White Hat Changing Terms Across the Board

[payme1day]

Yes, Gday, 21casino, Playgrand etc. have all updated their terms. Essentially, they're going to be enforcing the reduced rev share for no NDP in 3 months, arbitrary account closure when reaching 6 months.

I don't push these anyway because the RS is eye-wateringly bad with them - however many thousands in deposits I get across my players, they are either the luckiest people on earth and always win between them leaving me -ve OR say on a net +ve of £800 the 'bonuses' will somehow reduce the net RS to about £180, earning me the princely sum of £45 on a GOOD month.

Won't miss them if they close on me I've never seen such poor net commission from a programme in 10 years, bar the notoriouly skimming Videoslots who are just as bad.

 

[FictionNet]

Essentially, they're going to be enforcing the reduced rev share for no NDP in 3 months, arbitrary account closure when reaching 6 months.

Thanks for highlighting this change. I hadn't bothered to read the new T&C yet 'cos, well, as you rightfully point out... there's been little incentive to promote these brands.

Now, it's time to permanently pull all links.

 

[AussieDave]

They still owe me US$189 or so because for some odd reason their Neteller payments don't go thru anymore, yet other programs don't have a problem.

I reached out to Max W. (CEO), Aug 31'st 2023 via email BUT never received a reply. Strange because I've known him since around 2006. He's never ignored me before.

I also sent an email to my AM but again no reply, bizarre.

It's chump change... but that's not the point.

Implementing player quotas and threats of account closures if no action for 6 months, isn't anything like what the Max I knew would be OK with. However, I suppose, when and if the wolves are at one's door, then all sense of fairness and ethics, least in this industry, seem to disappear very quickly!

 

[Led]

I've read Superfly Partners T&C just now and found no change. I mean there is nothing there about the minimum activity.

 

[FictionNet]

Interesting. I've got a mega-busy day but will have a closer look myself.

Maybe AGD could look into this.

 

[payme1day]

From 21affiliates:


9.2 NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION IN THIS AGREEMENT, WE MAY TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT WITH YOU WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT AND CEASE ANY FUTURE PAYMENTS TO YOU IF, IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, WE DETERMINE THAT IN THE LAST PRECEDING THREE (3) CALENDAR MONTHS, YOU HAVE FAILED TO REFER AT LEAST ONE (1) NEW DEPOSITING PLAYER.

This is the same for all terms for all the programmes that have sent you out this e-mail, i.e. 21casino.

I do notice however that Superfly (ex full cream) for Gday casino etc. have NOT sent this e-mail, the only one that hasn't from this group.

So it seems the post from 'led' above is correct so far.

All the rest have though, I had about 5 of them.

As I said in a previous thread, Slots Cafe simply eradicated my account without telling me and killed my links. So they will do it.

 

[AussieDave]

9.2 NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION IN THIS AGREEMENT, WE MAY TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT WITH YOU WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT AND CEASE ANY FUTURE PAYMENTS TO YOU IF, IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, WE DETERMINE THAT IN THE LAST PRECEDING THREE (3) CALENDAR MONTHS, YOU HAVE FAILED TO REFER AT LEAST ONE (1) NEW DEPOSITING PLAYER.

When was this clause added?

AFAIK, it wasn't in the contract I signed with Full Cream Affiliates. However, it could have easily been inserted into the T&C's when FCA changed their program name to Superfly Affiliates.

Terminating an account is one thing BUT stealing the referred player(s) connected to a terminated-account is nothing short of Daylight Robbery.

These programs do NOT own the referred player(s), unless the affiliate is working on a CPA. In the case, the affiliate sells the player to the program for a set fee, based on a 1'st time deposit.

If programs owned referred players, then affiliates could NOT sell their affiliate accounts. They'd have nothing to sell, if that was the case.

Affiliates sell their affiliate accounts, because they sell the players attached to these accounts, because the affiliate owns the player(s), not the program!

Reiterating, if programs owned these players, affiliates would have NOTHING to sell.

 

[AussieDave]

@payme1day - sorry but I'm now confused...

21 Casino is a brand managed by White Hat Gaming Limited (Company). The Company is registered in accordance with Maltese law with registration no. C73232 whose registered office is 85 St John Street, Valletta, VLT1165, Malta. White Hat Gaming Limited is licensed and regulated in Great Britain by the Gambling Commission under account number 52894, and the Malta Gaming Authority under licence number MGA/B2C/370/2017 (issued 01/08/2018) for all other customers.

While White Hat Gaming manages 21Casino.com, the affiliate program is:
twentyoneaffiliates.com (not Superfly Affiliates)

What is the direct business connection between Superfly and Twentyone Affiliates, if any?

Edit:
The further I dig, the more confusion...

EG - Twentyone Affiliates is operated by a Company names Branders. This is their FB page: facebook.com/Branders.rocks/, and this is their company URL: branders.rocks

@payme1day - I'm lost... aside from what seems 21casino.com being a white label of White Hat Gaming, I can not see any relationship/tie between 21 Affiliates and Superfly Affiliates.

 

[payme1day]

@payme1day - sorry but I'm now confused...

21 Casino is a brand managed by White Hat Gaming Limited (Company). The Company is registered in accordance with Maltese law with registration no. C73232 whose registered office is 85 St John Street, Valletta, VLT1165, Malta. White Hat Gaming Limited is licensed and regulated in Great Britain by the Gambling Commission under account number 52894, and the Malta Gaming Authority under licence number MGA/B2C/370/2017 (issued 01/08/2018) for all other customers.

While White Hat Gaming manages 21Casino.com, the affiliate program is:
twentyoneaffiliates.com (not Superfly Affiliates)

What is the direct business connection between Superfly and Twentyone Affiliates, if any?

Edit:
The further I dig, the more confusion...

EG - Twentyone Affiliates is operated by a Company names Branders. This is their FB page: facebook.com/Branders.rocks/, and this is their company URL: branders.rocks

@payme1day - I'm lost... aside from what seems 21casino.com being a white label of White Hat Gaming, I can not see any relationship/tie between 21 Affiliates and Superfly Affiliates.

The relationship is simply that there were numerous separate affiliate programmes running White Hat white label sites. There was Slots Cafe Affs who had that site, Ivy Affs who had many including Casimba (both these arbitrarily shut my accounts, the former simply disappearing). There was Fruity Affs (Fruity Casa) now merged into Twenty One affs, Playgrand, Branders (Slots Planet) etc. Full Cream (now Superfly) are the only WHG one NOT to have sent this e-mail out and I cannot see this same clause in their present term: as I said above to the chap who said the same - I assumed in my OP that they had too, but uniquely had not.

So as I said in my last post, ignore the bit about Gday & Superfly.

 

[AussieDave]

as I said in my last post, ignore the bit about Gday & Superfly.

But what has this got to do with White Hat Gaming, other than provide 21casino.com gaming software?
WHG doesn't write the T&C's for 3'rd party white labels, that onus is on the operator/aff program.

If this has nothing to do with Superfly et al, or White Hat Gaming, then the thread title needs changing!

 

[payme1day]

Yeah, should read 'Aff programmes for most White Hat casinos change terms'.

 

[AussieDave]

Yeah, should read 'Aff programmes for most White Hat casinos change terms'.

Is that actually the case? Sounds more like a select few. And from what I can tell, it doesn't involve Superfly, which, seems to have a fair few WHG white labels.

I'm not defending Max or WHG but saying it's WHG, when, it's clearly not their call, is misleading.