail, so is every settlement in the history of this forum.

CLAIM: "CPA Hunting — we have all the proof"

FACT: THEY DON'T. Ask Velobet directly in this thread:
• Which specific player IDs were flagged?
• What behavior triggered the flag?
• Why did Saba write "i see some improvements and good redeposits" on June 5 if May was CPA Hunting?
• Why did Saba write "traffic is slowly improving that's nice" on June 12 if the traffic was fraudulent?
• Why did Saba tell me "you can continue to bring traffic" while delaying payment?
• Why did their management raise the offer from 650€ to 2,000€ if the traffic was fraudulent?

They will not answer because they cannot. The accusation was invented AFTER I refused their unfair offers.

PLAYER SIDE — Withdrawal issues

Multiple French players I referred to Velobet could NOT withdraw their winnings — retroactive KYC demands, invented "wagering violations," blocked withdrawals, delayed processing. Same pattern I experienced as an affiliate.

If any player reading this had similar experience, please share below or DM me. I'm compiling a public record.

MY GOOD-FAITH COMPROMISES

Even though contractually owed 3,601€, I offered:
• 3,000€ — refused
• 2,800€ — refused
• 2,500€ — refused

Velobet's counter-offers:
• Initially: 650€ (18%)
• Their management then agreed to 2,000€ (admitted in Saba's own message)
• Final: 0€ (account suspended, funds deleted, threat to "upload everything to your GPWA file")

WHAT I'M ASKING FOR

I'm not asking for anything beyond what Velobet's own tracking platform confirms I earned: 3,601€. At minimum, the 2,000€ their own management already agreed to.

@Velobet management: this is your chance to resolve this professionally. Pay what's owed. Continue with threats and I'll keep adding evidence to this thread.

@GPWA moderators: I'm ready to provide full unedited chat logs, dashboard exports, and additional screenshots for verification.

@Affiliates: get every KPI condition in writing before sending traffic to Velobet. Also verify withdrawal reputation from real players — if the cashier is broken, no traffic quality will save your KPIs.

Thanks for reading,
Phiphi

[wonderpunter]

50% conversion rate 62 FTD's only 1 time deposit.. 130 euro ftd is also exrtremely low. Like with many CPA deals looks like you got caught out. it has all the typical hall marks of CPA fraud.

[onlycasino]

Hi @wonderpunter, thanks for the honest feedback — you're raising valid concerns from the numbers alone, and I appreciate the directness. Let me address each point openly.

On the 43% conversion rate:

You're right that this is high for typical affiliate traffic. Context matters: my traffic doesn't come from SEO or paid ads — it comes from a private French-speaking Discord community of 2,000+ engaged members focused specifically on casino testing. When I post a bonus offer in a dedicated channel, members who click are already pre-qualified (interested in casino, ready to test). That's what drives the high click-to-FTD ratio.

Any experienced affiliate can confirm that community-based traffic converts 5-10x higher than cold SEO/paid traffic. Not fraud — just a different funnel.

On one-time depositors:

This is the exact point I address in the "On Retention" section of my original post. Multiple French players confirmed they could NOT withdraw their first winnings from Velobet. When a player can't cash out, they don't redeposit. Word spread in my community fast. That directly kills retention.

If Velobet had processed withdrawals cleanly, the retention curve would look completely different.

On the 130€ CPA vs 30€ deposits ratio:

Fair point. But here's the critical detail: this was VELOBET'S deal, offered by Saba himself in writing on May 12. I didn't negotiate an aggressive CPA — I accepted the terms they proposed. If the ratio was unsustainable for them, they should not have offered it, or should have added KPI clauses (they didn't).

The point that destroys the "CPA fraud" theory:

If my traffic showed "typical hall marks of CPA fraud," here's what makes no sense:
• Why did Saba write "i see some improvements and good redeposits" on June 5?
• Why did Saba write "traffic is slowly improving that's nice" on June 12?
• Why did Saba tell me "you can continue to bring traffic" on June 27?
• Why did their own management approve raising the offer from 650€ to 2,000€?
• Why offer ANY payment at all if the traffic was fraudulent?

A casino that detects CPA fraud closes the account, void the FTDs, and pays 0€. Velobet did none of that — they encouraged more traffic, approved a 2,000€ payout internally, then retracted it when I refused to accept the moving goalposts.

That's not fraud detection. That's a payout dispute where the operator changed the terms after delivery.

I fully understand why the raw numbers raise eyebrows. That's exactly why I published this thread with full context and screenshots — so the community can see what actually happened behind the stats.

Best,
Phiphi

[wonderpunter]

I see, I mean it looks like low value traffic for an operator to take on. did you mention that thsi was casino tester traffic from discord server? If traffic is good then brands always want more. But low value CPA which has suspicous markers will most likely be switched to revshare.

[onlycasino]

Thanks for the nuance @wonderpunter — that framing actually helps.

You're right that it's "casino tester" traffic — my Discord community engages with testing new casinos rather than being high-LTV long-term players. That's the honest context I should have added in the original post.

And your point about "low value CPA switching to revshare" is exactly what makes Velobet's behavior indefensible.

A legitimate operator handling low-value-but-real traffic would:
▸ Switch to revshare-only
▸ Lower CPA on future FTDs
▸ Or pause new intake with a heads-up

Velobet did none of those. Instead they:

1. Actively encouraged more traffic mid-June ("you can continue to bring traffic")
2. Confirmed quality themselves ("we are not scammers", "traffic is slowly improving")
3. Suddenly invented "CPA Hunting" AFTER 60+ FTDs were logged and management had already agreed to 2,000€
4. Deleted all earned commissions in retaliation for a smear campaign that hadn't even happened

That's the difference between "low value traffic dispute" (which would be a fair conversation) and "payout weaponization" (which is what actually happened).

Appreciate the thoughtful reply ��

Best,
Phiphi

[allfreechips]

I hate seeing CPA issues. Both side have valid arguments and its so easy to fraud, but then again is itys a pain to withdraw from a casino who would ever re deposit? Hard to say who is right but if the numbers don't work they don't work, but pay an amount that makes both sides happy and close it down.

[universal4]

my Discord community engages with testing new casinos rather than being high-LTV long-term players. That's the honest context I should have added in the original post.

I see, I mean it looks like low value traffic for an operator to take on. did you mention that thsi was casino tester traffic from discord server? If traffic is good then brands always want more. But low value CPA which has suspicous markers will most likely be switched to revshare.

If the traffic was more valuable, you would make a huge percentage higher revenue with revshare, rather than churn the players to another operator again....and sometimes again and again.

Not stating fact that is the case here, but from the operator perspective, operators MUST always keep that in their minds at all times with all deals.

I am actually surprised the cpa rates have managed to not fall a whole lot more then they have the last few years.

If you are confident the traffic is of higher value, you should not be so against revshare over cpa.

Rick
Universal4

[onlycasino]

Thanks @allfreechips �� you're touching exactly the core issue — the withdrawal side matters as much as the CPA side. That's something I mention in my post : many of the French players I sent to Velobet couldn't cash out their first winnings, which directly killed the retention Velobet later complained about. A broken cashier creates a broken funnel — regardless of affiliate quality.

On your point about "close it down at an amount both sides can live with" — that's genuinely what I tried. I offered 3 000€, then 2 800€, then 2 500€ (roughly 30% below what their own dashboard shows I earned). Their own management approved 2 000€ internally (documented in Saba's own message) before ultimately retracting even that and suspending the account.

I would still take a 2 000€ resolution today and this thread comes down. That's how much I want this closed the healthy way. The problem is that offer disappeared the moment I stopped accepting an 82% discount silently.

Really appreciate the balanced take.

Phiphi

[onlycasino]

Thanks Rick — really appreciate the admin taking the time on this.

You're absolutely right, and honestly your question deserves a direct answer : yes, I'm fully open to revshare. If Velobet had approached me at any point in this dispute with "your traffic LTV doesn't justify the CPA rate anymore, let's move to revshare-only going forward," I would have signed the same day. That IS the healthy way operators handle low-LTV traffic — adjust the model, don't destroy the affiliate relationship.

That option was never offered. Here's the actual sequence :

▸ June 5 : Saba writes "i see some improvements and good redeposits"
▸ June 12 : "yes traffic is slowly improving, that's nice"
▸ Late June : "you can continue to bring traffic" — WHILE quietly holding May payment
▸ Then : sudden "CPA Hunting" accusation, no evidence provided
▸ Management internally approved 2 000€ (documented in Saba's own words)
▸ I asked for a fair compromise (2 500-3 000€)
▸ Final response : account suspended, funds deleted, threat to "upload everything to your GPWA file"

Not once was revshare mentioned as an alternative. Not a CPA adjustment. Not a partial payout. The two options I was given were : accept 82% off silently OR lose everything.

On your point about CPA rates not falling as much as they should have — I actually agree, and I think this dispute is a symptom of that market imbalance. Operators facing squeezed margins are sometimes tempted to use account tools as retroactive renegotiation instead of negotiating openly. My concern isn't that Velobet wanted a better deal for themselves — it's how they went about it.

If Velobet came back today and offered "we'll pay revshare on what was earned, no CPA, going forward you're on 30% revshare instead of CPA" — I'd sign it. My reasonableness threshold is genuinely low. The line for me is weaponized account suspension as a negotiation tool, not fair terms adjustment.

Thanks again for the thoughtful engagement ��

Phiphi