- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 14, 2006 at 5:46 am #592046AnonymousInactive
I am planning to sign up with Fortune Affiliates with my new casino site. However I have found on their website that I need to refer 1 new player in 3 months to keep my account active with them.
I know from my poker site experience, that new sites need at least 5-6 months to get started, and it is not sure that all of the property I promote will end up with at least 1 player by the end of the above mentioned period. So my question is that should I wait until my new site will be older and get a steady visitor stream?My other question is that from the description I prefer the purchase-share model over the wager-share model. Anyone has experience and advice in connection with this?
Thanks in advance
January 14, 2006 at 6:29 am #680763AnonymousInactivesipka wrote:However I have found on their website that I need to refer 1 new player in 3 months to keep my account active with them.
I know from my poker site experience, that new sites need at least 5-6 months to get started, and it is not sure that all of the property I promote will end up with at least 1 player by the end of the above mentioned period. So my question is that should I wait until my new site will be older and get a steady visitor stream?I stopped promoting Fortune Affiliates when they tried to impose retroactive T&Cs… I think that was around 6 months ago. I can still get into my FA account; they haven’t shut it down (yet).The 3 month clause is somewhat predatory in my opinion, and it would be cool if FA would drop the clause from their T&Cs. There are numerous other Microgaming affiliate programs that don’t contain this kind of clause. Sure, the de facto understanding may be that FA doesn’t enforce the clause — but if you don’t refer a new player every 3 months, they could close your account and keep any existing players you have referred in the past, if they wanted to.
January 15, 2006 at 7:58 am #680853AnonymousInactiveThe 3 month clause is somewhat predatory in my opinion, and it would be cool if FA would drop the clause from their T&Cs.
I plan to meet with David Sack at ICE and will bring this to his attention. This IMO should be dropped from their T & C’s.
January 15, 2006 at 4:14 pm #680879AnonymousInactiveEngineer wrote:close your account and keep any existing players you have referred in the past, if they wanted to.Is this for new affiliates only or does it apply to seasoned affiliates?
January 15, 2006 at 5:14 pm #680890AnonymousInactiveDominique wrote:Is this for new affiliates only or does it apply to seasoned affiliates?I’m pretty sure it affects all affiliates. I seem to remember reading it when I signed up with FA back in Aug 2004.
January 15, 2006 at 5:32 pm #680893AnonymousInactiveThanks for your answers
Yes, I have read it in their FAQ.
http://www.fortuneaffiliates.com/affiliate/forward.do?forward=FAQ#17And what do you think about the payment model?
Thanks again
January 15, 2006 at 5:34 pm #680894AnonymousInactivePayment Model has to be Rev Share for me. Unless I negotiate a media buy.
January 15, 2006 at 11:03 pm #680914AnonymousInactiveWebzcas wrote:Payment Model has to be Rev Share for me. Unless I negotiate a media buy.Yes, I would like to sign up with rev share (I avoid CPA like plague), but they are using different rev share plans: purchase-share model and the wager-share model. (and there is or will be a 3rd one, I didn’t remember the name)
Which one do you think is better?
January 15, 2006 at 11:39 pm #680920AnonymousInactiveWell, I am still on the old rev share with Fortune, but I do Slotland and I like them a lot. They pay a percentage of deposit.
You don’t worry about win or lose anymore, and things tend to be more steady.
January 16, 2006 at 1:33 am #680932AnonymousInactiveThanks Dom, I like Slotland too.
I think I will go with the purchase model.Thanks again everyone
January 23, 2006 at 12:00 pm #681575AnonymousInactiveI know it’s a bit late to post on this but I’d just like to point something out: This T&C does not apply at all to Purchase-share, Wager-share or CPA earnings models. So if you are on any of the above models or if you registered after the 1st September 2005 it does not apply to you.
Something to also keep in mind is that this would only be enforced in extreme circumstances and up to now we have not actually done so to any affiliate. And by extreme I mean EXTREME…
It is seriuosly nothing at all to worry about, unless you plan on abusing Fortune Affiliates :angry:
January 23, 2006 at 7:47 pm #681621AnonymousInactiveI don’t find that particularly assuring. It’s a clause that you can fall back on any time you please. It’s a predatory clause in that it allows you to steal someone’s lifetime players.
So let’s not get into this. The cause has been there for a long time and shame on me for not seeing it way back when I signed up – I wouldn’t have.
Nothing to be done about it now but bitch.
January 23, 2006 at 9:36 pm #681648AnonymousInactivequeriesresolved wrote:I know it’s a bit late to post on this but I’d just like to point something out: This T&C does not apply at all to Purchase-share, Wager-share or CPA earnings models. So if you are on any of the above models or if you registered after the 1st September 2005 it does not apply to you.Something to also keep in mind is that this would only be enforced in extreme circumstances and up to now we have not actually done so to any affiliate. And by extreme I mean EXTREME…
It is seriuosly nothing at all to worry about, unless you plan on abusing Fortune Affiliates :angry:
I have read the 1 player/3months term in the FAQ, and there was nothing which stated that there are exceptions. That’s why after reading the whole website back and forth I tried to ask others.
And no, I don’t plan on abusing FA… but this default assumption makes me feel a bit interesting….
Btw, thanks for your reply “queriesresolved” (how can I call you please?)
Sipka
January 24, 2006 at 8:02 am #681709AnonymousInactivesipka wrote:I have read the 1 player/3months term in the FAQ,Btw, thanks for your reply “queriesresolved” (how can I call you please?)
Sipka
That will be taken out of the FAQ’s very soon to avoid confusion.
You all can call me Marvyn, Marv, Starvin Marvyn or even just M.
January 24, 2006 at 4:06 pm #681729AnonymousInactiveEh Starvin Marvin,
That will be taken out of the FAQ’s very soon to avoid confusion.
That sounds good to me. I assume you meant T&Cs, not FAQs.
Looks like Fortune is continuing to become a better program all the time…
-
AuthorPosts