Hi All! We've been having a lot of discussing internally about potentially restructuring our affiliate commission structures (for future registrations, not existing) as well as changing how we advertise them. We have jumped back and forth for a few months on how to move forward, and on my commute to work today I realised that it would be crazy to make any decisions without asking you for input/feedback. I also posted on GPWA and I'm hoping to gather some learning from both before we move forward. So (for the record) I'm personally leaning towards keeping the structure as it is. Current Structure: As it stands, our affiliate program pays on gross gaming revenue and there are no deductions on payments. The reason we chose this model was in the interest of transparency. We didn't want to pitch seemingly high commission structures which are then dramatically reduced when it comes to the day of payment (as a result of varying fees, taxes, banking charges etc.) The Challenge: Lately, some of our partners have commented on their revenue share & the fact that it's seemingly lower than other deals they're on. In addition, when signing up new affiliates it can be challenging to explain our system and the benefits of operating on a gross revenue/no deductions basis (as the moment someone hears 25% they assume it's not worthwhile). The Question: At the moment, we are discussing whether it is more advantageous to advertise a higher revenue share and pay on net revenue instead of gross, or to leave the structure as it is. What model would attract you more? A higher advertised revenue share, or a more transparent deal? So the question is: A) Keep the revenue structure as is (excluding deductions such as tax, supplier costs, banking charges, admin fees etc) and try to advertise this in a clearer way. B) Change the revenue structure to Net Gaming Revenue and advertise higher commission structures. Any feedback on this would be extremely helpful and greatly appreciated, Thanks, Rachel.