Broadway Gaming dont pay comission

[pasiu2222]

Your arguments are baseless and meaningless. From the month of December BrodwayGaming repeatedly he assured me that he would soon receive their commission payments (241 pound) When I wrote complaint now, you are a completely different arguments. I did not do anything wrong! account manager offered me commission I posted information and banners on my forum. If GuardDog will, I can even give you a link to my forum to post with your brand. There, people have commented posts as you paid and played in your brand. It said there also players that the payment had been asked to send documents. So I ask, on what basis are you saying that there were some abuse? You provided me many times via skype, that my payment will be in few days - how you can explain this?

 

[Broadway Gaming]

Hi,

Can you please send me a link to the forum post as mentioned above?

 

[Shay]

If the original deal was a 50 quid cpa on a 10 quid trigger, then the numbers (from period 12/1/15) tell me that someone's story is not adding up.

If those numbers were reflecting the six accounts in review, my maths tell me we'd be talking about 300 quid cpa (£50 * 6 players = £300 cpa due).

The amount showed to be paid is £241.87, which strongly suggests that the CPA amount/reviewed accounts is not reflected in the balance. If part of the 6 CPA's is shown in that balance, then I'd need help understanding why some show and others do not (did a few of them pass the fraud check?).

Without knowing any background other than what has been shared in this thread - the affiliate is owed 241.87 GBP and the conversation should move towards when exactly this affiliate is going to receive this amount or demonstrating (clearly) why he is not entitled to this amount.

 

[pasiu2222]

Hi,
I send you the link via email.

 

[Guard Dog]

You can post links now.

 

[slotplayer]

We work with a 3rd party affiliate software provider, so once a commission is recorded, it is much easier for us to negatively manual bonus any queried amount than it is to contact Income Access and have them go back and change the commission structures. To do the latter costs us money in itself.

There also seems to be confusion, I never said you were a fraudster. I said that your players failed fraud checks. Which is why we will not be paying a CPA on these players, we will pay Rev Share.

Based on this, you are due £5.29. This falls below our payment threshold. We will happily pay you any commissions you are due once they pass our minimum payment threshold of £100.

If they're fraud players why pay anything? I'm assuming they've been banned as well.

 

[Broadway Gaming]

The players didn't pass our fraud checks so we were willing to pay them on revenue share instead as while we were not satisfied with the traffic, we did not believe it to be serious enough to be a banning offence for the affiliate. As discussed in email, we won't be paying the CPA amount for the players sent as once our security team finished their checks, they were not satisfied. It was at that point that the CPA was voided and the traffic sent moved to lifetime revenue share. We will of course, pay revenue share generated. The minimum threshold for payment is £100. If less than £100 commission is generated in a month then it gets rolled over into the next period until the total is £100+.

 

[Shay]

If the original deal was a 50 quid cpa on a 10 quid trigger, then the numbers (from period 12/1/15) tell me that someone's story is not adding up.

If those numbers were reflecting the six accounts in review, my maths tell me we'd be talking about 300 quid cpa (£50 * 6 players = £300 cpa due).

The amount showed to be paid is £241.87, which strongly suggests that the CPA amount/reviewed accounts is not reflected in the balance. If part of the 6 CPA's is shown in that balance, then I'd need help understanding why some show and others do not (did a few of them pass the fraud check?).

Without knowing any background other than what has been shared in this thread - the affiliate is owed 241.87 GBP and the conversation should move towards when exactly this affiliate is going to receive this amount or demonstrating (clearly) why he is not entitled to this amount.

This still...

 

[Broadway Gaming]

5 players deposited £10 so triggered CPA at £50 for a total of £250. All of that £250 is now void.

The reason it's less than £250 in the screenshot is due to the revshare amount being negative in December. Income Access just totals that with the £250.

 

[KasinoKing]

5 players deposited £10 so triggered revshare at £50 for a total of £250. All of that £250 is now void.

I think you mean triggered a CPA, not rev-share.
To me that is HIGHLY suspicious and I'm not a bit surprised they were flagged as fraud players.

KK

 

[Broadway Gaming]

I think you mean triggered a CPA, not rev-share.
To me that is HIGHLY suspicious and I'm not a bit surprised they were flagged as fraud players.

KK

Yes, I meant CPA. I edited the post, thanks!

 

[Guard Dog]

ok. seems to make sense to me. I think the OP maybe isn't understanding that the £241.87 was part of the original CPA that won't be paid?

 

[pasiu2222]

Laura, why are you said, that was only 5 deposit 10 pounds? It is not true that all the players have made a deposit of 10 pounds. Here attached screenshot for Dec.

It shows that I had more deposits that 5. But cpa freed me of the amount of 10 pounds or more. Here's a thread on my forum to their offering (currently in archive)
http://www.darmowybonus.com/t3347-b...0-do-100eur-150-free-spinow?highlight=diamond
I have a forum with high traffic from Poland - players from my country usually pay smaller amounts. If it were as Laura says, that only 5 deposit equal to 10 pounds is actually it would be suspicious. But there were also smaller amount of deposits (as seen in the attached screenshot), probably were players who founded the account and paid € and 10 € (not in pounds) and amount is not freed my CPA.

So please tell me why Laura is still trying to make me guilty of the whole situation? and why so far BrodwayGaming assured me several times that I would receive his commission? At time when I wrote a complaint Laura changed rhetoric.

 

[Guard Dog]

ok, now I am back on @pasiu2222's side. I think we need the full story Laura and that doesn't seem to be coming out.

 

[Shay]

Many of the bingo specific creatives "ask" for a minimum deposit. When the customer gives what is asked of them, who's fault is that?

If the webmaster provided incentives that weren't approved by BG, that is one thing. But if the players are only guilty of giving "merely" what was asked of them, the webmaster must be compensated.

My suggestion is pay the webmaster the amount he is owed for CPA, then going forward - stop the CPA if you no longer wish to work with him on a CPA basis.

Additionally, I'd suggest having a meeting with your marketing and player retention teams to see how you can better "inspire" players to do more than the minimum. Some brands are fantastic at inspiring activity after the min ftd. Other brands - not so much...