Affiliate Managers Poll: Do You Sign Affiliate's TOS?

[Top Online Casinos]

As an affiliate manager, if some affiliate approaches you with their TOS would you consider signing it and agreeing to it?

Example Affiliate TOS can be found right here

Thank you very much for participating.

[Alex_PlayAttack]

Hi Friend,

It's ok to accept reasonable TOS. And what do you mean legally agree? Signing a contract?

[Top Online Casinos]

Hi Friend,

It's ok to accept reasonable TOS. And what do you mean legally agree? Signing a contract?

Hi,

Thanks for your input, it is much appreciated.

If you sign and 'legally' agree to a TOS, that means, you sign to legally agree to the TOS. TOS are not contracts. But if you agree to a TOS, you state you accept it's terms. Meaning, if something goes wrong which was laid out in the aff's TOS, and the affiliate takes you to court, shows his TOS to the judge, you will have to abide by whatever you signed and agreed to.

If you accept those TOS, will you abide by them?

Now, if you do, will your bosses?

Do they allow you to agree on terms and will 'they' stick by it. Have you ever asked them?

Thanks!

[Alex_PlayAttack]

Thanks for your questions.
From this point the it should mentioned the TOS are only focused on obligations of one side - affiliate program. It's important to remember that we talk about a deal between two parties affiliate and AP. This fact leads us to classical definition of the contract that presume the duties and the benefits for both parties. Therefore there's a lot of issues has to be added to TOS to compile a contract that allows parties to operate safe and beneficial in a long run.

What do you think about such legal approach?

[Triple7]

Thanks for your questions.
From this point the it should mentioned the TOS are only focused on obligations of one side - affiliate program. It's important to remember that we talk about a deal between two parties affiliate and AP. This fact leads us to classical definition of the contract that presume the duties and the benefits for both parties. Therefore there's a lot of issues has to be added to TOS to compile a contract that allows parties to operate safe and beneficial in a long run.

What do you think about such legal approach?

I got this reply a few times too. T&C are usually very one-sided in favour of the program, additional agreements provided by affiliates in favour of affiliates.

I would definitely be willing to have a customized agreement with programs a work a lot with.

[yeahfree]

i have just received a contract from ladbrokes, if i could sign it. it had a '48 hour notice' in it in which they can cancel my account. i'm on revshare. so i kindly did send it back and requested to remove that termination part as i don't agree to it (duh..!)
let's see how that will work out. if they are not willing to remove it i'll start removing them from my sites. no need to lower myself to such a level...

[LukeC]

This comes down to:
1) how important the affiliate is
2) what the affiliate wants in the agreement

Generally you will have to be doing some significant numbers in the context of the operator's overall business for them to entertain modifications to T&Cs - but pretty much every operator is signing bespoke agreements with some of their affiliates.

Pretty much no affiliate managers are allowed to agree to contracts/T&Cs/IOs/whatever you want to call it (they are all contracts or contract modifications) that make significant changes to the standard T&Cs.

Given the T&Cs of most affiliate programmes, the following from your example is a significant change:
"XX% Revshare with no negative Carry over for life. This is without restrictions / quotas / or placement requirements. Account can not be closed while there are any active players."

No UK licensed operator is going to agree to this, because there is no termination clause if what the affiliate does jeopardises their gambling license and the Gambling Commission tells the operator to terminate - which is non-negotiable with any operator.

None of the other things in the post you quoted are T&Cs, they are simple requirements of what the affiliate wants the operator to provide in order to list their brands (of course affiliate managers are going to provide bonus info and links to pretty much any affiliate where it's worth their time).

If there is a significant change that you want, and the affiliate manager is happy with it from a commercial perspective and still wants to do the deal, this then gets sent off to a legal team for review. Some companies won't entertain this, others will. Some companies might not need it sent to a lawyer depending on the change nad will have non-legal staff that have the ability to sign-off on certain modifications - it varies - but in 99% of cases it's company policy that a "normal" AM can't do it. The more senior the member of staff, the more likely they are to have permission to do so.

Whereas a minor change, that I would frequently sign, is that the operator has to give 48 hours notice for termination of a CPA deal (unless it threatens the gambling license or the regulator says to terminate the agreement per above), and without affecting the operators' rights to not pay for fraud, etc.

[universal4]

I personally try to find programs that I feel offer TOS that appear to be fair to all, and most often don't try to cut special deals or ask for a contract outside of the published TOS on the program's site.

If I feel the terms are not suitable to me then I will most often just not promote the group.

If I feel the terms are not suitable or fair to most affiliates, I will join in lobbying efforts to try and help convince the operator changes would earn them more affiliates and good will.

Similar to what Michael stated in a post earlier, the GPWA and it's collective membership has been very successful over the years in helping affiliates see better terms at some programs...others it didn't work, but I always see discussions like this as positive steps forward to that end.

Rick
Universal4

Side note: As for the termination clauses, maybe they could be re-worded a little to cover the types of issues "such as regulatory compliance" "affiliates acting in bad faith" "suspected fraud" etc...this may not please all affiliates but possibly go a little further to less affiliates seeing the termination clauses as an easy out that so many affiliates fear from operators.

[Former Member 14]

I personally try to find programs that I feel offer TOS that appear to be fair to all

And that's how it should be. Most T&C's set minimal requirements for the program, yet literally stack clauses (riddled with loopholes in favor of the program). Then some programs aren't happy with that, they then add more clauses retroactively. Always wondered how a program would fair if their T&C's were challenged in a court. I dare say, not too well.

[Miles_Videoslots]

Yes i would as long as the Terms are fair and agreed on by both parties why not

[Triple7]

And that's how it should be. Most T&C's set minimal requirements for the program, yet literally stack clauses (riddled with loopholes in favor of the program). Then some programs aren't happy with that, they then add more clauses retroactively. Always wondered how a program would fair if their T&C's were challenged in a court. I dare say, not too well.

It depends on which court perhaps. I have no clue about the law and jurisprudential in BIV, Belize or Curacao. The first step should be to agree that in case it will be taken to court, that will happen somewhere else. I think that with that move you killed quite some nasty terms and actions already.

[MannyBetting]

i have just received a contract from ladbrokes, if i could sign it. it had a '48 hour notice' in it in which they can cancel my account. i'm on revshare. so i kindly did send it back and requested to remove that termination part as i don't agree to it (duh..!)
let's see how that will work out. if they are not willing to remove it i'll start removing them from my sites. no need to lower myself to such a level...

Interesting, I did exactly the same. I told them that I would sign if the term was removed, or I would work with them to amend it so that it was mutually acceptable. By that I mean, it should explicitly state that the notice would only be given if I was found to be in serious breach of any other terms, such as endangering their license, and then only after I had been given a reasonable opportunity to correct any issue.

This was 2 weeks ago, I haven't heard back from them so ball is still in their court. Given the utter shambles that seems to be going on there, I'm not holding my breath. But that's their problem not mine, as it's them that is asking for the new contract.

[Top Online Casinos]

i have just received a contract from ladbrokes, if i could sign it. it had a '48 hour notice' in it in which they can cancel my account. i'm on revshare. so i kindly did send it back and requested to remove that termination part as i don't agree to it (duh..!)
let's see how that will work out. if they are not willing to remove it i'll start removing them from my sites. no need to lower myself to such a level...

I don't think they're actually following anything that's been going on here about this type of 'unwanted' behavior..

[Top Online Casinos]

Yes i would as long as the Terms are fair and agreed on by both parties why not

There. If they are fair. If we only had that option... Big affiliates might, most of us surely don't.

Some / Many of the TOS are not fair (anymore). And, if I am earning my bread with an affiliate program, I have not much choice but to accept them.

We're not all rich playboys with yachts and Ferrari's yet.

If for instance, I would after a change in TOS, not accept and drop the brands, I could be set from 40% to 10% 'lifetime' commission. And so, who loses out in the long run?

Perhaps, all TOS from all respectable affiliate programs should be upgraded to be more fair to begin with, assuring it will stay fair during any future updates and, that it will have the AFFILIATE a little more in mind, to have at least have a minimum set of rules, making sure no respectable affiliate program uses unfair rules and / or limitations, now, and in the future.

Really we all would benefit from it in the long run.

I would like the programs to add a clause about hackers too. That they fully protect against hackers / do not ever work with them.

Any program that is not willing to add it, should be avoided and blacklisted.