- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Dear All
As per my posting on Friday, we continuously review all the feedback we receive from our Affiliates. As part of this review process, and as promised last week, we are running a structured opinion poll on http://www.referback.com (please log in) to once and for all establish a consolidated view of the “Players lapsed after 6 months” clause in our new Terms and Conditions. The poll will be placed on the Referback website to ensure that all our Affiliates in the marketplace have the opportunity of voicing their opinion on this matter.
The poll will be running from tomorrow until close of business on Friday and I urge you to participate even if you have expressed your opinion on this matter on this or other Forums or in previous discussions. We will publish the results on Monday together with the final business decision made based on the poll results.
In addition to the “Players lapsed after 6 months” clause, you have raised a number of other concerns which I am happy to supply the following answers:
1. “A player is only counted on Second Successful Purchase”
For Revenue Share Commission Models (Classic & Partner Deal): Commission will be payable from 1st Successful purchase for all new players to the Belle Rock Gaming Group as from 1st August 2005.
For CPA Models (Cash Injection & Partner Deal): Commission will be payable from the Second Successful purchase for all new players to the Belle Rock Gaming Group as from the 1st August 2005 however, the player will be linked to the Affiliate based on first purchase.
We are currently making the required changes to the backend to accommodate the above. Whilst we endeavour to have all in place by month end to avoid impact on commission payments, we will keep you updated on any possible delays.
2. “Customers must be new to the Belle Rock Gaming Group”
This term will remain unchanged, per my post on Friday.
3. “20% Commission Tiering”
Although this has been introduced into the discussions around the new Terms and Conditions introduced on 1st August 2005, this system came into effect during July 2004 and is not currently under review.
We do however maintain our original stance which is that any currently performing Affiliate that is adversely affected by this rule, due to unforeseen search engine issues, may contact their account manager to discuss an interim wavering of this rule.
I trust this addresses some of your concerns and look forward to sharing the opinion poll results and final decision around “Players lapsed after 6 months” clause with you next Monday.
Best Regards
Zane Green
General Manager: ReferBackZane –
I urge you to reconsider that BS 20% term REAL DAMN QUICK. I don’t give a shit how long it’s been there, we have been arguing this point for over a year now and it continues to show your blatant disregard for fairness.
I also urge affiliates NOT to waste your time voting for something you should not have to vote on. Referback don’t need your permission or assent to REVERT to the original terms and conditions.
The hammer is going to come down REAL HARD if you do not wake up and smell the roses by Thursday.
I dont care about polls
I just want stay with the old Terms and Conditions I signed up under.
:banger:Let me put the 20% rule that you illegally implemented in a different perspective.
Let’s suppose an affiliate is starting out in the business, and manages to get you a few players right away – but after a few months, he/she happens to have a month where one or more of the following things happens:
1. The site is down for an extended period of time
2. His/her newsletters are unwittingly blocked by a spam filter
3. He/she can’t compete in the PPC price wars
4. The tracking system fails or is otherwise manipulated, internally or externally
5. NOTHING AT ALL HAPPENS, except that for whatever reason, the affiliate doesn’t get a signup that month.You’re going to penalize him/her for something that isn’t within his/her control, despite the fact that he/she has your banners up in good faith? What’s more, you’re going to deduct what he/she has been promised in the contract for the lifetime of the player?
Get real.
You are absolute right Spearmaster
This is total unfairWe working like maniacs sending them players and then they put us down on redicilous 20%, if we have a bad month so they can get 80% them self.
IT IS GREED GREED AND TOTAL GREED
Zane, please address the 20% rule. This is, in fact, a breach of contract, and this has been pointed out to you multiple times.
Referback don’t need your permission or assent to REVERT to the original terms and conditions.
Very true.
The choice is quite simple. Either retract these retroactive terms or continue to have your portfolio of casinos in addition to your own affiliate program blacklisted not by just my sites but countless other webmasters sites.
I’m quite happy actually as I know I am sending my traffic to decent honourable programs, whilst warning same visitors away from your program
I’m against a 6 month removal due to high rollers that tend to take breaks.
You’ve heard every angle as to why this is a bad decision, you haven’t
provided any response as to why this is a positive change for affiliates,
so I think it should be removed.. without everyone filling out a poll.The 20% tier needs to be addressed. First of all, you implemented this
change without any notice to affiliates, the next month you asked for
our input on the commission structure in order to improve it, then you
changed the t&c’s and caused a lot of stress for existing affiliates. Now,
you want everyone to accept the 20% tier. I think that if you want to
earn our trust again and have affiliates go through their portals and add
your casinos again, after already going through every page and removing
them, then you need to show some support for us by removing the 20%.Hi all and folks at RB,
well it seems pretty darn simple to me to make this work for everybody.
first of all, understand that these are reasonable people and therefore will probably not throw too much of a fit about the 20% thing, … if you simply change things to according to your own words –
We do however maintain our original stance which is that any currently performing Affiliate that is adversely affected by this rule, due to unforeseen search engine issues, may contact their account manager to discuss an interim wavering of this rule.
which means that as long as we’re trying, you’re not cutting us back to 20%. Is that not correct? and I know it is; so with that in mind, why not change the rule to a compromise, although I don’t know if everyone will agree but i think we can all agree its a goal we could all easily satisfy … why not change it to if you don’t send any hits that month, you get cut back to 20%
stay with me on this. with the exception of your site being down, or some other weird circumstance which both could still contact RB and get it worked out if that was the case; but instead of one new player, how about if we don’t send any hits? because even if you lose rankings in the SEs, there is always going to be some hits trickling in unless you’ve made a concerted effort to remove the links from public access.
this shows good faith on both parties sides.
the other thing is what I believe Mr Yook had said; and that is that I’ve done nothing but beg and plead with you guys for 2 weeks not to do this, and now that I’m almost done removing all your links …. now you want to have a change of heart.
I’ve got something like 3000 or more pages I gotta go thru , mostly by hand cause i’m too damn dumb to know otherwise. so ya, now I want some effort from you guys to make up for all the lost time and energy, not too even go into the loss of credibility this causes to players who see you on my warning list one day and promoted at the top of the page the next ….
Zane, whether you know it or not cause I can’t remember where I said it; but I have said some good things about RB, and of course, some bad, but the good has been real good IMHO, and I think you guys are still worth the trouble.
But good golly Man! I hope a hell of a lesson is learned from all this because its just freaking rediculous that things have had to reach the point that we had to go public with warnings…
Now you guys have made the step in the right direction. But at this point I feel that I’ve probably run a bunch of players off from belle rocke anyway, just from the couple of sites that i have added your casinos to the warnings list.
so needless to say if my earnings are down on top of all the rest of this …. grrrr… crap! well I’m not going to be in any hurry to get the casinos off my warning list until such as time comes that you guys have made everything right … and even then I worry I’ll never see all the income I would have seen from current players,…. if they see the warning lists.
sigh…
Zane I think you are so full of sht, take your program and shove it. Don’t need ya don’t care,
brian
Spearmaster wrote:I urge you to reconsider that BS 20% term REAL DAMN QUICK. I don’t give a shit how long it’s been there, we have been arguing this point for over a year now and it continues to show your blatant disregard for fairness.I agree 110 %!
Gambman wrote:I dont care about polls
I just want stay with the old Terms and Conditions I signed up under.I agree 110 %!
ZaneReferback wrote:The poll will be placed on the Referback website to ensure that all our Affiliates in the marketplace have the opportunity of voicing their opinion on this matter.ZaneReferback wrote:The poll will be running from tomorrow until close of business on Friday and I urge you to participateWhen there is any affiliate, who signed up before August 1 and now accepts the new t&c´s…
If I vote FOR your new t&c´s you expect I´m more than stupid. That´s my understanding for such a poll.
Personally, I don’t have a problem filling out a poll but i agree with Spearmaster, we shouldn’t have to. But if you continue to insist on this poll it would be nice to have all the facts first.
Please respond to this question that has been posted here in various forms several times:
Zane – clarify this please.
Ok, maybe I’m seeing boogie men in the closet, but Zane please answer me this. How is the ‘lapsed’ customer put back into the pool? He still has his account number. He knows he is allowed one account per casino. He pulls up the software and enters the account number he still has OR he contacts RB and retrieves his account number. Does his original account ID still work? If he logs in with the original account number and makes a deposit, who gets the credit for that deposit? Now, affiliates will make this new rule known to players so that they can retrieve these poor misguided players and place them in their pool, so knowledge of this rule will be wide spread. If they are fished by a new affiliate, then they have to meet the 2 deposit rule again? and drop again? and be retrieved by another affiliate again? And y’all are going to track all this action accurately? I can see all kinds of major abuse related to this type of action on both sides. Why would you bring this on yourselves and your affiliates? This is piracy in high gear. Record keeping wise, it does not make any sense UNLESS only the first part of the lapsed customer were actually being carried out. The part where you get the player after 6 months of inactivity. The rest would be too much to track and I’m not sure you would even make the attempt.Please clarify this.
Sue
Hi Zane,
Get the powers that be at Referback to wake up and smell the coffee before it is to late. Change back to the old t/cs now. I am not going to promote Referback with the present shitty terms that suck. That’s right you heard it direct from the Captain Referback present t/cs suck. I know your are intelligent enough to know what the majority of affiliates are saying. It’s very simple, change back to the old t/cs and do away with the 20% rule. In fact I think you should authorize a 50% commission for all affiliates this month and next to compensate for the stress and extra work load of removing Referback’s casinos from their sites.Zane I think you are so full of sht, take your program and shove it. Don’t need ya don’t care,
brian
Thank you Brian. My thoughts exactly. Nothing more to say.
Zane is the “authority” at Referback – or at least he claims to be – however, he reports to higher-ups which manage the casinos.
It’s very simple for them and the other programs – by Thursday evening Bangkok time, either revert back to the previous terms (in Referback’s case, back more than one year) until such time as you come up with an ACCEPTABLE alternative solution, even if this is temporary, or come up with your solution which is fair before that time. One way or the other, get your program BACK into a legal status by that time.
And in case they claim ignorance, Bangkok time is 6 hours faster than South Africa time – which is to say, by close of business in South Africa (which I presume to be 5 pm their time, or 11 pm my time) – have everything fixed, ready, and announced. Those of you in the US will probably just have woken up to these announcements – if they come.
