Yet Again - Income Access based advertiser links don't work

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis - Income Access

Hi Paul

This is the first I have heard this from you and something I would be glad to investigate.

Let me know if you want to discuss this further.
Thanks

---

Louis,

I'm struggling to understand WHY you think affiliates WOULD bring this to you.
If I have a problem with numbers an invoice in a word document I don't take it to Microsoft - I assume the software did it's job.

So it is with statistics - I had previously assumed that the IA software was best-of-breed and did its job in reporting and displaying all data unedited - and that the data was accurate. So why get IA involved?

Instead we take concern direct to the programs involved ... unfortunately we are usually dealing with low level marketing staff who have no idea of any of these issues and only see the numbers that the system displays and so they tell us that there is no problem in reporting and the numbers are the real numbers. Never has there been a mention of disable links, duplicate sorting, or any other filtering.

We had some clients that perform, and some that don't. The wide range has surprised me - especially with the nature of many of the UK clients being so similar - but hey-ho ... that's life and it's wondrous mystery .. you carry on!

Or so I thought ...

It's only in the last 24 hours through the course of this discussion that I've felt the need to sort our clients according to their affiliate software and note the underlying under-performance of programs "powered by Income Access".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis - Income Access

My recommendation would be to organize some blind tests in a structured way so that we can see if there is actually any leakage with the tracking set up with these clients or if this is simply a case of the brands CRM not performing as well. I can provide a step by step explanation of how our tracking works if this would help to structure how to test. We recently did this with JustBookies and it was helpful to identify the source of a test registration he did that was not tracked (fraud prevention tool which stops a duplicate user registration from entering the database).

---

What is needed here is not investigations on a 1 on 1 basis to source problems and then explain them. What is needed is a full public explanation, even put it in the terms and conditions for IA, of how tracking works. Affiliates need to know all of the logic and rules that might affect revenue. From reading this discussion there already seems to be several things like duplicate logic that affiliates will not be aware of.

Without knowing what manipulation is going on in the IA system, any affiliate reading this will not trust Income Access based advertisers.

Louis, are you prepared to make a public statement here of the high level logic of how a referral goes from click, to logging the click, to registration, to all of the associated data finding its way into the reports affiliates see?

If we knew what actually happened in the black hole that it IA, we could take our own action to make things more profitable for all parties. For example, if someone you're filtering out duplicate click throughs or something like that, I could do something on my side to monitor and take action on click throughs from the same IP address.

Agree with TheGooner, IA programs perform inferior to other programs and it makes you question your own marketing strategy - and Louis you never got back to me about the BetVictor scenario and the registration that didn't "register", until after i gave them the test username - and that was on 3rd october. problems do not get solved they just get "forgotten about"

Hi Guys

Thanks for the follow up.

As mentioned - we're committed to open dialogue about any issues that affect the affiliate community. We feel it's important to focus the dialogue towards actionable improvements and positive change; if the dialogue devolves into a witch hunt with polarized perspectives and far fetched interpretations of statements, it's not likely to lead to anything productive.

Quote:

---

This application of additional tools to manipulate the data BEFORE it enters the system just sounds so wrong on so many levels.

---

You have misinterpreted the situation - our software does not apply any "manipulation" to the data before or after it enters the system. We add a tag to a user when they click a link, then when they register their account they are tagged in the client database, then the client database pulls a complete sales file for all tagged players and sends the data to Income Access, and we then display that data in our reports. In the case mentioned, the client had a fraud protection tool in place which had nothing to do with the affiliate software, but which prevented the player account from properly registering. Since the player account was not registered in the database, it was not sent in the data files and thus not displayed in our system.

Quote:

---

Call it anything you want - that's a smoking gun.

---

Yes - it is evidence that something has changed with the click tracking - we know this to be the case since Betfred was migrated to a new system. It's not evidence that there is anything fundamentally wrong with the software. Is it extremely difficult to simply clear your cache, click a link and run a registration test? If the registration doesn't show up - then we have something we have to look into. The more likely scenario is that what you're seeing is a result of not completely migrating your links and some of the data being in the old system because the link is the basis for how the click is counted, so if you have a partners.Betfredaffiliates.com link then your click is going to track in that system.

Quote:

---

If I have a problem with numbers an invoice in a word document I don't take it to Microsoft - I assume the software did it's job.

---

Unlike Microsoft - if someone has an error or a confusion with our software, you can actually ring us up and we will help troubleshoot. This is one of the core reasons we win awards and new business.

With Microsoft, Income Access, or any other SaaS, there is no fool-proof system. Before working in the iGaming industry, I worked in the retail affiliate business, and participated a lot in forums like ABestWeb, Warrior Forum and Affiliates4U. Affiliates complained about tracking and stats just as much or more than in GPWA, and in that case they were talking about major platforms like LS, CJ or TD. In some cases they were right and identified things in the tracking or reporting that could be fixed. In most cases there were other variables at play that had nothing to do with the affiliate tracking or reporting.

When you look at anecdotal evidence - there's a million ways to interpret it. Drawing conclusions from the data is not science. Drawing testable hypotheses from the data and then testing is science. If you want to identify causes, you make a hypothesis, control for all the variables, and then perform a structured test. If you want to find a scapegoat for an issue, you can interpret a situation however you choose.

As said previously - if you want to find solutions - we're ready to get started when you are.

Thanks

Quote:

---

Louis you never got back to me about the BetVictor scenario and the registration that didn't "register"

---

Hi Andy

This is a legitimate complaint - my apologies.

Our normal process for unmanaged programs is that affiliates have to speak to their AMs, and the AMs then deal with our internal account manager team to resolve issues. I had escalated your ticket to our team since you had already attempted to work with your AM on this case and weren't satisfied with the answer. I just reviewed and due to the way I filed the ticket, it wasn't picked up by the account manager.

I've spoken to the account manager now and they are going to have a look next week (our offices are closing for the holiday until Monday).

Cheers

We are ready to get started, affiliates were ready years ago. All we're asking is for our affiliate links to work, and sometimes they don't on your system. Is this to much to ask?

Louis - you seem mythed that people are complaining, but they're complaining because they're losing money every day on IA. Any issue raised by an affiliate is legitimate unless you can prove otherwise. At the moment you're getting heresy and anecdotal stuff because issues are not resolved, the buck is passed between the advertiser and IA etc, and you'll continue getting this if affiliates have misunderstood 'functionality' like the fraud filter. In this example what IA should be providing a report of the data that was filtered by the advertiser prior to sending their file to IA. Everything must be transparent, or as you're seeing here you'll continue to build mistrust in IA.

And thanks to the other affiliates who have shared their experiences of lack of earnings on IA advertisers.we too have experienced the same thing and until we can understand the poor conversion we will continue as we have done for a couple of years now to give preference to non-IA based advertisers. I know for certain that some of the poor performance has been due to invalid links as this is not anecdotal but the truth that we've experienced first hand

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGooner

How about 457 clicks after 45 days? Great! Number of registrations? Zero. WTF?

---

This is the big issue for me. I have encountered three different very big firms where I have been using a link that did not track referrals but did track clicks and impressions etc.

As mentioned (sorry for the repetition here), one of them blamed it on their aggressive duplicate suppression software and I got no further as the AM would not address the issue again. However the other two had cookie problems ie: it wasn't dropping the cookies as it should. One firm came clean and admitted it and paid me for the missing days. The other firm had just migrated to their new system and everything worked but was not dropping the cookies correctly.

What you mention in the quote above Gooner is a certainty to be a cookie dropping problem because in that scenario everything works (including clicks) but you just don't get referrals. It might only affect one link rather than the whole of their system, hence they don't notice.

The 'invalid clicks' are bad enough but at least you see the problem when you click a dud link. With the 'cookie missing' issue you are really in trouble because you need to see a sustained period of no referrals before you can start questioning it.

I always check the cookies and with the cookie issue with the firm who admitted the problem (and subsequently emailed Louis about it when he asked them, copying me in), there were cookies that looked like tracking cookies. There certainly was a cookie acknowledging the affiliate link, just it was not quite right and when I swapped to a more 'commonplace' link I could see the difference in how the cookies were being dropped.

This issue of a link working perfectly except for referrals is the most insidious of the lot.

Louis, your responses are admirable, but please could your guys find a way to plug this loophole where landing pages can be set up incorrectly but appear to work?

On other issues - as for the stats Gooner has supplied about how IA firms lag in his earnings list, that is kind of scary. I don't know if my own stats bear that out but I have felt for a long time that Bet365 subsidises many of the other operators on my UK sites, who just do not earn their keep considering the referrals sent their way. Also really glad to hear you make money with Ladbrokes because my last four months have been abysmal (three negatives and a draw even) with them and I need to know someone is doing well to keep the faith!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis - Income Access

You have misinterpreted the situation - our software does not apply any "manipulation" to the data before or after it enters the system. We add a tag to a user when they click a link, then when they register their account they are tagged in the client database, then the client database pulls a complete sales file for all tagged players and sends the data to Income Access, and we then display that data in our reports. In the case mentioned, the client had a fraud protection tool in place which had nothing to do with the affiliate software, but which prevented the player account from properly registering. Since the player account was not registered in the database, it was not sent in the data files and thus not displayed in our system.

---

Louis, this comment relates to the "duplicate suppression" software that one of your major clients uses. This only came to light when I did a test that did not show. The AM did a test that did not show. Then he blamed the duplicate suppression software they use. I could give the date the problem started, why? Because it had been one of the best converting programs for me to that point. Then it stopped. Then I tested and the tests did not show. I could give a precise date when they either started with this software or tweaked it so it filtered out everything. I am still referring clients to this firm so can only assume they have toned it down. However it is not back to the sign-ups to clicks percentage that pre-dates the problem. It is actually gutting because it was a firm I steadily gave more and more profile to until this problem arose.

I do not believe Gooner has misinterpreted anything. I can echo his "wtf" sentiments as I was absolutely distraught to find a top firm now had a major cloud over its stats. The thing is we appreciate this manipulating software is nothing to do with Income Access. It belongs to the operator and they "filter" or "manipulate" the data (call it what you will). Then they feed the data into the IA system. I appreciate IA are not doing it. That to me is irrelevant. It is a perversion of the stats that the IA system is generating. It was so bad I noticed it very quickly and even the AMs tests did not show in the stats (though he sent me a screenshot showing the test referral he did and that I did was tracked by the IA system). I know in that situation the IA system was working. But the manipulation of the data meant the referral was lost and given they all dried up for a while I reckon a lot of non-duplicates were lost too and I suspect may still be.

The point I think Gooner was making and certainly that I make is that it does IA's credibility no good at all to find some cocked-up, half-witted attempt at "fraud prevention software" by an operator is reducing the correct number of referrals. IA should take responsibility for the honesty and credibility of the figures. You do have responsibility when an operator corrupts the data, even if all the bells and whistles you provide are working as expected.

PS: The test player's account did register in the operator's database. I could log into the operator's site as the test account and it was prompting me to deposit. This was a live sportsbook account that I could have used, not one flagged as a duplicate from the player's perspective. It was filtered from the data sent to the affiliate system only.

I was told that the data could not and would not be manipulated prior to going into the Income Access reporting software, which is obviously not the case - given the above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Shay-

I was told that the data could not and would not be manipulated prior to going into the Income Access reporting software, which is obviously not the case - given the above.

---

It does really now make me wonder every time I get an email through from an Income Access advertiser telling me to promote a deal on a particular deep link that a) does the link work/track, b) will the link just become invalid in a few days, and c) what data is being filtered out from the registrations, wagers and earnings that I'm referring on this promotion.

All in all, my confidence is totally shot in promoting advertisers strongly who are using this system, unless I have some detailed understanding of what each of these operators is doing at their end before they send their XML file to Income Access to update my stats.

The good that has come out of this discussion though is that we're probably going to become a lot more efficient in 2015 at promoting advertisers who convert a lot better than those on Income Access.

Just a quick one for all you affiliates to try - check your IA links. Try this one - click through on an IA link to an advertiser - you're cookied, but then while you're on the advertiser site clear your cookies and then run the link again. If, by magic, you're now not cookied the second time you run the IA tracking link! I suspect this is the duplicate supression "feature" in action right before your eyes.

I have raised this with some advertisers and they say it's something to do with not cookie-ing a visitor if they appear that they don't want cookies set (seems a bit spurious that if you clear cookies this means you don't want them for that site anymore). However I don't know if it's duplicate supression or something else.

This feature will knock out a lot of referals, as for those people with clear cookies on exit of browser this "feature" will inevitably kick in.

Tested in Firefox - various versions.

Very well said I must say. I couldn't add anything further.

However, these threads keep coming up time after time but nothing EVER comes of it. Except that IA keeps winning awards. How does that feel for affiliates? Not Good!

Perhaps we could ask for a different representative from IA, a Manager or Owner? No offense to Louis at all. It just seems we are spinning our wheels time after time and getting nowhere. I notice different answers and arguments with no consistency by Louis if you peruse old threads. Perhaps we need to go higher on the ladder.

For sure this is very alarming an something needs to be done this time.

My browser was set so that it does not accept cookies. No click showing in IA stats.

Quote:

---

My browser was set so that it does not accept cookies. No click showing in IA stats.

---

Wouldn't that be true of all or most affiliate programs? Don't they use cookies to track you, so no cookies equals no tracking?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gambling Joe

Wouldn't that be true of all or most affiliate programs? Don't they use cookies to track you, so no cookies equals no tracking?

---

It might be. But that begs the question of how my website's stats program can seemingly identify me as a visitor, identify how I arrived at the site, and track my action across my own website (including outbound clicks) with no problem but my clicks do not show on IA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gambling Joe

Wouldn't that be true of all or most affiliate programs? Don't they use cookies to track you, so no cookies equals no tracking?

---

And this would be an unacceptable situation. Their job is to track all referrals, no excuses. Anything else means operators are stealing from affiliates.

I had to stop adding anything with IA years ago.. seems anything that I started either shut down, stoped tracking, changed ownership and revshare.. quickly became obvious it was a waste of my time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Shay-

It might be. But that begs the question of how my website's stats program can seemingly identify me as a visitor, identify how I arrived at the site, and track my action across my own website (including outbound clicks) with no problem but my clicks do not show on IA.

---

Because you are tracked not with cookies, but with IP or so.
To track ppl with IPs is both much much more costly, performance demanding and probably even illegal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by webanalysissolutions

Just a quick one for all you affiliates to try - check your IA links. Try this one - click through on an IA link to an advertiser - you're cookied, but then while you're on the advertiser site clear your cookies and then run the link again. If, by magic, you're now not cookied the second time you run the IA tracking link! I suspect this is the duplicate supression "feature" in action right before your eyes.

I have raised this with some advertisers and they say it's something to do with not cookie-ing a visitor if they appear that they don't want cookies set (seems a bit spurious that if you clear cookies this means you don't want them for that site anymore). However I don't know if it's duplicate supression or something else.

This feature will knock out a lot of referals, as for those people with clear cookies on exit of browser this "feature" will inevitably kick in.

Tested in Firefox - various versions.

---

This is simply incredible.