Playshare Shaves?

[GFPC]

As i have said many times in the past - there has to be a way to seriously audit these programs continually. Not just 1 time when something is brought to light.
Of course after its reported on the forums everyone can do tests and its possible the program stopped the SHAVE. It has to be done secretly and frequently! Patterns need to be scene and shown. Tests for each program conducted at least 5-6 times a year with at least 3-4 different accounts.

This of course costs money - but it is needed and serious affiliates need to start working together on this. I mean really working together to fight this bullshit...

I certainly have had shaving happen to me recently. I got my issue resolved and took a different approach but still feel sick about it. Its happened to me with other places as well and each time it got sorted after months and months of non stop battling!

I take the personal opinion you need to be totally aggressive with this stuff. Come right out as call it like it is. Its no longer safe to work in this industry because everyone is so hush hush... lets be politically correct. Lets mediate this and get it sorted while other affiliates get FXXKED.

So let me put this on the table - many of us suggested testers and everything like that many times. Lets seriously do this on a large scale.

I have at least 5 people I can trusts fully that will make deposits fully. I am sure we can get at least 20-30 testers who will be on stand by to test any program. We need to test sites with multiple Ips and locations. And at varrying times - not all the same time - at least few days - week - month apart to account for errors.

Each webmaster also should be responsible for the testing required. So lets say 5 testers are needed to test a program and the deposits are $50 each. Well the webmaster will need to pay in $250. Something like that.

The point is we may need a website to do this and report all the findings.

It can be a costly endeavor if we do tests randomly on large scales lets even say 4 casinos a month or more could run 1K a month.

If people are serious about something -- Lets do it.. Enough talk!

I will donate and be a huge part of the team 100% I will test any site anytime and do this for my community!

Wake up everyone - smell the coffee. Lets all put our money where our month is so to speak!!!

A site can be done in no time - we could even use a logo type seal!! Not to compete with any organization - but to compliment them!!

We need more layers of protection!!! Sites with the logo have brands that will be tested and casino operators may think twice before shaving these affiliates..

Webhosting, Money, Time, Coding, content, anything you need!! I am in - I will contribute to all these areas!!

Lets just do something - not just blow air!

 

[Guard Dog]

I would be in for this sort of thing. We could use AGD easy enough with a new subdomain or section. Could also use CasinoGuardDog.com. The coding for it's intended purpose is still in progress (should have been done months ago), but it would flesh that site out a lot more to have this type of thing on it as well.

let me know your thoughts and we can work together to come up with a solid plan.

 

[Aussie-Dave]

I can't say it any better than arkyt has:
(extract from public GPWA post)

Regarding auditing - anything short of a totally 100% independent company showing up at the servers doorstep unannounced and gathering data - IMO, its not a legit audit.

The above tells us how every audit in the gaming industry should be conducted.

If a program is permitted to submit data to the auditor, the audit can only ever be as good as the data submitted.

The GP fiasco is a prime example

If the auditors are in any way shape or form connected to those being audited - any and all such audits should be considered null and void!

Again using the GP example, eCOGRA is a sham. Their audits should be considered null and void, whilst their seals are nothing more than a marketing ploy by Microgaming.

Conflict of interest is riff in this industry - it's alive and well at eCOGRA.

And the rest, I'll let you figure it out!


Cheers



Dave

 

[Aussie-Dave]

I agree with everything you say GFPC right up to the point of:

we could even use a logo type seal!!

F#ck the seals!
These things are the cause of more conflicts of interest than I care to recall.

• The OPA Seal - Mike Craig abused them with Playtech.
• eCOGRA Seals mean absolutely Jack!
• The GPWA Seals - worth about as much as the eCOGRA Seals.

That's just 3 examples, I could give you a lot more.
At the end of the day what SEALS fundamentally represent (least in the gaming industry) is not what these proposed audits or site should be founded on.



Cheers



Dave

 

[inspiration]

Auditing & Monitoring affiliate tracking

read the new post

 

[bonustreak]

This of course costs money - but it is needed and serious affiliates need to start working together on this. I mean really working together to fight this bullshit...

Streak Gaming is in!! Andy that's a great idea something needs to be done asap with this and the Star Partner stuff happening we have to get these programs under control!

 

[Aussie-Dave]

we have to get these programs under control!

The only way to get control of these program - least to have them adapt to a fair playing field for all, is to boycott every program who tries anything to stick it to affiliates.

The give anyone a 2'nd chance in this industry, spells game over for affiliates.

Side note - I don't go to convention because frankly I don't see the point in mixing with programs who are probably shafting me. The irony of attending parties and such at these conferences is the money used to fund them are probably gained from shafting affiliates.


Cheers



Dave

 

[GamTrak]

I will donate and be a huge part of the team 100% I will test any site anytime and do this for my community!

...

Lets just do something - not just blow air!

Count me in! I will help where I can.

 

[bonusgeek]

I would like to help also, but there needs to be some serious thought to this whole system if it's going to be effective. Like Lotso mentioned, what is going to happen when a program is caught shaving? I think it's great that a lot of webmasters put up blacklisted pages, I just don't know how effective it is without more unity. I am just as guilty, I don't have the time to constantly update these pages everytime a program or casino does something underhanded. It takes constant monitoring at casinomeister and all the webmaster forums and I don't have the manpower to do it or I would never get any work done. Some people might argue that it's our job to monitor this stuff. Well I agree with that to a point. Most do the best we can by promoting brands that we know are good for players, but I don't feel like it's my job to list every casino that a player should avoid. That's what casinomeister is for imho.

That being said if there was a way to facilitate the whole process I would love to hear more on that. For example what about a master script or feed that us webmasters could put on our sites that does all the updating for us? It would list programs like Betwin who are cheating both players and affiliates alike. The premise for showing it to players is if they are cheating their own business partners, surely they are going to cheat you the player as well and they should be avoided. That's a list no program wants to be on. What that also does though is take all the updating out of the equation which in turn should make it easier for more webmasters to participate in something like this. How can we be the most effective is the key to keeping these programs honest and more affiliate participation is the key to that. An auto updating script solves both of those problems.

So at this juncture I would be willing to play my part and pitch in financially for testing and the development of a script or feed if someone wanted to take the role making something like that happen. But this has to be done right right to be effective, and without a solid plan for what happens when the programs are caught, it's just sort of winging it.

 

[arkyt]

F#ck the seals!
These things are the cause of more conflicts of interest than I care to recall.

I agree - as long as the auditor is getting paid in any manner by those they are auditing - the audits IMO, can not be trusted. Its my belief that it has to be a totally independent entity doing the auditing with absolutely no connection to the ones being audited in order to be trusted.

 

[WCD Admin]

Link to Inspirations new thread (about ways to audit/monitor programs)
http:// www. affiliateguarddog. com/forums/auditing-monitoring-affiliate-tracking-t3446.html

Link to my new thread (what we can do about offenders)
http:// www. affiliateguarddog. com/forums/idea-defend-ourselves-hostile-industry-t3449.html

 

[GFPC]

I finally took a day off today and planned to come back tomorrow!! LOL - Well i decided to take 1/2 day off. So back in action!!

Yeah I see your point Dave on the Seals! maybe your right. My idea though is to have as many affiliates as possible join in this. I would rather like to see affiliates test programs and trusted members of the forums.

Not just a single test - but multiple tests. The system of course needs to be discussed and this can be a costly ordeal - but if several webmasters pitch in say 2 or 3 times per year a set fee it could work.

The idea is every affiliate who joins this would have to agree if a program is found to be shaving or cheating affiliates - they must stop working with them.

A complete ban on the program. Any program who is banned - no member is permitted to advertise them. If a new member wants to join - yet he promotes one of the sites on the ban list - he/she will only be able to join if they remove the site that is banned.

The reason behind this is simple - affiliates will not be able to take bribes or payments from these programs while others are getting shafted!

We have to do this as a group and do it right - and i know there will issues but we must start somewhere.

I will use myself as an example to show you a problem that could exist. Lets use Bewinners as an example. I spend a great deal of time and energy and resources to make sure affiliates are aware of their shaddy terms, and rogue behaviour. What they are doing is shaving as well. Yet i am still promoting them on my sites. It looks rather rediculous right?

Well the reason I still have them on my site is because I follow the argument that if i remove them I will lose all future earnings and its hard to bite that pill. Since after 3 months no players they shut down account.

Yet for this new idea/testing - under no circumstance can a member promote the site that is considered banned! The only way to unbreak the ban is based maybe on voting by its members.

To break a ban - a program would have to correct all areas of the problem and pay every affiliate owed money.

I know its hard to police all of it - but the site with all its members would have chances to vote and remove and add bans.

Of course these tests would have to be done - and documented proof would need to be replicated several times on diff ips, locations and times.

Only when majority feel the ban is warranted would it happen.

I honestly feel if this became something large - the seal idea i thought of was not so much a seal like you think it is.. but rather a logo on webmasters sites that follow the rules of the membership site of affiliates who test programs.

If 100 members exist - these 100 members can use the logo! - Just an idea!

Anyways its a challenge and I think it would be great to have a conference on this somehow on this.. so we can all speak together at one time..

 

[Aussie-Dave]

Hi GFPC (all),

I think it's a good idea what you've put forward - anything is better than sitting here knowing your getting shafting but not able to prove jack!

The major hurdle which will be the clincher/deal breaker is getting all affiliate (or least the majority) on board.

Hypothetically XYZ casino gets busted shaving and it gets flagged. How many affiliates who are promoting XYZ will kick them to curb? I can tell you now, not too many. Especially if this casino is one of the better performers for them.

In real money terms...even if they're getting shafted by XYZ casino, most will think well I'd rather get $x,xxx now that nothing if I yank the program.

JMO but if 90% of affiliates stood back to back and yanked XYZ program for a week or two, I can guarantee this casino and others would quickly rethink their stance on shaving and affiliates would be at last on a even and fair playing field. Nothing good ever comes without a fight.

Look back over history...The truckers union in the USA...Unions all over the world, not one hasn't had a battle on their hands to change their industry for the benefit of the workers. Nothing changes if Nothing changes...

Problem is as it always has been the majority of affiliate can not agree of jack. The casinos know it and use it to f#ck people over. Ironic hey



Cheers



Dave

 

[GFPC]

I have to agree with you 100%. Your absolutely right! Its a hard task to get done, but certainly worth the efforts. The way i see it - nothing tried nothing gained. SO there is really nothing to lose. Affiliates have come together on a couple of things in the past and present. Grand Prive is one of them.

The other is Bewinners - although the major big affiliates of Bwin are hush hush and don't want to support the cause - I think there are enough who when we are all put together with a common goal - we will affect their bottom line.

Its a good start so far discussing it. Even if the big affiliates do nothing to support any of this - that is ok.

 

[dominique]

This has been debated periodically over the years.

The first issue is that no one can reach 90% of all affiliates.

Even if all the aff boards cooperate on such things ( and I am working on that), actually the majority of affiliates never visit the boards. And the larger ones in particular. And the programs frankly don't much care for small affiliates, they are work intensive, require the same expenses as the large ones and the return is often just free branding.

The second issue is, when it hits the pocket book hard to comply, affiliates will choose to put food on the table rather than solidarity.

So, first one would have to develop reach online. And then, there would have to be something in it for affiliates.

What this is in effect proposing is a form of strike, like brick and mortar unions implement.

People belong to unions because it gives them job security and better benefits and pay. They may risk their jobs by striking because they have seen unions secure a better life for them. No such thing online. No security, no benefits. At best one can negotiate fair treatment.

These are the reasons any attempts over the years to organize in such a fashion have failed.

 

[GamTrak]

Dom has hit it on the nail 100% and the reason I think we need to start/worry more about detecting the shaving and go from there.

 

[Aussie-Dave]

Dom has hit it on the nail 100% and the reason I think we need to start/worry more about detecting the shaving and go from there.

I agree Dom has nailed it!

Nothing ventured nothing gained...On the same token Robin you/I have seen it all before. Lets say we catch a place cheating, then what?

I'm not saying it's a bad idea but as Dom pointed out, "first one would have to develop reach online. And then, there would have to be something in it for affiliates."

On the other hand things like this have never worked because affiliates haven't been suffering. However most are now - Pain is a good motivator!

IMHO the balance between programs/affiliates needs to change and change quickly.
Otherwise we wont be just living on our knees, we'll be crawling around in the gutter hoping to find loose change.

Edit: As far reach goes...Most of the super affiliates don't care because they are not hurting financially. And apart from a handful of committed seasoned affiliates, I see our best bet in recruiting the young blood in our industry. Remember they are us 10 years ago.

And if we are going ahead with something like this, we discuss it in a closed private forum.



Cheers



Dave

 

[GamTrak]

Nothing ventured nothing gained...On the same token Robin you/I have seen it all before. Lets say we catch a place cheating, then what?

I'm not sure what happens after a program is identified for shaving. Other than a personal satisfaction that I can trust a program there may not be much that can be done without the help of the major forums.

The majority of us have the skill to put them on blast via the search engines, but making the majority of affiliates aware is an issue that we may not be able to address.

 

[arkyt]

I'm not sure what happens after a program is identified for shaving. Other than a personal satisfaction that I can trust a program there may not be much that can be done without the help of the major forums.

10% of affiliates make 90% of all earnings ... just because one or a few of the 90% that makes 10% identify and drop a shaving program - is it really going to hurt the program?

I am conifident that if affiliates identified a shaver and every forum online blacklisted that program, that anyone making good money with that program would continue to work with them.

I think GP put several nails in our coffins - programs seen that affiliates are not in any position to do anything about being shafted and they've started pushing the boundaries even more.

I think if the masses identified cheaters - the only benefit it would have would be to give the USA government more leverage to keep the industry down.... If the cheating is truly that bad, maybe that would be a good thing.

 

[WCD Admin]

This is what I suggest for that as a starter: http:// www. affiliateguarddog. com /forums/idea-defend-ourselves-hostile-industry-t3449.html

Comments please? Even if it only took away several million, it would be a worthy endeavor. Not to mention eliminate a lot of headache removing content even if it didn't hurt the program - assuming you don't want to promote rogues. You could also easily opt out by removing the DIV at any point you disagreed with consensus, so no one would REALLY control your site. You could even keep your pages live, just remove all inbound links to them therefore not losing out on the SEO from those casino review pages either.