RevDuck
Affiliate Program Representative
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2025
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 7
Over the last few years, the relationship between affiliate programs and arbitrage teams has supposedly evolved.
Before, it was simple and honest:
traffic → payout → goodbye.
No illusions, no “partnership” talk, just fast ROI and short-term thinking.
Today, everyone talks about “partnerships,” LTV, and long-term growth.
But in reality, in many cases, it’s still the same old model — just rebranded.
Yes, the market has changed:
But here’s the uncomfortable part.
Affiliate programs say they want quality and LTV, but often:
A market stuck between two models:
They bring:
The real question:
Is “partnership” even possible without real data sharing and service involvement?
Or is it just a convenient word until something goes wrong?
And one more thing worth thinking about:
In the long run, what actually keeps you working with someone —
better terms, or better service?
Because many of us have stayed with “average numbers” simply because the communication, speed, and attitude were right.
Curious to hear real experiences — from both sides.
P.S. Herę is article about it
Before, it was simple and honest:
traffic → payout → goodbye.
No illusions, no “partnership” talk, just fast ROI and short-term thinking.
Today, everyone talks about “partnerships,” LTV, and long-term growth.
But in reality, in many cases, it’s still the same old model — just rebranded.
Yes, the market has changed:
- traffic is more expensive
- accounts get banned faster
- regulation is tighter
- mass low-quality traffic stopped paying off
But here’s the uncomfortable part.
Affiliate programs say they want quality and LTV, but often:
- keep analytics closed
- change terms retroactively
- delay payouts or decisions
- treat arbitrage teams as replaceable risk, not partners
- chase quick ROI anyway
- cut traffic quality under pressure
- disappear when things go wrong
- refuse to take responsibility for player value and brand impact
A market stuck between two models:
- the old one is dead
- the new one requires trust, transparency, and shared responsibility — and many aren’t ready for that
They bring:
- channel and GEO expertise
- fast testing and feedback
- insights that directly affect offers and products
The real question:
Is “partnership” even possible without real data sharing and service involvement?
Or is it just a convenient word until something goes wrong?
And one more thing worth thinking about:
In the long run, what actually keeps you working with someone —
better terms, or better service?
Because many of us have stayed with “average numbers” simply because the communication, speed, and attitude were right.
Curious to hear real experiences — from both sides.
P.S. Herę is article about it
