How is Rewardsaffiliates doing for you?

[dominique]

If you would fight to not have live links at the bottom, but only images, you would be our hero.

That's what it's all about - the live links on the bottom of the mails.

I know they say "to re-download" - whoever looks at that? I don't. I see a link to someplace interesting, I click it if I trust the place.

We don't call people "dickheads" here at AGD. We try to get things fixed. Name calling fixes nothing. If someone calls you names on this forum, let me know and I'll dig out my whip. It's NOT ALLOWED here. We just made that perfectly clear to members and we are enforcing it. This is a professional forum.

That said, you and I are continually talking past each other. I know what you have fixed and all the rationale.

All I want for Christmas is to have these links not be live, but have plain branding images there.

That's all, very plain and simple.

 

[Perc]

I've read about this issue for a quite a while but sat on the sidelines, well now here's my 2 pennies.

I seems to me that the issue isn't who gets the player, it's the possibility that no affiliate will. Assuming you use cookies for tracking, what happens when someone deletes their cookies, uses a different PC, etc., clicks on a link in the newsletter, and there is no previous tracking information? I assume in that situation, the player would be playing untagged.

I think most people agree that the last referrer getting credit is fair, so wouldn't the simple solution be to tag the newsletter links to the affiliate that most recently sent the player to a CR casino? It would be easy enough to do, when the new account is added to the newsletter under "Your account details" the links could be updated with the recent affy tag.

That would remove the possibility of the player signing up with no tag, and goes with the current "last referrer policy" which I think is fair.

 

[dominique]

Of course "last referrer" is fair.

This is about cross promotion.

 

[free4gambling]

Hmmm was looking into my account at RA on saturday, noticed a new player done well for me. On sunday the player was gone. Never knew players could dissapear from your account.

 

[Daera]

Hmmm was looking into my account at RA on saturday, noticed a new player done well for me. On sunday the player was gone. Never knew players could dissapear from your account.

I'm not sure, but I think players can disappear if they have multiple accounts at the same casino for example. The only way to know is to email or chat Renee.

And about the name calling... this is one of the reasons I prefer AGD to the other forums. I don't like name calling either, and AGD doesn't allow that. It's not fair to hold AGD responsible for name calling that happens at other forums, even if some people posted in the threads at both forums. I really appreciate the professionalism at AGD. If you don't like the policy other forums have about name calling, maybe stop sponsoring them?

 

[Renee]

I've read about this issue for a quite a while but sat on the sidelines, well now here's my 2 pennies.

I seems to me that the issue isn't who gets the player, it's the possibility that no affiliate will. Assuming you use cookies for tracking, what happens when someone deletes their cookies, uses a different PC, etc., clicks on a link in the newsletter, and there is no previous tracking information? I assume in that situation, the player would be playing untagged.

I think most people agree that the last referrer getting credit is fair, so wouldn't the simple solution be to tag the newsletter links to the affiliate that most recently sent the player to a CR casino? It would be easy enough to do, when the new account is added to the newsletter under "Your account details" the links could be updated with the recent affy tag.

That would remove the possibility of the player signing up with no tag, and goes with the current "last referrer policy" which I think is fair.

So if you sent a player to a casino where they were playing like a mad man, then the player was sent to another casino where they didn't make a single deposit, you would be happy to have that player tagged to the affiliate who sent them to the casino they have not played at?

 

[Renee]

I'm not sure, but I think players can disappear if they have multiple accounts at the same casino for example. The only way to know is to email or chat Renee.

And about the name calling... this is one of the reasons I prefer AGD to the other forums. I don't like name calling either, and AGD doesn't allow that. It's not fair to hold AGD responsible for name calling that happens at other forums, even if some people posted in the threads at both forums. I really appreciate the professionalism at AGD. If you don't like the policy other forums have about name calling, maybe stop sponsoring them?

When I mentioned name calling, I meant all types of it. There is a thread here where the company was called slime, scum and someone said my bosses had no nuts. That person is banned now, but it wasn't for that.

 

[Guard Dog]

When I mentioned name calling, I meant all types of it. There is a thread here where the company was called slime, scum and someone said my bosses had no nuts. That person is banned now, but it wasn't for that.

I dislike when things are framed up all wrong

The person was banned when I decided (relatively recently) that the recent bout of name calling was a criteria for banning.

 

[Guard Dog]

So if you sent a player to a casino where they were playing like a mad man, then the player was sent to another casino where they didn't make a single deposit, you would be happy to have that player tagged to the affiliate who sent them to the casino they have not played at?

I don't understand how that addressed the question? Maybe I am dense today? Sorry if I am missing something!

 

[Renee]

It was in response to the suggestion of tagging to whoever referred the last casino account. So if the last referred casino account was by an affiliate where the player has not placed a bet, but had been constantly playing somewhere else before that, I dont think thats fair, but that would be the reality of taking that suggestion.

So Andy, you refer player to GT. For shits and giggles they are making you 100k per month. Then I refer the same player to CA where they have not made a single purchase and not placed a single bet.

If we go by the suggestion made by Perc, that player would be tagged to me in the newsletter. I don't think that's fair.

Regarding the name calling, I meant they were not banned for the name calling against the company and my bosses.. The name calling may have been what made the ban be put in place finally but the references I made were not the nail in the coffin, they were probably just the start of it.

 

[Daera]

So if you sent a player to a casino where they were playing like a mad man, then the player was sent to another casino where they didn't make a single deposit, you would be happy to have that player tagged to the affiliate who sent them to the casino they have not played at?

For me, the answer is YES. With things changed as Dom suggested.

 

[dominique]

Renee, you didn't address my post. I just need to hear that you do understand what I am asking.

And please let's not derail with the name calling now - it's not happening anymore without consequences and so that's solved.

We seem stuck at the point where the links are still live. That would be the last step to be taken to make things right.

These threads have been popping up here and there for a long time now, and after watching the industry for over ten years I can predict they will do so at infinitum.

Why not put an end to it? You said they don't get many clicks, so why keep this discontent alive? Wouldn't it be more profitable to attract new affiliates because you have a squeaky clean program?

 

[bonustreak]

I would like Dom's along with other posters questions answered. This is the most professional thread of all, on all forums to date I think the derailing needs to stop!

Please address the concerns Renee...

 

[Renee]

What makes you think I don't fight for these things already?

Not everything I fight for will be approved immediately/at all.

 

[dominique]

Anything I can do to help?

 

[Perc]

It was in response to the suggestion of tagging to whoever referred the last casino account. So if the last referred casino account was by an affiliate where the player has not placed a bet, but had been constantly playing somewhere else before that, I dont think thats fair, but that would be the reality of taking that suggestion.

So Andy, you refer player to GT. For shits and giggles they are making you 100k per month. Then I refer the same player to CA where they have not made a single purchase and not placed a single bet.

If we go by the suggestion made by Perc, that player would be tagged to me in the newsletter. I don't think that's fair.

So if you stick with the no tags in the newsletter, and there is no previous tracking information (different PC, etc.) like the scenario I described, does that player then manually get tagged to the last affiliate that sent this player to make a deposit?

If not, then yes that would be fair. At least someone would be benefiting from sending that player to CR.

At least then we would have a chance. The scenario you described is possible, but it would be a lot more rare than an affiliates player being lost to CR as they come in untagged through the newsletter. The most likely scenario would be that the proper tags would be in place, and the right affiliate would get credit for most recently sending that player.

It appears your bosses won't even consider removing the links from the logos, tagging them (physically tagging them, not just depending on cookies being there) to the last referring affiliate is, in my opinion, the fairest way to keep them live.

You say tags (cookies) don't get overwritten when a player visits a casino webpage through an untagged link. So what happens if my player visited another portal and clicked through several links to CR casinos, but did nothing, and then clicks on an untagged link in the newsletter and signs up and plays, wouldn't I then lose that player to the other affiliate? If that is possible, then the scenario you described could already be happening.

 

[inspiration]

FYI

888.com was removed as an accredited casino at Casinomeister because of its unethical marketing to sister and extraneous sites.

ACCREDITED CASINOS POLICY CHANGE
Marketing Standards have been updated to include:

Marketing Standards
Must not use false, misleading or deceptive advertising.
Must not spam, and must take appropriate actions against any affiliates or any third parties who do spam.
NEW!! Must not cross promote to other properties without giving proper credit to affiliates and/or their advertisers.

In essence what we are asking from CR/RA is a marketing standard according to CM, the way it should be.

 

[Renee]

So if you stick with the no tags in the newsletter, and there is no previous tracking information (different PC, etc.) like the scenario I described, does that player then manually get tagged to the last affiliate that sent this player to make a deposit?

If not, then yes that would be fair. At least someone would be benefiting from sending that player to CR.

If there is no tracking info on the computer, and the player visits through the newsletter, then yes it will come in under the newsletter tag.

At least then we would have a chance. The scenario you described is possible, but it would be a lot more rare than an affiliates player being lost to CR as they come in untagged through the newsletter. The most likely scenario would be that the proper tags would be in place, and the right affiliate would get credit for most recently sending that player.

It appears your bosses won't even consider removing the links from the logos, tagging them (physically tagging them, not just depending on cookies being there) to the last referring affiliate is, in my opinion, the fairest way to keep them live.

You say tags (cookies) don't get overwritten when a player visits a casino webpage through an untagged link. So what happens if my player visited another portal and clicked through several links to CR casinos, but did nothing, and then clicks on an untagged link in the newsletter and signs up and plays, wouldn't I then lose that player to the other affiliate? If that is possible, then the scenario you described could already be happening.

Since we tag via last referrer, if you sent the player to a casino where they didn't sign up, then Dom sent the same player to the same casino and they did sign up, she would get the player because she was the last to refer that player to that casino website.

If you send the player to GT where they do not sign up, but then Dom sends the player to CA where they sign up, Dom will get the player at CA. If the player then types in GT and signs up, the player will be tagged to you at GT because your aff tag was the last on that site.

FYI

888.com was removed as an accredited casino at Casinomeister because of its unethical marketing to sister and extraneous sites.

Quote:
<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset"> ACCREDITED CASINOS POLICY CHANGE
Marketing Standards have been updated to include:

Marketing Standards
Must not use false, misleading or deceptive advertising.
Must not spam, and must take appropriate actions against any affiliates or any third parties who do spam.
NEW!! Must not cross promote to other properties without giving proper credit to affiliates and/or their advertisers. </td></tr></tbody></table>
In essence what we are asking from CR/RA is a marketing standard according to CM, the way it should be.

We are not accredited at CMs.

About CR, I hope you are successful Renee and the links are removed in time. The longer you keep at it with this type of marketing more and more Casino's will start to do the same. So for me it's not so much about CR itself, but the example they are setting..

As I mentioned earlier, I can fight for anything but it doesn't mean I'm going to necessarily win every time.

Anything I can do to help?

I don't think so.

 

[Perc]

Since we tag via last referrer, if you sent the player to a casino where they didn't sign up, then Dom sent the same player to the same casino and they did sign up, she would get the player because she was the last to refer that player to that casino website.

If you send the player to GT where they do not sign up, but then Dom sends the player to CA where they sign up, Dom will get the player at CA. If the player then types in GT and signs up, the player will be tagged to you at GT because your aff tag was the last on that site.

You may have missed my point. Say I have a player at GT and he visits Dom's site, clicks on a link to CA and does nothing. Later, he clicks on a link to CA in the newsletter and signs up. My player would then be tagged to Dom. That is very similar to the scenario you described, only worse because they don't even have to sign up for this to happen.

My point was that your argument for not following my suggestion, could already be happening.

That player is getting the newsletter because I sent him to GT, and I should get credit for him clicking on any link found in it, regardless of the tracking cookies currently on their PC.

If that player did sign up at CA after clicking on a link on Dom's site, regardless of them playing or not, I think it's fair that the newsletter would then contain her tag.

My suggestion is the only fair way I can think of to keep the links live. Either that or just get rid of them.

You could also send one newsletter for each account and have each one tagged to whichever affiliate sent them. If someone had an account at 20 CR casinos, obviously they wouldn't want the same newsletter 20 times, but it would also solve the issue.

I'm just trying to help by giving you my suggestions. You keep saying there is no fair way to tag the newsletter links, well there you go, there's the fairest way I can think of. At least the last affiliate to send the player would benefit, where currently only CR benefits when someone clicks on one of those links (provided there are no tracking cookies already in place).

Not everyone may agree that tagging the newsletter that way is fair, but I'm pretty sure most would agree that leaving them untagged is worse.

 

[inspiration]

Got this email from crewards@@news.c-rewards.com

in the header :

Tom - Account Transfer

I thought hey what is this ?

It turned out to be a Promo from Nostalgia :

Our system shows that your name has been
generated on the list below.
* GET £/€/$20 JUST FOR VERIFYING YOUR AGE
To claim your winnings please click here

So players are not curious to see click and see what this means ??

---

About the newsletters :
this will remain a major issue and it is very complicated.

eg :

Affiliate X refers a player to Casino Action
player deposits and did not win.
player receives a CR promo email for Casino Classic finds it interesting and signs up, since these mailers do not have our btag this player is now aquired by CR/RA not the affiliate.

Will this player receive 2 newsletters (current situation)?