Today Posts Today Posts
Recent Affiliate Payments
Recent Forum Posts
SHOW: 5 | 8 | 10
  • Affiliate Program
  • Payment Date
  • Payment Method
  • Mainstreet Affiliates
    Feb 8th
    wire transfer
  • 7Red Affiliate
    Feb 7th
    MONEYBOOKERS
  • My Bet Partners
    Feb 7th
    Player Account
  • AffActive
    Feb 6th
    Moneybookers
  • 121 Casino Affiliates
    Feb 6th
    NETELLER
Enter Your Recent Payments

View Poll Results: Is Playshare's retroactive High Roller Term Acceptable?

Voters
43. You may not vote on this poll
  • Playshare Partners' retroactive High Roller Term is acceptable

    4 9.30%
  • Playshare Partners' retroactive High Roller Term is not acceptable

    39 90.70%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 73
  1. #21
    dominique's Avatar
    dominique is online now Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,012
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked 611 Times in 334 Posts

    Default

    Other than the retroactiveness (meaning violation of contract) my issue with this is the first month. IMO the player should be fenced IMMEDIATELY upon winning, as is the case in the new Casino Coins term.

    That would be the issue I have with the term itself.
    Online Gambling Directory

    Bingo Forum






    Individually, we are one drop. Together, we are an ocean.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to dominique For This Useful Post:

    bonustreak (07-11-2009),Engineer (07-11-2009),Guard Dog (07-11-2009),sipka (07-12-2009)

  3. #22
    Guard Dog's Avatar
    Guard Dog is offline Guard Dog
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,536
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 2,207 Times in 1,143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I have the same issue. I think we all understand that if a player wins $400,000 and loses it all immediately in the next month - that is difficult for the program to absorb (even though programs have been doing this for years and most continue to do this).

    Here is what I see based upon your own example:

    playshare.jpg

    Let me know if I am wrong.... But if you look at the 1st table (your relatively-new high roller clause) and compare it to the 3rd table.... It is plain to see that you are removing $6,000 in affiliate commissions that have nothing to do with the 'High Roller'.
    Last edited by Guard Dog; 07-11-2009 at 12:11 PM.

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Guard Dog For This Useful Post:

    bonustreak (07-11-2009),Daera (07-12-2009),Engineer (07-11-2009),inspiration (07-11-2009),triple777s (07-12-2009)

  5. #23
    alex777 is offline Affiliate Guard Dog Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    25
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Arrow

    I am not an affiliate with this program, but I can say only two thing That term is good for casino operators only, and bad for affiliates.

    So, I would not join and promote anything with terms like this.

  6. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Done
    Posts
    391
    Thanks
    92
    Thanked 263 Times in 161 Posts

    Default

    I think the numbers in your example are not correct

    With Highroller policy :

    M1

    20,000 regular
    -400,000 HR
    -120,000 net rev HR
    -100,000 all net rev
    0 all net rev @ 30%

    M2
    20,000 regular
    400,000 HR
    -400,000 HR carryover
    0 net rev HR
    20,000 all net rev
    6,000 all net rev @ 30%


    Last edited by inspiration; 07-11-2009 at 12:00 PM.

  7. #25
    Guard Dog's Avatar
    Guard Dog is offline Guard Dog
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,536
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 2,207 Times in 1,143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I fixed my image - thanks for catching that mistake (which was in the first example only, with the new High Roller clause). Everything else was correct as far as I am seeing.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Guard Dog For This Useful Post:

    inspiration (07-11-2009)

  9. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Done
    Posts
    391
    Thanks
    92
    Thanked 263 Times in 161 Posts

    Default

    will the commissionwarehouse (playerspalacecasino) program get the same clause because they are part of G3??

    Yes the other numbers seem to be correct IMO

    J........30% @ 400,000 ........ the good times are over now ?
    Last edited by inspiration; 07-11-2009 at 12:08 PM.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to inspiration For This Useful Post:

    Daera (07-12-2009)

  11. #27
    Guard Dog's Avatar
    Guard Dog is offline Guard Dog
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,536
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 2,207 Times in 1,143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by inspiration View Post
    will the commissionwarehouse (playerspalacecasino) program get the same clause because they are part of G3??

    Yes the other numbers seem to be correct IMO

    J........30% @ 400,000 ........ the good times are over now ?

    Commission Warehouse got the term at the same time Playshare did as far as I can tell. It's in their terms currently: Commission Warehouse Affiliates | Terms and Conditions

    Section 9.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Guard Dog For This Useful Post:

    Daera (07-12-2009),triple777s (07-12-2009)

  13. #28
    Engineer's Avatar
    Engineer is offline Certification Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,719
    Thanks
    1,121
    Thanked 930 Times in 559 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dominique View Post
    Other than the retroactiveness (meaning violation of contract) my issue with this is the first month. IMO the player should be fenced IMMEDIATELY upon winning, as is the case in the new Casino Coins term.

    That would be the issue I have with the term itself.
    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    Let me know if I am wrong.... But if you look at the 1st table (your relatively-new high roller clause) and compare it to the 3rd table.... It is plain to see that you are removing $6,000 in affiliate commissions that have nothing to do with the 'High Roller'.
    I agree with both of these comments. If you're going to fence, commissions from the other players shouldn't be affected.

    But I think the retroactiveness should be addressed first.

    Lawrence, what do you think about applying the high roller policy only to players referred after the new clause went into effect? I think that is the fairest way to handle a change like this -- do you agree?



  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Engineer For This Useful Post:

    Guard Dog (07-11-2009)

  15. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Done
    Posts
    391
    Thanks
    92
    Thanked 263 Times in 161 Posts

    Default

    If there is more than one high-roller, the negative balance carried forward will be split proportionally between them.
    I do not like that either.

    Let's assume you have player 1 won $11,000
    player 2 won $49,000

    On average this is $30,000

    The advantage of the split is not on our side for player 1 either, I could start earning once he loses $11,000 so I have to wait for the average being met.


  16. #30
    mojo is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 102 Times in 56 Posts

    Default

    This term is complicated but there is another problem I would like to get out there for consideration.

    The threshold is set at 10k. So if your player hits 9999.99 this doesn't apply. The first 9999 is forgiven. However, your player hits 50k and the whole amount is carried forward. The first 10k should also be forgiven. In other words, the carryover should be 40k.

    It's a win win for the casino. Besides the '1st month' confiscation of funds, then there is the threshold.

    My two major problems with the HR term. (I have quoted from another thread.)

    First:

    April
    5 players earn you 2K
    1 player hits 10K

    You lose all earnings under the HR rule in April. Then in May your 10K player plays it all back. You are even on THAT player but you have still lost the 2K from your other players in April. Why is that? Why is your HR back to even but you have still lost out your April earnings from other players. Who gets those eanings (2K)? The casino can make a good sum from our earnings.

    Second:

    " Since the regular terms of these programs using this HighRoller Term allows for there to be NO NEGATIVE CARRYOVER up to 10k, then this should also apply to any players that are quarantined.
    IE: If a player wins 20k, then only 10k should be carried over.
    If a player wins, 10,500.00, then only 500.00 should be carried over, and quarantined."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts