- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Retroactive changes are the biggest threat to our industry today. Once it was Gator and adware, and we weathered that.
We almost killed referback and fortune and a couple others a couple years ago when they tried to change contracts retroactively. It was war. And we won and all stayed on the level until this one.
I don’t want to see all the hard work we did in the past to keep this from happening go down the drain.
I doubt they will sue you. How ironic is that, sue someone over a contract that was broken because the other party broke a contract?
I can feel your pain, Lou. I have known you long enough to where you don’t even have to explain. And I understand how this will go over on a corporate level. And I know the guys you negotiated with and also understand on that level. If you want to vent, I am always here.
If I didn’t think this was a huge issue, if it wasn’t retroactive, I would just let it go. But I just can’t, there is too much at stake for all of us.
The idea of marking them somehow works for me, I kinda think though it wouldn’t be greeted with great enthusiasm by them.
There must be quite a bit of money at stake for them to be so darn stubborn about it. But I remember it took almost 3 months for Fortune to cave on the retroactive term. I had a big argument with them on the ship in Miami, remember? We can win this one too!
Hi all,
i’ve not much to lose in BCP but do stand much to lose if they are allowed to get away with retro,
personally I have long felt that bcp was bad news and as such stayed away.
I don’t see where they’ve given any reason to feel different. In fact I am glad I stayed away.
the term given from today is a loser that I would suspect many would choose to avoid … given it was implemented from today and not dragging in your previous sign ups.
And they know it which is why they include the previous
I think its a big mistake to knowingly enter into an agreement with such terms because it really will be a huge brick wall to hit … whether its now or after you’ve added in a lot more sign ups only dicates the severity of the damage … not ever prevents it from happening.
I applaud the decision to fight the term being retro and would help in any way possible.
I feel for you and the CAP crew, Lou. I think BCP put you in a rather precarious position with the ‘new term’. It is such a baby step that they must’ve known it would cause an uproar.
If they got rid of the retroactive term, I think we could all swallow it. If not – they are the ones breaking the contract, not CAP.
It’s such a bummer to see a program that has a good history go down because of greed. I think, though, that once the greed is overshadowed by the loss of new players – they will have to come to their senses. Unfortunately, IMO, it will be too late for them by that point.
It is tough coming back from something like contract fraud.
@kwblue 179209 wrote:
If they got rid of the retroactive term, I think we could all swallow it.
Agreed. Wouldn’t choose to promote them under it, but that would end any arguments.
Guys this is a serious accusation made by BCP. Is GPWA supporting and defending BCP? Jeff just told John on our certification team that they have the full support of GPWA WITHOUT a terms and condition change and they are sick of all the horseshit over here at CAP regarding their listing.
I really dont believe a word of what Jeff said but I dont have private access there. I can’t believe GPWA would support this. Is there ANY truth to this allegation by Jeff?
I’m on it. I’ll see what I can find out and get back to ya.
It’s like I figured. I’ve never seen a discussion regarding BCP regarding this and I asked a friend that hangs out there more than me and they confirmed it.
This is NOT true.
Yeah no way in a million years Michael would swallow that.
Get em Lou, what a bunch of clowns thinking you would not find out the truth of it.
You know whats funny? BCP isnt even listed as a program at GPWA nor do they have a forum there. Yes, Casino Blasters is there but no BCP as Jeff had said.
If your gonna lie its probably a good idea to check out your cover story first :tongue:
Lets see if they live up to their promise to post today.
They aren’t doing themselves any favors with lies and a hard line on applying a retroactive term (breaking their own agreement / contract with affliates).
Do we have a ‘going downhill’ smiley? Oh wait… :flush:
:whoa:
Well shit, Jeff wasnt lying about GPWA. Here is what was posted the private thread at GPWA addressing members concerns about the terms and conditions change at BCP.
Quote:Hi Chris,First of all, MANY apologies for the delay in responding to this!!!
To give you some background, I am in charge of the online advertising on Online Casino City and oversee the GPWA sponsorships in some capacity as well. Therefore, I have worked with TONS of affiliate programs over the years and I have several comments regarding the BCP/Casino Blasters change in T&Cs. I can understand your frustration as this change in policy can be viewed as a preditory act, especially if one has not been in touch with the BPC/CB team as of late. I have been friends with Jeff Korman (do you know him? If not, I will put you in touch immediatly), the owner, and several others from the team since I started with Casino City in March 2005. This team has been nothing but a pleasure to work with and Jeff is one of the most responsive affiliate managers I have ever worked with. I do trust these guys 100%. Jeff called me prior to the T&Cs change to explain the situation and we spent a good hour together in Barcelona discussing the purpose of this change. The main objective is to be sure affiliates are in touch with their BCP/CB affiliate managers…also, nothing is set in stone- they are willing to work with affiliates if affiliates are willing to get in touch with them.
Anyway, please let me know if you would like an intro to Jeff- he will take good care of you, that I can promise.
Rebecca
Hi Everyone-
Many thanks for your opinions, they are completely valid and I totally understand. My reasoning for posting what I did was to try and explain why we (GPWA, and Casino City for that matter) continue to do business with CB and BCP. While affiliates might view their T&Cs as unfair or unethical, they are putting it right out there that their T&Cs have changed and they are being honest with the public. No hidden changes or surprises, so that’s a positive I guess.Also, Matt, in response to your comment regarding the relationship btwn BCP and CB, here is my explanation on behalf of BCP/CB:
From September 2006 until October 2007, BCP was under a management company which is licensed in the Netherlands . In Oct 2007, Wolf Processing (who was already managing CB) took over management of BCP. There as a transition process which was completed in July 2008, and during the transition, CB took on the responsibilities of former BCP staff members. Bottom line is Wolf Processing is the marketing company, and two of it’s clients are BCP and CB.
Does this help? If not, please let me know and I’ll do what I can to clarify. Also, this should go without saying, but I’m happy to connect you with my CB/BCP people if you would to give them a piece of your mind directly! ha ha.
Becky
This makes it virtually impossible for me to maintain my stance of blocking their certifcation as my team says its totally unfair that we block them since affiliates seem to be fine with this at GPWA.
:flush:
OMG This is unbelievable.
Where is the thread?
@Professor 179770 wrote:
This makes it virtually impossible for me to maintain my stance of blocking their certifcation as my team says its totally unfair that we block them since affiliates seem to be fine with this at GPWA.
:flush:
Firstly, that’s Rebecca who handles advertising for Casino City, nothing to do with certification because GPWA/CC don’t certify casinos. She’s defending the decision to continue accepting advertising.
My reasoning for posting what I did was to try and explain why we (GPWA, and Casino City for that matter) continue to do business with CB and BCP
That quote explains her post.
Secondly, GPWA affiliates are far from fine with it. The rest of the thread is affiliates saying how they are not going to work with BCP/CB anymore. Just like here
Even then, Rebecca is not endorsing the term…at least that’s not how I see it. merely stating what nice blokes they are. LOL. If CAP merely accept them as advertisers and event sponsors like GPWA, I’m sure no-one would bat an eyelid Lou :hattip:
By the way, I’m a nice bloke too. Send me your money and I’ll look after it for you
