Hi Dominique,
What do you think is so complicated about theoretical %? Players clubs all over the world use exactly this to give cash back, free F & B, hotel rooms, flights, etc. Junket punters insist on this percentage as an incentive to visit a casino. The online version is the current points systems available to players which seem to be a great marketing tool and effective in player satisfaction.
In your average comp program, no players actually take the time to work out what gets them the best return in the house for thier action, they just play the games that they like, have a good time, go to the bar/restaurant to collect thier comps, get a discount coupon for their next trip, etc. It is a proven system that players like as there is a correlation between their play and the reward, the same would go for affiliates. The reward for passing a good player to the casino will be steady and directly related to the LONG TERM VALUE of that player and paid as such.
Turnover is so transparent. It will help you over time to work out which casinos are really the best for you and your players!!! You will be able to workout the casinos real return to player without having to rely on the the casino publishing a PWC report. Now wouldn't that be cool!
In answer to the idea of paying a % of deposits being 'thought of as a % of theoretical win' from Mary, sorry but it can't be. A deposit can be deposited, wagered a few time (not exhausted0 and cashed out. This player is clearly not as valuable as a player who turns the deposit over for hours and hours and cashes out the same amount. Why he/she isn't as valuable? He/she does not have the propensity to gamble as much as the first punter, that's it.
mary said:
Paying affiliates based on theoretical win would be easy in terms of the math, but it would require keeping track of the games each player plays and adjusting the numbers in proportion. This is what land casinos do to calculate comps.
Paying a % of losses is easier because from the casino side it should be the same in the end (as actual losses should equal the theoretical win), but the recordkeeping is much easier.
Mary, keeping track of the games each player plays is easy and adjusting the numbers is also easy after all, as you say, the land based guys manage it ok. Where your logic doesn't translate to the online business is because the casino and the affiliates do not share the losses evenly.
You do have a great point though about the level of skill, this would make a difference. Perhaps a 'Mug Punter Index' could be used there to even things out a bit!
Jokes aside, it is an area of concern but I also think it will fade as online punters become more educated aobut which games to play and how to play them.
PeterBey
