
Originally Posted by
ACF-Benoit
Hello,
We have identified auto-incentive which is not accepted in our TC and can be detected by analysing the affiliate's website, the quantity of players, followed by the number of deposits, the netgaming, the computer serial number, the method of payment of those players.
Unfortunately, this information remains confidential and can only be shared "results" to make it public, by the affiliate.
ACF ensure to secure all informations from our partners, which is logic for an affiliation platform.
We've always kept a basic agreement rule with GA, which is to check the players before any payment.
You have contracted with Gambling affiliation, please contact them for any futher information, as you are not subscribed to ACF plat-form.
If players identify themselves after six months (less or more..) we will pay them according to the TC set up during the period of the deal. You can be sure that we have also tested on other websites as Fulltilt,
Pokerstars, or even Party Poker, and all operator/plat-form are requesting the same conditions.
ACF informed more than a month ago changes of TC in advance to GA, our TC are now based on revshare commission.
According to our explanations, could you please let us know what you consider as SCAM here, Gambling affiliation ???.
We hope that we have answered your questions once again.
ACF-Webmaster for Casino Riva
It's likely to be the retrospective implementation of these T & C changes that are causing problems. Changing to 25% rev share from a given date is one thing, but to then add stringent requirements to deals done BEFORE this date that were NOT in the original terms is going to get some affiliates annoyed. This is not a GENERAL change either, it seems specific to Polish players.
It seems the Poles have caught on to the problems surrounding CPA deals, what took them so long
The original terms should have guarded against this, for example requiring the player to deposit before they are considered "accepted" in terms of generating revenue for the affiliate. This looks like an attempt to "shut the stable door after the horse has bolted", and worse, this action was only taken 2 days before payments were due to go out.
When in a dispute party A says to contact party B, who then sends the complainant back again to party A (who no doubt will keep the loop going forever), it becomes clear that the issue is being avoided, rather than dealt with, hence the suspicion of "scam".
Riva & Gambling affiliation need to get together and decide which of them is going to be the point of contact for affiliates affected by this - simply shunting them from one to the other will ensure they look elsewhere for a solution, such as opening up the issue to the forums for discussion, and the hope that negative publicity will FORCE one of the two parties involved in running the affiliate program to start talking to the affiliates concerned.
Requesting documentation from players is NORMAL, but usually takes place after a player submits a withdrawal. Where it is suspected that many BOGUS players have signed up in order to generate CPA payments to a given affiliate, but with no intention to play with their own money in the longer term, waiting until players withdraw before requesting documents is leaving it too late.
Players conspiring with affiliates to "rinse" CPA deals is the "problem" with this kind of marketing strategy, and it is surprising that CPA still plays a part in recruiting players. Unfortunately, some groups have "screwed" affiliates who signed up for the usual percentage rev share deal, only to have the program unilaterally terminated by the program, leaving the casino with some of the players, still earning money, but the affiliate no longer getting the "lifetime" rev share they were expecting. This can be avoided by going down the CPA route, where after a month or two, it matters not whether the "lifetime" rev share deal is cut short.
I once saw a casino offer CPA at £150 per player, triggered as soon as the player deposits £50 (win or lose). Even where the players are "bogus", the profit for the rogue affiliate is STILL £100, rather than the £150 it would be were the bogus player able to engineer the withdrawal of their £50.
52 players under such a deal would lead to a profit of £5200, INCLUDING the fact that £50 is sacrificed to the casino in order to trigger a CPA payment.
The rep should worry about where ELSE this is going on, rather than focussing on Poland as though it were the ONLY place where the problem exists. It might be more NOTICEABLE there due to the number of cases vs genuine players signing up, but I'll bet it is happening elsewhere at a lesser rate, but not getting noticed because most players ARE from genuine traffic.
This is the affiliate version of players' "bonus abuse".
Empty Fruities Astern Capt'n
Back to port for unloading.
Full Sails - before we get raided ourselves.
Bookmarks