Rivalwide Progressive Issue - Rogue Poll.

[Vladi]

1st I LOL at the 400 Affiliates banner ad at the top of this page.

Secondly, you could do a better job explaining what this is all about:

RE: 400 Affiliates Earnings Calculations Change
Summary: This change was not sent out as notification to their affiliate partners and appears to be done in a very 'odd' manner (i.e., at the end of the month).

400 Affiliates are the ONLY program to do this (Rival program) and they implemented this without regards to their partners (consultation or otherwise)

I had to go and find another thread to work out what exactly the problem is. Perhaps you could update the original post with a concise explanation like "400 Affiliates have started deducting progressive contributions on each dollar wagered from affiliate commissions" or something and maybe a link to the original thread?

Also the 3 examples you give would be clearer if you compared the same numbers - i.e. deposits $5000 - show commission without progressive play and then show commission change if player plays progressives. Otherwise none of the examples are directly comparable.

All in all it doesn't sound good to me. Changes like this don't happen by accident.

 

[thisisvegasLina]

I am the AM for This is Vegas, part of the 400affiliates group. I would like to point out that this doesn't seem to be restricted just to Rival software. I have an affiliate that is asking right now all of his programs so we can find out some more. I've been told some of them have already replied saying they don't have a clue while others have replied stating that contributions are deducted from affiliate earnings. These are from a respected Microgaming and RealtimeGaming casino group.

As soon as I get more information I will let you know.

Lina Jonsson

 

[dendrite]

Intertops used to take a "progressive contribution" every month from me when I promoted them, but that was a couple of years ago

When combined with their basic 20% commission, the jackpot contribution made the 'basic' commission very very low. The result (for me) was that they simply were not worth promoting

I don't know if they still do this, since they moved from MG to RTG...?

 

[Guard Dog]

I am the AM for This is Vegas, part of the 400affiliates group. I would like to point out that this doesn't seem to be restricted just to Rival software. I have an affiliate that is asking right now all of his programs so we can find out some more. I've been told some of them have already replied saying they don't have a clue while others have replied stating that contributions are deducted from affiliate earnings. These are from a respected Microgaming and RealtimeGaming casino group.

As soon as I get more information I will let you know.

Lina Jonsson

Hi Lina,

The problem here is twofold (IMO:

1. The commissions calculation now being enforced is retroactive and was not even communicated to affiliates prior to it's enactment.

2. The progressive calculation appears to be on 'wagering', which can then well-overrun deposit amounts for other players. (Meaning: The negative amount applied to the affiliate's account can be many times higher than the deposit amount from the same player)

 

[Steve S]

Thisisvegaslina:

Thank you for your contribution to this thread. If you can, would you please name those programs charging affiliates for contributions to progressive jackpot pools? The lack of significant participation in on this topic by the affiliate programs is disheartening. We are your business partners and we deserve answers!

It is issues such as these and the virtual solid wall of silence on the behalf of the affiliate programs that has affiliates thinking that there were members of some of the affiliate programs on the grassy knoll in Dallas the day the Kennedy was shot and still others carted away the UFO wreckage and alien bodies from Roswell, New Mexico.

In any successful relationship, business or otherwise, trust is a fundamental building block upon which the relationship is based. Remove it, and more often than not the relationship begins to deteriorate and crumble. We were led to believe that we would be paid a certain percentage of player losses and we are not. Now when this is discovered, the affiliate programs have no clear answers nor proposed solution to repair this damaged relationship nor make we the affiliates "whole" - to restore to us what was taken away in violation of our agreement. Pretty disgusting.

I run a small business full-time not associated with the gaming industry. Many other affiliates either do the same or are employed in the "real" business world. I cannot speak for others, but, if this same situation had occurred in the "real world" my reaction would have been one of "what the hell is going on here?" and then once I found out the details "you sneaky fxxxing bastard!" I do not care if you hid these conditions in the fine print, you know this is not in the spirit of our agreement, you know this is not what I signed up for!" and then I would look for another customer, vendor, competitor to take their place.

I know there will be those that will say that I should always check the fine print, yada, yada, yada. And they are correct. However, it is hard enough to make a living in today's world as it is. I do not have time to constantly check that everyone I deal with is living up to their end of the bargain we struck. Furthermore, if you are the kind of person to screw me with fine print and technicalities, then I really do not have a place for you in my life, business or otherwise.

My point with this is that we, as affiliates, come from different backgrounds to be sure. However, we understand things like profit margins, the need to cover fixed and variable operating costs and the risks of loss. We signed up to be paid an agreed upon percentage of player losses. If the affiliate programs and the casinos the represent, really believe that charging us for contributions to progressive jackpot pools is necessary and fair, then explain it to us. We can understand. We should not have to find out about this practice in this manner. We are your partners and we deserve better.

 

[Peter-Jan]

My analysis: A real revshare includes sharing in cost (and revenue) of progressives, at the same % as your revhare deal.

Key question IMO: How big (in % of wagers) are total progressives being paid out?

If affiliates are charged 2% of wagers for progressives than progressives paid out better be 2% / (weighted average revshare commission % across affiliate base), i.e. somewhere around 4-5% I guess?

In other words, if progressives = 2% of wagers and affiliates pay the entire bill, this is not in line with the revshare agreements we have a very big issue.

Secondary issue: If all affiliates are all charged the same % (regardless of whether this is 100% or the fair overall %), than small affiliates are subsidizing the big affiliates because they pay this fee based on wagers but earn less revshare per wager.

Rating advice:
- Not being warned about changes = Retro-active T&C change
- Keeping this term = Predatory T&C
- Not being warned + keeping = ROGUE

 

[KasinoKing]

I'm not really bothered, as long as they treat their players fairly.
What percentage of players play progressives anyway? I know I don't!

Their bonuses are mostly crap anyway - surprised they even have any players!
Especially ThisIsn'tVegas - total waste of web-space!

KK

 

[JSM_Jaxon]

Hi everyone,

Sorry for the delayed response as I was waiting for a lot of info and discussion to take place prior to making my initial statement.

I would like to start by saying that this is not a 400affiliates specific issue and that ALL white label Rival casinos are processed and supported by the same Rival group that we are. All calculations and procedure implementation is controlled by Rival. Individual programs are all different and handle their customers and affiliates differently (management), but the support and processing is all the same. ALL White Labels use the same payout table for Affiliate Commissions, which is minused progressive adjustments. Regal/Superior are incorrect in saying they do not do this. This has been confirmed by a source within Rival. Although the programs have a way to change the settings in regards to progressive deductions, I have been informed that none of the other programs have changed these settings. At current, we are in discussions with Rival to implement a system to allow operators to change the setting on a mass scale and not the current individual manual “override” that it requires currently.

The adjustment to the ANW calculation has been the same since the introduction of progressives and this is NOT a retroactive change. As you all know, progressive slots are funded by a percentage of wagers made to the jackpot. It is the same for online casinos as it is for land based casinos. Affiliate commissions have always been based on ANW (adjusted net worth) of a player multiplied by the affiliates revenue share percentage. When Rival introduced progressives, the calculation was amended to include progressive deductions as part of the ANW (dep – chargebacks –cashouts – Progressive adjustments). As previously stated, the progressive adjustment is a percentage (5-7%) of all wagers that are made to the slot. This adjustment is a deduction that BOTH the casino and affiliate SHARE based on the affiliates rev-share.

Casinos and their affiliates are partners and we incur the same effects from all situations, whether good or bad. Our affiliates essentially have a 35% stake in the casinos and in the “real world”, when you are partners with someone and have a stake in the company, you would incur a percentage of the fees and operating cost based on your stake just as you earn profits. When progressive were introduced from Rival, the braintrust behind the scenes was looking at the “big picture” and what is appealing to what our casinos/affiliates thrive upon; our players. Players like to play progressives due to the nature of the jackpots and if the progressives bring in more traffic to your site/our casinos, then that is a positive thing. Another important thing to note is that these contributions to the pot that have been deducted from both of us, benefit neither the casino nor Rival monetarily. These are contributions that go directly to the player and no one ever sees any benefit from these contributions but them.

This particular thread about whether to rogue 400Affiliates alone was based on incorrect facts. It is important to note that we are NOT the only group within Rival to share progressive deductions with our partners. How could we be when Rival is the governing body for invoicing and payments that all white labels subscribe to? This a deduction that affects all Rival based casinos and I would urge you to ask questions to other software providers and casinos as well. There are other very reputable casino groups that have identical deductions to what we currently have with no mention anywhere at all about affiliates paying progressive deductions -- some of these casinos have gained accreditation on some affiliate sites with very stringent admission policies in place.

All this is to say, we are on your side as your partners and we (our casino management and affiliate teams) are collaboratively working with other Rival casino operators and Rival to make sure that the progressive/affiliate structure is one that is pleasing to both affiliates and casino. Rival is a very accommodating bunch so we’re sure we’ll have something more to tell you shortly. We will continue to sort through all of the concerns and disagreements that have been put forth to find a solution that will satisfy our affiliates.

Regards,

Jaxon

 

[Peter-Jan]

In principle yes I agree that it makes sense that affs pay their % on progressives. (Maybe better start calling it gross profitshare though.) You need monthly contributions for that as progressive wins are so big that A. With negative carry over affs would close their accounts and B. Without neg carry over this would be a huge financial risk added for the programs. So far so good.

That said, for each individual affiliate the deductions are (% of progressive contributions) * (HIS/HER revshare) right? Or do all affiliates, regardless of their rev share deal, pay the same % contribution (namely the average)?

Do other software vendors have this progressive deductions too? Because now that we're on the topic we might as well address the low player value Rival generates (so I read and hear everywhere)...

 

[inspiration]

Thanks for the update Mr.Jaxon really appreciated. I always get a quick reply and support by 400 affiliates, kudos to that !

Got payment on 9th that is fast too. ;D

When I select the commission report progress. adj. have always been there

'Real Players' : Players that made their first deposit during the report period.
'All Players': The total of all players that have signed up for Fun or Real accounts during the report period.
Click on any of the highlighted column titles to see the values displayed in a chart.
Click on a campaign name to get campaign and banner details.
Click on any player count to get a Player Summary for that campaign.
'ANW': Deposits - Cashouts - Chargebacks - Progressive Adjustments.

Ofcourse it is something I would like to be more fair especially when players who play progressives deposit small amounts but costing us a fortune.

BTW 400aff is a not a rogue program IMO.

 

[slotplayer]

Do other software vendors have this progressive deductions too? Because now that we're on the topic we might as well address the low player value Rival generates (so I read and hear everywhere)...

Red Returns, and I'm now wondering if Brightshare has it.

 

[bonustreak]

Thanks for the post Jaxon

 

[Steve S]

Hey Jax:

Thanks for coming in here and posting. I believe this issue needs a full airing and your input is greatly appreciated.

Jax is correct when he says that the practice of deducting contributions to progressive slot pools is not limited to 400 Affiliates. Every Rival program I promote was doing this. I have talked to all of the programs that I do business with. The three other Rival programs I promote have told me that they will no longer charge me for these contributions. One has credited me back for past contributions to the progressive slot pools. As far as the casinos with other software:

The following programs have told me they do not charge affiliates for contributions to progressive slot pools, or anything else not listed on their websites:

Best Casino Partner
Casino Coins
Mainstreet Affiliates
C-Planet

 

[JSM_Jaxon]

That said, for each individual affiliate the deductions are (% of progressive contributions) * (HIS/HER revshare) right? Or do all affiliates, regardless of their rev share deal, pay the same % contribution (namely the average)?

Do other software vendors have this progressive deductions too? Because now that we're on the topic we might as well address the low player value Rival generates (so I read and hear everywhere)...

Hi Peter-Jan,

For each individual affiliate, the deductions will never be the same from month to month and all affiliates will see different deductions. This is determined by the amount wagered by their tagged players and the affiliate rev share %. The calculation for the way deductions are currently set in the Rival system is (affiliates tagged players progressive wagering * 5-7%(dependent on progressive games played) * % of Rev Share). 5-7% is the amount of each wager that is deducted from each bet to keep the pot constantly growing. Each of our four progressive games deducts a varying %.

From what I understand from Rival and our own casino management, this is a normal policy in the industry and Rival’s progressive system is identical to one of the other software “giants”. We have confirmed with a number of operators, some as I mentioned accredited on some very big forums, that have identical policies in place. Overall in the industry, it is not abnormal to see progressive deductions.

Regards,

Jaxon

 

[WCD Admin]

2. The progressive calculation appears to be on 'wagering', which can then well-overrun deposit amounts for other players. (Meaning: The negative amount applied to the affiliate's account can be many times higher than the deposit amount from the same player)

Can someone refute or deny this? I'll admit I'm a bit confused. I follow what everyone is saying but my head revolts when asked to do the math for myself ;D

If what I understand is correct it's still theft (regardless of who else is doing it). If you take a negative commission on the total loss of the players funds you should not need glasses to see that you're taking money from the affiliate. That's not the way land based casinos do it if I'm correct.

They take the % out of the coins IN, not amount wagered.

Thanks!

 

[Steve S]

Jax:

I have a few problems with your post:

You state that in the "real world" partners incur a percentage of fees and operating costs and earn a share of the profit based upon their stake in the company. And this is a fair assessment. It is apparently a statement meant to justify in some way the charges to our affiliate commissions for contributions to the progressive slot pools.

However we do not own a stake in the company. We do not earn a share of company profits nor do we share the company risk of loss. We cannot make management decisions. We cannot determine how cash receipts are applied to the expenditures necessary to produce them. We cannot determine who gets paid and when. We cannot access company accounting records or detailed player statistics.

We are customer and vendor. We provide players to you. We are business partners to that extent only.

As for the assertion that the deduction of contributions to progressive slot pools does not benefit the casino ownership, Rival or the affiliate program, I would have to disagree with that as well.

Jax, you and other Rival affiliate managers have told me that the contributions to the progressive jackpot pools are split between affiliate program and affiliate. In your last post, you say affiliate and casino. Either way this is still a bad deal for the affiliate. I am going with the first explanation as I have heard it from more than one source. If in fact it is the casino and not the affiliate program that is splitting the contribution to the progressive jackpot pool, it changes things, but not for the affiliate.

These entities; casino, Rival and affiliate program benefit in at least the three following ways:

Benefit One

The casinos/Rival/affiliate programs are using the affiliates to fund their progressive jackpot pools.

If the casino did not have affiliates and players came directly to it, the casino itself would have to set aside the 5% of progressive wagers to fund an account from which to pay the progressive jackpot win or be prepared to fund it out of current cash flows. I think that most of us would agree that the prudent way to be prepared to pay progressive jackpots would be to fund an account to pay them from. This would provide for smoother cash flows and cost certainty.

The fact that the affiliates and affiliate programs are paying for this means that the monies they would have been forced to allocate to this fund are now able to be directed elsewhere as their needs dictate. Affiliates are effectively paying for all of this thru reduced commission checks.

Benefit Two

Whomever is receiving all of the contributions to the progressive jackpot pools (Jax, I believe you said that Rival processed all payments, etc.?) is now able to earn interest on monies held within the fund until they are paid out to jackpot winners.

Benefit Three

Permanent reductions in affiliate commission percentages.

I have seen a lot of comments along the lines of “What’s the big deal? I can’t see how it affects me.” that sort of thing. Please consider the following:

Before I get started, please know that I am trying to make a point here, to illustrate the possible adverse effects of this policy on affiliate commissions and support my contention that these terms are, for the affiliate, not fair or in our best interests.

Disclaimer: some of the numerical examples here may reside on the extreme side of possibility, but I am using them to make a point.

Suppose you the affiliate acquire three players during a month:

Player A plays blackjack, deposits $4,000, loses it all.
Player B plays craps, deposits $4,000, loses it all.
Player C plays regular slots, deposits $1,000, loses it all.

Assuming you are on 40% RevShare for the sake of easy calculations, you stand to earn $9,000 X 40% or $3,600.

Now suppose the following:

Player A plays blackjack, deposits $4,000, loses it all.
Player B plays craps, deposits $4,000, loses it all.
Player C plays progressive slots, deposits $1,000, wins nothing and loses it all.

Assuming a 5% contribution to the progressive jackpot pool, player C has wagered $1,000 on progressive slots. Your contribution to the progressive slots pools is 40% of 5% or 2%. In this case, $1,000 X 2% or $20.

Your commission is now $9,000 X 40% or $3,600 minus $20 or $3,580. This comes out to a commission percentage of $3,580 in commission divided by $9,000 in player losses or 39.78%. I don’t think any of us have a real problem with that.

Consider however that Player C deposits $1,000 and on their last spin before they have exhausted their deposit, they win a $100,000 jackpot. Instead of cashing it out, they lose it all back. Now you commission calculation is as follows:

Player A plays blackjack, deposits $4,000, loses it all.
Player B plays craps, deposits $4,000, loses it all.
Player C plays progressive slots, deposits $1,000, wins $100,000 and loses it all.

Your progressive slots player has $101,000 in progressive slots play. However, since $20 had already been contributed to the progressive slot pool, you are going to have the credited back to your account when that player wins (or so I have been told the system is supposed to work). So, now your contribution to the progressive slot pool is calculated as follows:

$101,000 in progressive slot play X 2% = $2,020 less the $20 credit for a net deduction of $2,000.

This means your final commission calculation is this:

$9,000 X 40% or $3,600 minus $2,000 or $1,600. This comes out to a commission percentage of $1,600 in commission divided by $9,000 in player losses or 17.78%. I have a real problem with this even if the rest of you do not. This is not what I signed up for.

Think something like this can’t happen? It already has. To me.

Furthermore, I suspect that this has been happening to most if not all of the larger affiliates from the introduction of this progressive slot model. Only, as this would be buried in a much larger volume of players and a significantly higher commission dollar amount, it would probably go unnoticed. It would take a perfect set of circumstances to expose this practice.

The conspiracy theorists among us are probably of the opinion that this is exactly what was intended by Rival as the idea of having contributions to progressive jackpots deducted from affiliate commissions and the programming and calculations necessary to implement this model must have taken conscious thought and had a cost involved to make it all work.

I cannot honestly think of a scenario where an affiliate can come out even with a progressive slot player using this model. It will always result in a reduction of the commission due to the affiliate, sometimes with significant effect.

Another concern that I have yet to see addressed is that according to what I have been told, when one of my progressive slot players wins playing progressive slots, I am supposed to be credited back for contributions to the progressive jackpot pool that resulted from that players play. I do not believe this is happening. I had a player at Paradise 8 that deposited about $22,000. According to Jax, I was charged for $138,325.55 in progressive slot play by this player. 2% of this number is $2,766.51. I was actually charged a total $2,899.31 in three successive months. The adjustment was done on the last day of the month.

I have asked Jax how it was possible for this player to have wagered $138,000 if they only deposited $22,000 – unless they won at some point. And, if they won, why does it appear that I was not given credit for it as I was charged the full contribution amount at the end of the month?

What should be a chilling thought for larger affiliates is that Jax stated in his previous post that none of the Rival affiliate programs (I assume this include his own) have made any changes to the settings that determine whether the affiliate is to be charged for contributions to and credited for amounts contributed by one of their players when that player wins. What this means, is that if it is happening to me, it is happening to all of the rest of you as well. In this scenario, larger affiliates could be owed a significant amount.

I have been asking for an explanation for most of this for three months. I have been asking for an explanation about credits due to me for eight days. I have copied the Guard Dog on the last few days’ emails to 400 Affiliates. I am not receiving answers.

When I first question the reductions on the commissions on the last day of the month I was given an explanation that did not include progressive contributions being deducted from my commission due to me. My inquiry into the reduction of commission due to me on the last day of the following month elicited a similar response.

Initially Jax told me that there was no place within the software that could be adjusted to turn on and off the settings that would deduct the contributions to progressive jackpot pools from affiliate commission and the credit back to affiliate commissions for amounts previously contributed to the pool for a player that won. When I told him that other Rival affiliate managers told that this could be done, he told me they were wrong. Now he admits that it can in fact be done.

Jax tells me that the adjustments to the affiliate earnings for contributions to progressive jackpot pools are done at the end of the month. Other Rival affiliate managers say that it is done in real time and something funny is going on at 400.

I feel that I should have the amounts deducted from my affiliate commissions returned to me as this is not what I agreed to. If 400 Affiliates decides to continue with this model, then I want no part of it, with them or any other program that utilizes it. I will work with them is on a CPA basis only. It makes no sense to accept a substantially lower commission percentage when there are other programs that do have this policy in place.

I have nothing against Jax or Jason; even if they are ‘Nucks fans (go Stars!). However, 400 is where I experienced this problem and that is where most of the facts pertinent to this story are.

I believe that this is an issue that affects all affiliates. We need to get all of the facts out and fully discuss it. If anyone can find where I have made an error or have my facts wrong, please point it out. We need to get to the bottom of this.

 

[WCD Admin]

Players like to play progressives due to the nature of the jackpots and if the progressives bring in more traffic to your site/our casinos, then that is a positive thing. Another important thing to note is that these contributions to the pot that have been deducted from both of us, benefit neither the casino nor Rival monetarily. These are contributions that go directly to the player and no one ever sees any benefit from these contributions but them.

Is it on amount wagered, or only counted on coins-in to the machine.

I had a player at Paradise 8 that deposited about $22,000. According to Jax, I was charged for $138,325.55 in progressive slot play by this player. 2% of this number is $2,766.51.

Question answered. Thanks Steve

 

[Guard Dog]

Great post Steve. I am being copied in on the conversations and I appreciate that fact.

It appears to me from everything I've read that 'amount wagered' on progressives is what affiliates are charged 2% on. I don't think that has been answered to as a fact, though, but it appears (in Steve's post) that is what happened to him.

Nicholas - that IS the response that we should be hearing from everyone. Well done and it's time for me to give Regal a bit of a boost.

 

[Guard Dog]

NOTE: Title changed to reflect more properly on the gravity of the situation and to not single out one program when all (except Regal Affiliates) are affecting this change.

 

[Steve S]

I talked to a Rival aff mgr today about a number of issues. He told me that there are currently conversations going on among Rival and its programs. The topic of these conversations is to determine how to handle the issue of deductions from affiliate commissions for contributions to progressive slot pools.

Incredibly, it appears that the most likely solution among those being proposed is to continue making deductions from affiliate commissions for contributions to progressive slot pools - and them pay them back later.

Are you freaking kidding me?

My comment to him, and to Rival and the rest of you is not just no, but hell no. What is the purpose of all of this? Why complicate things? I am older than most of you and as a result have had the chance to gain a lot more experiences. It has been my experience, that whenever a simple calculation is made complicated, it is usually done so in the favor of the persons making it complicated, so to speak.

This so easy to see thru that it is pathetic. Rival wants to use the contributions to the progressive slot pools deducted from affiliate commission to supplement their cash flows. Well, I have news for them. Affiliate have to manage their cash flows too! I can think of no reason for them to make deductions from my commissions now only to pay them back to me later other than to use my money, which I have earned, for their own purposes, in the interim.

How about this for a solution to this problem Rival? Pay me the percentage commission I signed up for and pay it to me when I earn it! While you are at it, pay me back for the money you have stolen from me since March 1, 2009! It really does not need to be any more complicated than that.

While you are at it, why don't you ask a few affiliates how we would feel about your proposed solution before enacting it. It might save us all a few headaches.

I apologize for this rant. However, when you have a program like Regal Affiliates step up to the plate and do what is right, you have to wonder why the other programs cannot. I have been emailing 400 almost every day, and I am hearing nothing from them for over a week. Pathetic.