Suggestion for addition to T & C's

Discussion in 'Star Partner' started by ConradHaack, Feb 12, 2010.

  1.  
    ConradHaack

    ConradHaack Affiliate Program Representative

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    Hi Guys,

    I need to ask your opinion on something about new affiliate accounts.
    It has to do with fraudulent players that are sent to us through new
    affiliate accounts.

    At Star Partner we offer all new affiliates 90% for their first month with us
    and often in most case affiliates do well with us but there's now another side
    to the coin, we have been losing out but not because of the 90% but mainly
    due to affiliate and player fraud.

    We have been hit and continue to take a beating when these players or valid
    card holders charge back one month later after we have already given new
    affiliates the 90% commission, once we've given 90% there's no windfall for us.

    Charge-backs usually start coming through 25 days later once card holders
    receive their statments and realise that they've fallen victim to fraudsters.

    This is what we would like to propose on new accounts only:

    Payments on new accounts will be subjected to a 30 day holding period,
    from the date that the new account opened. This pending period will allow
    for all possible charge-backs to be processed against any new account.
    The required deductions to take place before new affiliates are paid the
    90% for their first month with Star Partner.


    How would this term be construed?
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2010
  2.  
    Guard Dog

    Guard Dog Guard Dog Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,725
    Likes Received:
    1,147
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006

    Interesting term. I wonder if it is not the initial revshare rate that needs to be restructured instead? 90%? That's great and all, but I would almost expect fraud attempts with this.

    Now - as far as the term is concerned.... I, personally (not speaking for the certification team), have no issue with the term.

    But, you need to think of this: New affiliates (honest affiliates) will be quite put off by delaying their payment by 30 days. Some new affiliates could easily be that large affiliate you are praying for. Do you want to offend them by holding onto their money? Or is it better to restructure the initial offer such that affiliates are not going to spend the time to take advantage?

    You may also want to look at other programs who offer similar initial increases in revshare. Ask their folks what they do in the event of late-arriving-fraud.
     
  3.  
    Engineer

    Engineer Super Moderator

    Messages:
    2,443
    Likes Received:
    199
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    I agree with Guard Dog. The 90% would be great (if the casino converted), but I'd be somewhat put off by having to wait an extra month for the first payment. I'd probably go for it, though, if I heard positive feedback about the program from other affiliates before I signed up.

    The term itself seems fine; nothing predatory about it, IMO.
     
  4.  
    inspiration

    inspiration Affiliate Guard Dog Member

    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    167
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    No problem with that term. I should add that on the mainpage.

    90% in first month is subject to a fair use policy e.g. with a link to the policy.
     
  5.  
    Guard Dog

    Guard Dog Guard Dog Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,725
    Likes Received:
    1,147
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Yes, I agree 100% with this. There should be a policy attached. Excellent idea!
     
  6.  
    ConradHaack

    ConradHaack Affiliate Program Representative

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    Thank you the feedback, it's greatly appreciated.
     

Share This Page