Online Casino

[Anonymous]

There are quite a few different business models here that work for people.

We have big sites, networks of small sites, general sites, narrowly targeted sites, sites that carry from one to 10 sponsors, sites that carry dozens, message boards, blogs and so on.

All these have proven to work for folks. But some are more vulnerable to various things that can happen than others.

I have one very big site. It carries listings for hundreds of places.

I have always decided on placement (exposure) for any particular place based on performance, but still allowing good exposure to new places I trust for one reason or another, since players like these.

Basically, the better a place performs in a low placement, the faster it climbs up to a better spot. Now this has always made good sense to me and worked well until quotas came along.

Casino X may have done well in the past and I have a nice player base there, providing continued revenue. But the last few months they have slipped in conversions and started sliding down the exposure ladder.

If casino X now adds a quota, I will be forced into a decision that is a lose/lose for me.

This would be the main vulnerability of a huge site in my experience.

I would be very interested in what other business models consider a disadvantage of their system.

[Anonymous]

I have one big site ( GoonersGuide ) and a share of three smaller sites ( PokerLabrat, BookielabRat and CasinoLabrat ) that I work in partnership.

However, I’ve taken a different approach to advertisers / partners, typically only working with a dozen of the best (in ou opinion) in each vertical.

So GoonersGuide will have a dozen sportsbooks (and their other channel offerings) and maybe only 6 each of the specialist casino / poker only sites. While CasinoLabrat wil have the best dozen casino sites etc, PokerLabrat the best dozen poker sites etc, etc.

This has four positive things for us :

1) LESS HASSLE WITH DODGY SITES :
We only include the best sites, with player safety and longevity having an influence, meaning that we get to avoid the strife and heartache and fallout from nearly all of these newer, smaller sites that get dodgy. (Grand Prive / Cardspike)

2) EXCLUSIVITY HAS ITS REWARDS :
Space on our site is at a premium – and we knockback 90% of requests for entrance. We have an extended waiting list of potential advertisers and can usually charge a monthly tenancy is addition to rev-share when we finally accept a new entrant.

3) PERFORMANCE PLUS :
Because we have a relatively small number of programs on each site, each of the programs gets significant exposure and tends to perform well – and we consider that the minimum monthly return for each program is a $x,xxx. If it’s not then the advertiser is put on notice, and after 3 months is dropped.

4) NO QUOTA ISSUES :
This means that we don’t have quota issues ever. We are likely to drop a non-performing program much quicker than they are likely to raise a quota issue. And with only a small amount of focused advertisers we tend to sail through any monthly minimum signup limit anyway.

---

I acknowledge that it’s possible that this approach will miss out on potential easy sales, if say a loyal player who is active in our forum wants to join up to PokerSatrs or UltimateBet then we don’t get the cash and they have to look elsewhere.

But I’ve found that our approach does have the upside of minimising all the mucking around with banner and link changes, dealing with pushy AMs who want more exposure, monitoring player issues and keeping reviews up to date and the general issues that come with affiliating with a program.

With two dozen valued partners it still takes us about 1/2 days each week to ensure that our text and offers and reviews are up to date. I don’t know how you handle hundreds in a good thorough manner?

[Anonymous]

I have a network of small sites and find it an advantage above having one big site.
Imagine Dom… that for some strange reason or whatever, your site would be penalized in Google???

further on… i try to decline paid links and
also flat fees in advance

re quota issues….i still have affiliate lounge running, yes… its my wallet which says it’s ok…

i avoid dodge sites also… to much work to give them a chance

further on re business model:
– i decided to continue on myself, not hiring any employees for different obvious reasons
– did not go offshore…so paying a lot of taxes…wich is good and bad

[Anonymous]

Haha elgoog, google threw me in the google hell pit for two years.

I survived on reputation, word of mouth, 80% repeat visitors, and relying on yahoo and MSN for new blood.

I just recently was released. I had the 50 penalty – every page ranked exactly 50 spots lower than before. Whenever a page would break the 50 barrier and climb, google would hit it with a sledge hammer and push it back down to 70. Then it would start climbing etc etc etc for two years.

In a way it was refreshing to see that there is a life without google. But I think it is because of the size of the site and the loyalty of it’s visitors that it survived at all.

Gooner, if I listed dodgy places I would ruin what I have going – a good reputation among casino players. By having such a large pool of places I can easily weed out any one of them at any time and I will hardly feel it. Part of why I decided to go this way is because I wanted to brand the site and build a reputation, and I did. Listing any dodgy places would kill me.

But, because of the wide spread of revenues, I never make too much with any one place. That’s good and bad – I am beholden to no one, that’s a good thing all around. But – I am vulnerable to quotas from places that have been on the site for a very long time, and I also rarely get into top revenue tiers.

The pushy AMs can be a real pain, yes. I don’t answer my business phone – ever. Got the ringer turned off and don’t even listen to messages. There are plenty of ways to contact me online without interrupting my work day.

Keeping things fresh is a must with so many repeat visitors, and I contract some housewives or older pensioned ladies to click links and verify current bonuses and proper linking. It’s great for them, they can use the extra income, and it’s great for me.

I also employ no one, it gets too complicated. I contract a good number of people to work on projects. Some have been with me for over 5 years. They all work from their homes.

[Anonymous]

I have one bigger site in the bingo niche and at this time some smaller sites for casino and poker. I think that I just cannot have one big site, it would be too risky if Google penalizes me for some reason, so I follow Dom’s rule in case of websites: Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

I want to expand my casino and poker site to be a brandable, big site, but at this time they have very few content items, so I refer them as small ones.

I don’t believe that loads of mini sites can work out too well, too much time to maintain them, but I think it can work for some if that’s your model. (though i refer small sites like those that have 40-50 pages, not those that are just 1-2 page “sites”.)

[biggyg]

I own a lot of website but my Two big sites are the main money sites.I operate much like Paul ,we have dozen or so main partners and if i have to worry about quotas then obviously I have the wrong casinos on my website.If we get 5 or less players on a certain brand three months in a row we generally tell the affiliate manager we are not happy and pulling them in favor of their competition.

[Anonymous]

I have a large site and many small ones, I work with aff managers for exposure for either payments or extra CPA, but it get tough as everone wants the top spots non stop. I will not allow any casino that has any quota at all, some have tried but after removing them they “change” their mind

[Author]

Posts