Buffalo Partners, the new referback-wagershare.

[inspiration]

Hi Vladi,

You're quite right - the amount would be -$5,000.

The amount is subtracted from the positive earnings in the first month.
Big winner: -$10,000
Other players: +$5,000
Net: - $5,000
Commission: $0

FYI: the above amount would leave 5k high rollered against that player which would only come off against that player only in future months.

Thanks

Andrew

I do not understand what you mean.

the High Roller is ring fenced and commissions for this player will be paid provided he plays it all back.

Why do you deduct the negative for this player from the commissions generated by the other players?

This is very confusing ?!

 

[admin]

A reminder is sent to all affiliate managers.

 

[AussieDave]

Why do you deduct the negative for this player from the commissions generated by the other players?

This is very confusing ?!

It's exactly that, which doesn't add up here.

As soon as any "player" wins = or >, the stated "High Roller" amount, this player is automatically fenced into the High Roller corral.

At that point, their losses/wins (should) have no affect on "other players".

So why is Vlad's account having the High Roller deduction offset against his other players?

EG -

• Other Players.......... +$ 5,000
• High Roller...............-$10,000
• Vlad's RS..................-$ 5,000

A "High Roller" is either fenced or they're not. And if they are, then their wins are seperate to other players. It's not rocket science

• Other Players.......... +$5,000
• Vlad's RS..................+$5,000

HR: -$10,000 is fenced (wins/losses applicable to this account only). Has no affect/influcence on "other players"!

NB - my "High Roller" was fenced as soon as he exceded the $10K win. Hence if the player is now "fenced" how can their wins be offset against other players?

That makes no sense at all.

 

[AussieDave]

So we are all on the same page:

High-Roller Policy

7.14 In any given month, if a Customer generates a negative net win of at least $10,000 he/she will be deemed to be, for the purposes of this section, a 'High-Roller'.

7.15 If the aggregate Net Win for the Affiliate, in that month, for a Merchant Brand is negative $2,000 or greater, then the High-Roller policy as set out hereunder, will apply:

7.15.1 The negative Net Win generated by the High-Roller will be carried forward and offset against future Net Win generated by that High-Roller;

7.15.2 The negative balance carried forward cannot be set-off against other Customer's Net Win;

7.15.3 The negative balance carried forward cannot be greater than the total aggregate negative Net Win for the Affiliate, for that month;

7.15.4 The negative balance of a High-Roller will be reduced by future positive Net Win that they generate in subsequent months;

7.15.5 A negative balance will not be increased by future negative Net Win unless the High-Roller meets the qualifying criteria in subsequent months.

---------

Reiterating my "High Roller" was fenced as soon as he met the above criteria. What I don't get and think others will agree, these terms are ambiguos.

When a player is fenced on the "High Roller Policy", they are placed into quarantine; seperated from other players.
This happens automatically as soon as a player meets the "High Roller" status.

Either a players wins/losses are quarantined from other players or they are not.

If fencing negatives are only applied to the "High Roller Account" going forward (not current month)... Instead are offset against "other players" wins.... Yet the "High Roller Policy" is activated in a current month... The terms of the "High Roller Policy" are unfairly weighted toward Buffalo Partners...

Remindes me of a Double Wammy... just sayin!

 

[Vladi]

If fencing negatives are only applied to the "High Roller Account" going forward (not current month)... Instead are offset against "other players" wins.... Yet the "High Roller Policy" is activated in a current month... The terms of the "High Roller Policy" are unfairly weighted toward Buffalo Partners...

It only makes sense to say going forward, because if a player wins $10,000 one day in a month then lose $5000 the next (still in the same month) then they are at -$5000 at the end of the month. Surely they can only work out who is in this quarantine thing at the end of the month?

The program isn't going to segregate the big winner's winnings from the other players because if the player has the sense to never come back and play again after getting so lucky then the casino may have given us affiliates a free ride on that winner by paying commissions on all the other players despite possibly losing money in that month.

I presented the scenario I did because I was worried that they might get us with a double hit: i.e. deduct from the other players' earnings and then keep the big winner at -$10,000. At least this way in the scenario I presented the winner only has to play back half their winnings for you to start earning again. Its not ideal, but I concede that it is fair.

What you guys are asking for is this, assuming 40% revenue share (note I originally had a mistake in this and I have edited it to correct):

Month 1
Big winner: -$10,000
Other players: +$5,000
Net: -$5,000
Commission: +$2000 (40% of $5000)

Month 2
Big winner: +$10,000 (-$10,000 NCO)
Other players: +$5,000
Net: +$5,000
Commission: $2000 (40% of $5000)

Totals
Net: +$10,000
Commission: +$4,000

Which is more or less identical to the stated policy, the only difference obviously being the monthly cashflows:

Month 1
Big winner: -$10,000
Other players: +$5,000
Net: -$5,000
Commission: $0

Month 2
Big winner: +$10,000 (-$5000 NCO)
Other players: +$5,000
Net: +$10,000
Commission: $4000 (40% of $10,000)

Totals
Net: +$10,000
Commission: +$4,000

And this is what happens when the big winner does not play any of it back, or plays less back than the NCO:

Month 1
Big winner: -$10,000
Other players: +$5,000
Net: -$5,000
Commission: $0

Month 2
Big winner: $0
Other players: +$5,000
Net: +$5,000
Commission: $2000 (40% of $5,000)

Totals
Net: +$0
Commission: +$2,000

Perhaps I should not have typed in that last scenario...

 

[Bonus Paradise]

I am absolutley not happy with this High Roller Term.
So now I have one High Roller at Spin Palace, and I do not earn on any other players with Spin Palace?

Everyone may also be interested to know the following:
My partner won once a bigger amount at one of the wagershare brands. And then he did not get any bonuses anymore.
Before that he always got emails from them with bonus offers. Then he asked the support why he does not get a bonus anymore and they told him, this is due he won a lot.
Nice job on player retention! Needless to say, that he did not play there anymore. So, guess how big our chances are that our highrollers are playing the money back with this group.

 

[Vladi]

No that is not right. If you have a big winner at Spin Palace you don't earn from your other players there in the month of the big win (i.e. the same as any other program with or without the rule) unless they earn you more than the big winner won of course. In subsequent months you earn from all the other players as normal. You just do not earn anything from the big winner until they have played back what they won.

Its an interesting point you make about the retention. But if you think about it, if all the big winners never played back their winnings then there is no difference between a program that has this rule and one that does not.

 

[Andrew - Buffalo Partners]

Hi everyone,

Hope you all had a good weekend. This is just to let you know that we'll be replying shortly.

Thanks

Andrew

 

[inspiration]

No idea but this I find awkward :

Spin Palace
No Favourite Game
Desktop
signup 03/09/2014
last played 03/09/2014
deposit count 1
deposit amount $1,000.00
net revenue $784.00

is there some balance left you think?
why this initial deposit for this high amount and not play again ?

 

[peep]

Admin fees..? Those are usually quite a big..

No idea but this I find awkward :

Spin Palace
No Favourite Game
Desktop
signup 03/09/2014
last played 03/09/2014
deposit count 1
deposit amount $1,000.00
net revenue $784.00

is there some balance left you think?
why this initial deposit for this high amount and not play again ?

 

[bonustreak]

I think it means there is money still in the players account?

 

[inspiration]

I think it means there is money still in the players account?

Yes there is !
has was playing blackjack but has not played all from his purchase.
The retention team will contact him next week or so.

 

[Vladi]

Now another important question. We know that River Belle, King Neptune's and Mummy's Gold are no longer part of this affiliate program, yet they are still open and running and accepting new players. We know that the program could redirect any affiliate clicks to these casinos to one of their others that are tracked, but they aren't doing that. We can only conclude that BP is hoping to get free clicks and players from affiliates that are unaware or that forget to update their sites.

Aside from that, why then are River Belle and Mummy's Gold sites still linking to Buffalo Partners as their affiliate program? An unknowing affiliate could sign up under the impression that they can refer players there but they can't.

 

[Andrew - Buffalo Partners]

Hi,

Re. the High Roller policy - this has been in place for around 10 years now. No new changes have taken place.

If anyone has any particular queries regarding their accounts, please contact Buffalo Partners support or your affiliate manager, as they will be able to explain this and give you a call if necessary.

The Buffalo Partner account managers are here to help, and for any queries like this it is much easier to touch base.

Thanks,

Andrew

 

[Guard Dog]

Andrew - it does not matter that it has been around 10 years. It looks like your high roller clause is the opposite of those who do it the RIGHT way. You say you are ring fencing the high roller - but that is not true at all. It looks to me like you are doing nothing with the high roller. This is simply negative carryover with big players (debatable on the 'big' players).

Pretty much a shitty way to make your affiliates pay when your players win.

 

[AussieDave]

Surely they can only work out who is in this quarantine thing at the end of the month?

my "High Roller" was fenced as soon as he exceded the $10K win. Hence if the player is now "fenced" how can their wins be offset against other players?

That btw was within a few days, of the commencement of August 2014. Ironically Buffalo opened for business on the 1'st.

Had never been hit with this clause at Referback... Yet within a few days of Buffalo taking over, I'm slugged with this fencing gig!

You say you are ring fencing the high roller - but that is not true at all. It looks to me like you are doing nothing with the high roller. This is simply negative carryover with big players (debatable on the 'big' players).

Pretty much a shitty way to make your affiliates pay when your players win.

Pretty much the point I've been trying to make all along. Albeit probably because I'm so frustrated and annoyed (-$69K NCO will do that to you).

I was biting my tongue on this...BUT screw it... This stunt has got Wagershare's modus operandi all over it!

 

[Andrew - Buffalo Partners]

Hi,

High Roller information was never available at Referback in your reports - but in the backend the calculation was in place. The difference since the 1st of August is that you can now view the information in your Buffalo Partners account.

So I can understand that it may appear that there has been a sudden change, but in reality the only change is that you are now able to view your high roller information.

Thanks,

Andrew

 

[AussieDave]

I can understand that it may appear that there has been a sudden change, but in reality the only change is that you are now able to view your high roller information.

I never got stung with this High-Roller Policy at Referback. Yet within a few days of Buffalo Partners opening, WHAM I'm hit with it. And, other members in this thread have been hit with it too... From my perspective gauged from years of being with RB and to what's taken place last month at Buffalo Partners, it most certainly is a "sudden change" in policy.

Whether I can see it or not is a moot point. The fact this High-Roller Policy has been initiated at Buffalo, is the issue here. Not withstanding AGD's comments:

This is simply negative carryover with big players (debatable on the 'big' players). Pretty much a shitty way to make your affiliates pay when your players win.

Dressing this up as a High-Roller Policy when it clearly isn't... ain't cool in my opinion.

 

[Andrew - Buffalo Partners]

We have to point out again that this rule is over 10 years old, and the idea of making our affiliates pay is not the idea here. The casino is simply quarantining the player in future months, as any future netwin for that particular player is skewed as it is simply winnings. Again this does not apply to any other casino player which is why we do not consider this negative carryover. Should the player who has had the huge win never play again, then this amount will never come off against other players. The high roller policy is also only enforced on winners of 10k or greater. This affects a minority of players, and for any players who win anything under that amount, there is no policy enforced and no quarantine set up.

If anyone has any questions about their specific account, please contact Buffalo Partners support (support@buffalopartners.com) or your account manager.

 

[Guard Dog]

I am trying to wrap my head around how your "High Roller Policy" works...

The casino is simply quarantining the player in future months, as any future netwin for that particular player is skewed as it is simply winnings.

When does the player return to the affiliate's account?

Should the player who has had the huge win never play again, then this amount will never come off against other players.

Wasn't it said before that this negative balance is affecting the affiliate's account? So - is only the FIRST win creating a negative amount against other players?

The high roller policy is also only enforced on winners of 10k or greater. This affects a minority of players, and for any players who win anything under that amount, there is no policy enforced and no quarantine set up.

As expected.