Affiliates censored for bad advertising

Webzcas

Winter is Coming!
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Location
Block S25, South Stand, Ashton Gate, BS3
I'd like to see the national press concentrate on those operators targeting the UK without a UKGC license. Starting with the likes of Affpower casinos such as Smashing would be a start. Plus Affpower work closely with Manchester based ITC aka Club World Group.

Incidentally Paddy Power Betfair sent out a communication to affiliates yesterday concerning advertising. Warning of a one strike policy.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
A little birdy -- albeit a very well informed and reputable little birdy -- passed these along to me this morning:

re 888:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


re Bonne Terre:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


re Casumo:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


re Ladbrokes:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Interesting how these days it's always a "rogue affiliate" that is doing the dodgy business, never the parent company who benefits directly therefrom. :rolleyes:
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Right, it's obvious of the differences here - except Casumo, all of those are big bookies and have huge advertising budgets and far less reliance on affiliates anyway, so can make the calculation that potential fines for rogue affiliate crap in the future far outweigh the revenue/benefits and can thus shut their accounts (which they have) or in the case of Sky simply ditch affiliate programmes altogether, with the added benefit of then retaining 'lifetime' player revenues that would have been paid.

Casumo maybe don't have that luxury and just 'have a chat' with the idiots that do these sick fake news antisocial media ads.

I can only guess the sickest one I ever saw that Bebo spotted about the cancer patient in Canada by Casino Rewards "Oh! it's not an affiliate that did this but a marketing company" (biggest pile of shite I ever heard by the way) and somehow seems to have been quietly forgotten on CM, is not on your links as they don't have a UKGC license?
 

osulle

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
In my head
A little birdy -- albeit a very well informed and reputable little birdy -- passed these along to me this morning:

re 888:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


re Bonne Terre:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


re Casumo:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


re Ladbrokes:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Interesting how these days it's always a "rogue affiliate" that is doing the dodgy business, never the parent company who benefits directly therefrom. :rolleyes:

Reading those complaints it looks like the same affy or media buyer that posted those ads since poor William and his plight appeared in all of them. Reading the article though it looks like the blame is put on all affiliates in general so unfairly tarnishing all affiliates with the same brush while the parent company comes out looking good.
I remember the lengthy thread posted about Casumo's fake Facebook ad and the lukewarm reaction that Casumo took at the time. They didn't seem all that bothered, so I can't help but feel a bit cynical reading their response in the article. I hate the it wasn't us and we had no control over it crap, blah, blah, blah. Casumo and I am sure the others only cared when official complaints were filed.
 
Last edited:

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
Right, it's obvious of the differences here - except Casumo, all of those are big bookies and have huge advertising budgets and far less reliance on affiliates anyway, so can make the calculation that potential fines for rogue affiliate crap in the future far outweigh the revenue/benefits and can thus shut their accounts (which they have) or in the case of Sky simply ditch affiliate programmes altogether, with the added benefit of then retaining 'lifetime' player revenues that would have been paid.

Casumo maybe don't have that luxury and just 'have a chat' with the idiots that do these sick fake news antisocial media ads.

I can only guess the sickest one I ever saw that Bebo spotted about the cancer patient in Canada by Casino Rewards "Oh! it's not an affiliate that did this but a marketing company" (biggest pile of shite I ever heard by the way) and somehow seems to have been quietly forgotten on CM, is not on your links as they don't have a UKGC license?

These aren't really much different to that are they?

William is also over £130,000 in debt after having to sell the house and continue to pay out of pocket for his wife’s cancer related medical bills their insurance WOULDN’T cover

See casumo claim in the response they will terminate any affiliate account that doesn't comply with the rules, but from their response in the big thread yesterday, thats clearly a lie.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
Reading those complaints it looks like the same affy or media buyer that posted those ads ...

I was being a little sarcastic. While I could easily accept one or two instances of a "rogue affiliate" producing scummy material it beggars belief that all of these crapulent marketing schemes trace back to affiliates.

As the man said "follow the money and you'll find the bad guys." I certainly know who I think is really behind all this stuff but that isn't going to stop the companies, the media and pretty much everyone else from throwing an "affiliate" under the bus.

But let's get real: does anyone believe this BS? Why is it always the same few companies who are repeatedly in the shit? Is it because they are innocent and so desperately unfortunate in their business dealings or is there maybe some other, simpler explanation? I'm voting on the latter.
 
Last edited:

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
I was being a little sarcastic. While I could easily accept one or two instances of a "rogue affiliate" producing scummy material it beggars belief that all of these crapulent marketing schemes trace back to affiliates.

As the man said "follow the money and you'll find the bad guys." I certainly know who I think is really behind all this stuff but that isn't going to stop the companies, the media and pretty much everyone else from throwing an "affiliate" under the bus.

But let's get real: does anyone believe this BS? Why is always the same few companies who are always in the shit? Is it because they are innocent and so desperately unfortunate in their business dealings or is there maybe some other, simpler explanation? I'm voting on the latter.

For once I'm not as cynical as you here - why would these huge companies NEED to flout rules, they've got far more to lose when it goes tits-up and face huge fines as a result. You suggest there may be a few layers of obfuscation between these giants and those peddling this crap on antisocial media but until I see proof otherwise I would take what I believe to be the logical explanation that an individual is behind this.
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 29, 2004
Location
England
Gambling is just an easy target for a journalist who hasn't got any real news to report. Always has been, always will be. I doubt anyone really believes they are getting the full picture from a newspaper these days anyway. So much political bias and agenda-driven journalism that you never really know what to believe from them.

Interesting recent Yougov poll on this actually:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 

jetset

RIP Brian
Joined
Feb 22, 2001
Location
Earth
Gambling Compliance conducted an interesting interview with Sky Betting and Gaming CEO Richard Flint which touched on this issue - his description of some of the hassles they have had with seemingly rogue affiliates is informative and covers BS big winner fake stories and touting the Sky brand on pornography and illegal sports-streaming sites, which seems to have pissed him off sufficiently to pull the plug.

Like every occupation, I believe that in the affiliate world there are many good folks trying to do a decent job and earn a crust, but also bad bastards who believe that the rules and norms of society don't apply to them. Unfortunately, but typically, it's the bad buggers that get the coverage when things go wrong.

Edited to add a footnote that there is a general tightening up of regulations on operators , especially in Europe, which is triggering increased motivation to avoid getting into compliance trouble through the activities of their affiliate marketers. There are even some who are predicting that operators will increasingly fire risky affiliates because of this, whilst others have noted a growing consolidation trend for larger marketing oriented companies to buy up smaller affiliate outfits - there have been a number of deals of this nature recently.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
For once I'm not as cynical as you here ...

Happy days! :) But hey, who knows, you may well be right. I wouldn't bet my toenail clippings on it but to each their own. ;)

I should add that I don't doubt that there may have been a few perfectly legitimate cases where an unscrupulous affiliate was well and truly responsible for some of the crap that these casinos are blaming them for. A few. Not every single case. Not cases where there were TV ads involved. Those companies have armies of lawyers pouring over their public exposure and I don't believe for a second that they just had a wee slip-up in cases like this and didn't catch this stuff before it went out. The affiliate excuse is way too convenient a "Get Out Of Jail" card -- without any significant blow-back -- for all this "the affiliate did it" nonsense to be real.

I think we've seen enough examples in recent years of casino companies using really dodgy public stunts to capture attention. Their mantra has been "easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission" and since there's very little real downside they do their dirt and laugh about it.

It there where multi-million dollar fines attached to these various rulings against the casino companies involved I reckon those pesky rogue "affiliates" and their shenanigans would disappear in a heartbeat. Like I said, follow the money.
 

bebo67

Ueber Meister
PABnonaccred
MM
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Location
Ontario Canada
I was being a little sarcastic. While I could easily accept one or two instances of a "rogue affiliate" producing scummy material it beggars belief that all of these crapulent marketing schemes trace back to affiliates.

As the man said "follow the money and you'll find the bad guys." I certainly know who I think is really behind all this stuff but that isn't going to stop the companies, the media and pretty much everyone else from throwing an "affiliate" under the bus.

But let's get real: does anyone believe this BS? Why is it always the same few companies who are repeatedly in the shit? Is it because they are innocent and so desperately unfortunate in their business dealings or is there maybe some other, simpler explanation? I'm voting on the latter.

Max. Do you think the money being spent on these ads could be coming from one of casinos software providers? A lot of these casinos have one theme in common. And their ad's while they look simplistic, would take software knowledge to be able to take accounts of people in the comments, but be direct links to the casino.
And I have to add. Running any marketing campaign costs a nice budget. I know, I don't have one. :))
 
Top