CoolAffs, be very careful!

[@lsilva25]

I am submitting this complaint regarding the affiliate program of CoolAffs and the removal of CPA commissions generated during a completed test campaign in January 2026.

Before launching the campaign, we agreed on a test of 10 FTDs from Portugal under a CPA structure. With out kpis!

In January 2026, I delivered 9 FTDs from Portugal, generating a total CPA amount of €810, which was visible in the affiliate dashboard during the reporting period.

Throughout the entire test period, no concerns were raised regarding traffic quality, source, or compliance. The registrations were completed normally from Portugal without restrictions.

After the end of the reporting period, during the internal monthly review process, the CPA commissions were removed based on allegations of incentivized traffic, VPN usage, and non-genuine player behavior.

It is important to clarify:

The players registered normally without VPN. Registration in Portugal was functioning.

VPN was only used in certain cases to access specific games that were not visible to Portuguese users. This matter had been previously discussed with the affiliate manager, who indicated that such use would not be considered an issue. I have documented proof of this communication.

At no point during the test was I informed that traffic from Portugal was restricted or that the use of VPN for game visibility would be considered a violation. No warning was issued before the commissions were removed.

I invested real advertising budget to generate this traffic and have full documentation of the campaign and tracking.

The removal occurred only after the month concluded, under the company’s discretionary review process.

I am submitting this complaint seeking a fair review of the case and payment according to the agreed test terms

 

[CasinoDotReview]

What was the total deposit amount of those 9 FTDS?

 

[Gatto]

Thanks will keep an eye on this

 

[ashleyemacy]

I am submitting this complaint regarding the affiliate program of CoolAffs and the removal of CPA commissions generated during a completed test campaign in January 2026.

Before launching the campaign, we agreed on a test of 10 FTDs from Portugal under a CPA structure. With out kpis!

In January 2026, I delivered 9 FTDs from Portugal, generating a total CPA amount of €810, which was visible in the affiliate dashboard during the reporting period.

Throughout the entire test period, no concerns were raised regarding traffic quality, source, or compliance. The registrations were completed normally from Portugal without restrictions.

After the end of the reporting period, during the internal monthly review process, the CPA commissions were removed based on allegations of incentivized traffic, VPN usage, and non-genuine player behavior.

It is important to clarify:

The players registered normally without VPN. Registration in Portugal was functioning.

VPN was only used in certain cases to access specific games that were not visible to Portuguese users. This matter had been previously discussed with the affiliate manager, who indicated that such use would not be considered an issue. I have documented proof of this communication.

At no point during the test was I informed that traffic from Portugal was restricted or that the use of VPN for game visibility would be considered a violation. No warning was issued before the commissions were removed.

I invested real advertising budget to generate this traffic and have full documentation of the campaign and tracking.

The removal occurred only after the month concluded, under the company’s discretionary review process.

I am submitting this complaint seeking a fair review of the case and payment according to the agreed test terms

Testing a new partner requires a lot of trust and budget, so having commissions removed like this is a major red flag. Hopefully, bringing this to the forum will help get a faster response from CoolAffs. Good luck with the resolution

 

[@lsilva25]

What was the total deposit amount of those 9 FTDS?

The total amount deposited by the new FTDs was €410, with multiple players depositing different amounts, including €100, €35, €30, €25, €20, among other varied values.

After that, they sent me an antifraud report stating that the traffic was incentivized/abusive, CPA-driven, concentrated on BacBo, showing non-genuine behavioral patterns, low redeposit activity, no withdrawals, and alleging VPN/Proxy usage linked to coordinated behavior.

In response to this antifraud report, I submitted a formal and detailed explanation addressing each point, and I am now awaiting their official reply. I am also leaving my response here publicly for full transparency.

"
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally contest the conclusions presented in the antifraud report regarding my
affiliate account and the reversal of €810.00 in CPA commissions.
After carefully reviewing the allegations, I must state that the conclusions presented do not reflect
the factual reality of the traffic delivered.
Firstly, it was stated that the referred players made only minimum deposits and displayed
CPA-driven behavior. This statement is incorrect. The total deposit volume associated with the
flagged cohort was €410.00 (9FT10), which makes it impossible for all players to have deposited
only the minimum amount. Several players deposited €25, €30, €100, and other varying amounts.
This directly contradicts the claim that the traffic consisted exclusively of minimum-deposit players.
Regarding VPN usage, I would like to clarify the following with full transparency:
All players, with the exception of one specific case mentioned below, registered normally from
Portugal without the use of VPN. VPN was used only after registration, exclusively to access
specific games that were regionally restricted and inaccessible without VPN.
Before initiating operations, I consulted directly with my affiliate manager, who confirmed that using
VPN to access games would not be an issue. Based on this authorization, I informed players that
they could use VPN solely to access games, never for registration or any form of system
manipulation.

There was only one player who registered using a VPN. This player was directed to your second
casino brand, which did not allow registrations from Portugal. At the time, I believed this would not
present an issue and advised the use of VPN for registration, not knowing that this might violate any
internal policy.
If you consider that this isolated case does not comply with your internal rules, I am willing to accept
the removal of the CPA commission related to that single player. However, all other players
registered correctly without VPN and used VPN only afterward to access games, in line with the
prior guidance provided by my affiliate manager.
Regarding the claims of low redepositing activity and absence of withdrawals, it is important to note
that this concerns casino activity. It is entirely normal that many players do not withdraw funds
simply because they lost. The absence of withdrawals does not constitute evidence of fraud or
non-genuine behavior.

Additionally, I have been working in the online casino affiliate industry for approximately two years. I
am fully aware that all traffic undergoes strict IP verification, behavioral analysis, and antifraud
controls. It would make no sense to invest hundreds of euros in paid traffic, as well as dedicate time
and resources to organic traffic, only to risk losing commissions through fraudulent practices. I did
not start in this industry yesterday, and I fully understand the verification mechanisms involved.

I possess documented evidence supporting the legitimacy of my activity, including:
• Proof of traffic investment;
• Written confirmation from my affiliate manager authorizing VPN usage for game access;
• Evidence that players voluntarily deposited in order to access my private groups;
• Documentation showing that the traffic was organic and/or generated through legitimate paid
campaigns.

There was no incentivized fraudulent traffic, no coordinated manipulation, and no intent to exploit
CPA rewards.
In light of the above, I formally request:
1. Identification of the specific accounts deemed irregular;
2. Objective evidence supporting the determination of abusive traffic;
3. A reconsideration of the €810.00 CPA commission reversal based on the clarified facts
presented.
I value professional relationships based on transparency and fairness, and I trust this matter can be
reassessed in light of the factual information provided.

Kind regards,

Leandro Silva "