- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Would like to ask webmaster who registered at CasinoRewards for a long time. Have You an opinion, is recently introduced at CR 35% wager share model actually more profitable for webmasters than flat 35% revenue share? Since all the reports was replaced at CR by wage model, and casino revenue column not exist more in stats we can’t do actually compare the models difference. What if rev share option is more profitable, will CR pay the difference?
Casino-A-Z wrote:Would like to ask webmaster who registered at CasinoRewards for a long time. Have You an opinion, is recently introduced at CR 35% wager share model actually more profitable for webmasters than flat 35% revenue share?I don’t like the wager model, i find it even worst than 25% rev share. But there are those who are happy with it.
If you send a lot of players who play for long hours and spend many $$$ you may find this model satisfying. If you don’t have much traffic and send small amount of small $$$ players you may find this model to be far from satisfying.
you can learn more about it here
Some of my new players make me $10 a month.. so no I dont love it. I am considering changing affiliate program but will wait and see if its just bad luck cause though they do play on slots and video poker instead of blackjack that would even give less profit I was much better off weith the %35 win loss system.. One player back then gave me $3000 within a 3 days period.
The system works in favor of players who like to play and wager for some time.
If your player comes in, deposits 1000, bets it all on red in roulette and loses all, you don’t make much.
If your player comes in and deposits 50 and plays slots for an hour, you do well.
It has nothing to do with deposits and everything with how much time is spent wagering.
It’s just like your reward points in Vegas.
This program sucks.
Back in April, we were asked by CR to sign up for the new payment system (with an incentive percentage) as a trial. I went from a payment every month to a minimum payment every three months. Now it’s even worse. I’m slowly taking them down but it’s not a priority at the moment with so many non-US casinos to replace.
When requested, CR refuses to put affiliates back on the old system – even though it was a trial.
I understand those who didn’t switch are happy and doing well with the program.
ntaus
My affiliate account is very old with you and I had forgotten about it until I got paid to my payspark account. I remember before when you gave the option to members to go back to the 35% win loss model IF their account was created before the date of the new model wager share.
So what Im asking is : Can you edit my account so I go back to the old plan?
ntaus8 wrote:This program sucks.Disagree, the program is not that bad. CR features a variety of quality microgaming casinos as well as attractive free play promotions.
The program itself is better than many others IMHO, it’s the wager model that sucks.
I am still promoting this program but since i find that i earn more with programs that offer 25% rev share, i adjust the exposure i give CR in accordance.
The program do attract new players and depositors, but for me it looks like the casinos have one of the worst retention ratios.
I am sure that if there were other Microgaming casinos featuring similar promotions and excepting US players while offering affiliates 35% rev share, they would “steal” many hard working affiliates from CR.
ntaus8 wrote:Back in April, we were asked by CR to sign up for the new payment system (with an incentive percentage) as a trial. I went from a payment every month to a minimum payment every three months. Now it’s even worse. I’m slowly taking them down but it’s not a priority at the moment with so many non-US casinos to replace.When requested, CR refuses to put affiliates back on the old system – even though it was a trial.
I understand those who didn’t switch are happy and doing well with the program.
ntaus
I’ve been promoting CR before April 2006. I don’t recall any request to sign up for the new wagershare model, not as a trial and not as a non trial. From what i recall, there were no alternatives.
As far as i understood, CR no longer support the rev share model.
Does anybody knows better?
Casino-A-Z wrote:Would like to ask webmaster who registered at CasinoRewards for a long time. Have You an opinion, is recently introduced at CR 35% wager share model actually more profitable for webmasters than flat 35% revenue share? Since all the reports was replaced at CR by wage model, and casino revenue column not exist more in stats we can’t do actually compare the models difference. What if rev share option is more profitable, will CR pay the difference?It’s bogus. It took a few weeks to get to the $200 needed to earn a comission, now it takes months, but that was CR’s plan all along.
I’m in a poster affiliate program and the comissions just smoke these casino programs even at a flat 8% comssion. Many times the revs I’m getting from Google Adsense Ads beat these programs.
If they want the best for affiliates then they will have to listen to the poll results. Now offcourse Im crazy so I wont vote as my answer makes no difference but you have the chance here people!! Lets start a poll about old %35 share commision structure and new wager modell
There was a letter sent where people could opt out.
Then a lot of people complained they didn’t get it, and the opt out time was extended to accomodate that.
I wish VIP, Casino Coins and Canbet would have done the same and let people opt out for a time. It’s the decent thing to do when you change a program.
But what about me ? I didnt know I had an account at CR and for a few months know Ive known. I think I should be able to opt out since I didnt know I had the account and could have never been able to opt out back then at the original time limit.
Where is CasinoRewards staff btw?
It’s Sunday in the middle of the night?
Actually it will be Monday morning later this afternoon for them.
Dominique wrote:There was a letter sent where people could opt out.Then a lot of people complained they didn’t get it, and the opt out time was extended to accomodate that.
I wish VIP, Casino Coins and Canbet would have done the same and let people opt out for a time. It’s the decent thing to do when you change a program.
Hello Dominique!
I don’t received any letter from CR with opt-out option. I think would be fair to give affiliates a period to have both models reports and then let choose which model is better for us, right? Currently I have a profitable report from a small amout of players on wager share basis, but who know – maybe in rev share the commission would be 5x-10x times higher? So I had also good reports and at rev share. Anyway CR always paid timely, thanks them.
Im afraid this discussion will go on forever as long as CR does not give everyone the option to choose (like EVERYONE else)
I gave it a chance and I am still giving it a chance…. so far ITS HORIBLE… The worst ever IMO. My feeling on this really is that there is no merit that this program works for anyone but a very small handful. The last good payment I ever got from CR was back in April of 2006 for over 1k and actually just about every month before that was $600 to $2000 per month. The last 7 months I made a total of $683 with them and in the last 7 months I have sent them a decent amount of traffic even doubling their exposure the last 3 months.
Here are my stats last month
294 67 34 6 AVG: 0.5 $9,169.58 $56.14
Everyone I strongly recommend not to use this program unless Casino Rewards allows us to go back to rev share.
As far as being able to go back to rev share… good luck with that.. CR considers that even if you did not get the email you still did not opt out. I mean after all the best thing would have been to keep everyone rev share and let them go to the new model whenever they wanted.
Oh btw one great thing for those that are on rev share…!!! You can switch to the new program whenever you want!
WOOOHOOO!! hahahahaWell, like I said, it depends on the type of player.
I know that G&C revenue with them picked up and did exceptionally well after the switch.
Judging by the exposure they get, they are still one of the best.
We’ve been through all this, again and again.
The switch was conducted legitimately, everyone had a chance to opt out and stay with the original contract.
That is not the case lately with the predatory retroactive terms imposed on us without an opt-out by other programs.
Wagershare encourages a certain type of player and apparently the powers that be decided that was their niche and the type player they wanted to concentrate on. That is their right as long as they notify people, which they did here at CAP and in two mails, and allow them to opt out of the changes and remain with their original contracts.
You know I scream foul loudly and clearly when terms are changed in a way that contracts are breached. That is not to be tolerated IMO.
But that is not what happened here.
