Chargebacks

[Vladi]

Wrong. I am not confused and I know exactly what I am talking about.

You keep arguing that he is paid on "net revenue". We know this. The point is your net revenue is at a maximum 85% of the gross, which is far lower than a lot of other programs. Therefore 25% commission = 21.25% in the real world. You know that, why won't you acknowledge it?

17.8% is the % lauferb calculated that he earned on a player's losses of 1277.36. It is his share of gross revenue. I assume it is lower than 21.25% because there were bonuses in there, but the point is that it cannot be higher than 21.25%. If he wants to earn a "real" 25% of his player's net revenue then he needs to be on 30% in your program.

The point is that affiliates should be aware that an advertised 25% revenue share (despite you laughably calling it "among the highest in the industry") is not directly comparable across different programs, because some programs like yours and Bodog subtract unusually high fees from the gross revenue before calculating the commission. You also hide the 15% fee in clause 4.2 of your terms and conditions then show admin fees: 0% on the affiliate's commission structure page. Not exactly transparent. And as Topponline said and I know, not all programs do this.

I hope the above helps to make it a big clearer.

 

[Shaun O'Neill]

Vladi

We clearly state sin our T&Cs that we charge a admin fee plus we also show this in our reports to me that is transparent.

YOu are correct in that we paying out on 85% of the gross due to the admin fee of 15%, we are not alone in charging an admin but at the same time look ateh other things we do not deduct such as rake back, any player than makes over $50 will get 30% gross rake back yet we dont deduct that from your commission unlike most other companies like wise with rake races.

Lauferb did not get paid 17.8% rev share he got paid 25% of the net revenue.

Almost every company works out net revenue in a differant way some have fees some dont this is the way that we work it out so for the purpose of this conversation we pay 25% of the net revenue as per our revnue calculation.

Regards

Shaun

Wrong. I am not confused and I know exactly what I am talking about.

You keep arguing that he is paid on "net revenue". We know this. The point is your net revenue is at a maximum 85% of the gross, which is far lower than a lot of other programs. Therefore 25% commission = 21.25% in the real world. You know that, why won't you acknowledge it?

17.8% is the % lauferb calculated that he earned on a player's losses of 1277.36. It is his share of gross revenue. I assume it is lower than 21.25% because there were bonuses in there, but the point is that it cannot be higher than 21.25%. If he wants to earn a "real" 25% of his player's net revenue then he needs to be on 30% in your program.

The point is that affiliates should be aware that an advertised 25% revenue share (despite you laughably calling it "among the highest in the industry") is not directly comparable across different programs, because some programs like yours and Bodog subtract unusually high fees from the gross revenue before calculating the commission. You also hide the 15% fee in clause 4.2 of your terms and conditions then show admin fees: 0% on the affiliate's commission structure page. Not exactly transparent. And as Topponline said and I know, not all programs do this.

 

[lauferb]

I just saw a sketch in another thread in the forum, the thread is here: https:// www. affiliateguarddog. com/forums/why-do-some-affiliate-programs-t3662.html
and the sketch is this:

in this calculation I see another thing: deduction of player cash balance
question to Shaun: does triobet affiliate program also deduct the player's cash balance?

basically it does not matter so much since the balance is something that will either be cached out or the player will play with it, but just curious...

thank you