Hello Affiliate Guard Dog community,
I would like to bring attention to an ongoing payment dispute with [PROGRAM NAME].
The dispute concerns traffic generated by 11 affiliates. The program is currently rejecting/withholding the payments, referring to alleged CPA abuse and player behaviour.
We have repeatedly requested a proper reconciliation and the underlying data supporting this decision. However, instead of receiving a clear affiliate/FTD-level breakdown, we have mainly been told that the numbers and player behaviour are sufficient for them to make this decision.
There is also a significant inconsistency in the data provided by the program.
The export they sent us showed 75 FTDs. During a subsequent call, we were told that the actual figure was 35 FTDs.
We have not received a proper explanation for this discrepancy or a reconciliation showing how they arrived at the final numbers and rejected amount.
We have been requesting the complete data and their final position since 27 August. This has required multiple follow-ups, and the reports that were previously available in the affiliate portal were also removed while the dispute was still unresolved.
We understand that an operator has the right to investigate traffic and reject genuinely fraudulent or abusive activity. Our concern is that the entire amount relating to 11 affiliates is being rejected without a transparent reconciliation or sufficient evidence showing which FTDs are invalid and on what specific basis.
We have also made it clear that we are willing to resolve the matter commercially. We offered to discuss a reasonable settlement based on the information available to both sides rather than prolong the dispute.
Eventually, their management requested a call with our management. We agreed and have been trying to arrange the call.
At this point, we are simply asking for transparency and a fair resolution:
1. A complete reconciliation of the disputed traffic and payments.
2. An explanation of the 75 FTD vs 35 FTD discrepancy.
3. The specific criteria/evidence used to classify the traffic as CPA abuse.
4. A clear calculation showing how the rejected amount was determined.
5. Payment of the valid/undisputed amount, or a reasonable commercial settlement.
We have the relevant communication history and data exports available and can provide evidence to the moderators if required.
We are still open to resolving this directly with the program. However, after weeks of unsuccessful attempts to obtain a proper reconciliation, we believe it is reasonable to make the situation public and ask the affiliate community for transparency and feedback.
We would appreciate a response from the program and hope this can be resolved fairly, but in case they are not changing their position, we will proceed with the feedback, reviews and cases all over the internet, media and conference to make sure all affiliates are aware of Winbuddies approach.
I would like to bring attention to an ongoing payment dispute with [PROGRAM NAME].
The dispute concerns traffic generated by 11 affiliates. The program is currently rejecting/withholding the payments, referring to alleged CPA abuse and player behaviour.
We have repeatedly requested a proper reconciliation and the underlying data supporting this decision. However, instead of receiving a clear affiliate/FTD-level breakdown, we have mainly been told that the numbers and player behaviour are sufficient for them to make this decision.
There is also a significant inconsistency in the data provided by the program.
The export they sent us showed 75 FTDs. During a subsequent call, we were told that the actual figure was 35 FTDs.
We have not received a proper explanation for this discrepancy or a reconciliation showing how they arrived at the final numbers and rejected amount.
We have been requesting the complete data and their final position since 27 August. This has required multiple follow-ups, and the reports that were previously available in the affiliate portal were also removed while the dispute was still unresolved.
We understand that an operator has the right to investigate traffic and reject genuinely fraudulent or abusive activity. Our concern is that the entire amount relating to 11 affiliates is being rejected without a transparent reconciliation or sufficient evidence showing which FTDs are invalid and on what specific basis.
We have also made it clear that we are willing to resolve the matter commercially. We offered to discuss a reasonable settlement based on the information available to both sides rather than prolong the dispute.
Eventually, their management requested a call with our management. We agreed and have been trying to arrange the call.
At this point, we are simply asking for transparency and a fair resolution:
1. A complete reconciliation of the disputed traffic and payments.
2. An explanation of the 75 FTD vs 35 FTD discrepancy.
3. The specific criteria/evidence used to classify the traffic as CPA abuse.
4. A clear calculation showing how the rejected amount was determined.
5. Payment of the valid/undisputed amount, or a reasonable commercial settlement.
We have the relevant communication history and data exports available and can provide evidence to the moderators if required.
We are still open to resolving this directly with the program. However, after weeks of unsuccessful attempts to obtain a proper reconciliation, we believe it is reasonable to make the situation public and ask the affiliate community for transparency and feedback.
We would appreciate a response from the program and hope this can be resolved fairly, but in case they are not changing their position, we will proceed with the feedback, reviews and cases all over the internet, media and conference to make sure all affiliates are aware of Winbuddies approach.
