WARNING Affiliates Who Target Problem Gamblers

[colinsunderland]

yeah I wasn't having a go, just making a suggestion.

 

[Scott1baird]

Correct me if I'm wrong, there are still credited casinos letting rouge affiliate sites use there links?
If so from what I'm reading here it's generally accepted that they be asked to cut links to said affiliate sites, but as there is still money to be made some of the casinos have said they will but didn't or didn't even respond?
So if money talks wouldn't this be the time at the Malta affiliate convention for all the proper affiliates to stand up and tell these casinos if they do not stop the links with rogue sites then we as proper affiliates will remove you links from ours...... There is power in numbers.

 

[ThePOGG]

There's a disconnect here between reality and public perception of what's going on.

The site in question is huge in Search Engine Optomisation terms. To put this is perspective - there's a half dozen affiliates participating in this conversation - if you combined the traffic that all of these participants receive, and I'm including CM and TP, you would still likely fall far short of this single site.

To try and give readers something that they can visualise here's some ranking figures from ThePOGG.com:

I've highlighted 4 important pieces of information.

Firstly the top left red arrow - this data has been filtered to show only ranking 1-5. Anything below that is not included (and doesn't get much traffic).

Directly below that you can see the number of search results we turn up in the top 5 for each country.

On the far right you can see the position we turn up in.

And in the middle you can see the volume of people searching for this term. The table has been filtered to show the terms with the biggest number of people searching for them at the top.



Here's similar data for Casinomeister:

You can see that they turn up for less search terms (arrow on the left) than ThePOGG, but those search terms have high volumes of traffic and they rank higher for them.


And here's the affiliate being discussed:

They turn up in the top 5 for around 2.5x as many terms as CM and TP combined. The volume of traffic searching just for the their top term is greater than the volume of searches for all of the results I showed for CM and TP combined. It is also a far more targeted term that is of a high value (compared with 'cafe casino review' who we don't work with and 'red queen casino' who have been closed for some time now).

Most readers here would consider CM and TP to be well known entities within this industry. That may be true, but we are far from powerhouses in terms of our ability to drive traffic. Both sites sacrifice massive amounts of revenue to try and work in an honest fashion. But there is a flip side to having integrity. And that is that large swathes of the industry are really only interested in an affiliate's ability to drive traffic. This affiliate has this in buckets. If the 'right thing' is for operators to terminate their relationship with this site and they're not inclined to do the right thing by themselves, then it comes down to how concerned the operator are about losing us as a partner. Our leverage, even if we were to get a group of affiliates working together, is minimal. We don't have the traffic to force anyone's hand.

TP



P.S. And this site would still come behind AskGamblers by a significant distance I would reckon.

 

[dunover]

Crikey! That's a real kick in the balls for integrity.

 

[mack341]

I must admit I've never heard of that site and with a name like that would feel it was likely dodgy

No surprise the company address seems to be somewhere on the island of curacao

edit: are they getting the extra traffic through some sort of deal with the search engine for a higher placing in results?

 

[ThePOGG]

edit: are they getting the extra traffic through some sort of deal with the search engine for a higher placing in results?

They - like all of the big affiliates - engage a large amount of resources in getting other websites to link to them. They also bring in Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) services to look at structuring their content and site to ensure that the search engines like it and know the best terms to rank it for.

If you're really interested you can learn more about SEO here -

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

TP

P.S. We have to do the same btw. Diverting resources away from SEO to fund BetBlocker has resulted in our business shrinking significantly in the last 18 months.

 

[mack341]

I like the way they describe how they're funded:

Casino marketing is financed by a commission structure for the casino players sent from referral links on a page.

This means that the better you enjoy playing with our recommended casino the more money we make.


I'm not having a go at affliates but is that 2nd sentence a bit of creative licence for the newbie player who might've strayed to the 'about us' section?

I thought most deals were either a straight referral fee, a % linked to losses, or a hybrid of the two? The more my losses are at a casino the less I enjoy playing there, don't know if that makes me abnormal

 

[mack341]

They - like all of the big affiliates - engage a large amount of resources in getting other websites to link to them. They also bring in Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) services to look at structuring their content and site to ensure that the search engines like it and know the best terms to rank it for.

If you're really interested you can learn more about SEO here -

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

TP

P.S. We have to do the same btw. Diverting resources away from SEO to fund BetBlocker has resulted in our business shrinking significantly in the last 18 months.

At least that is a good cause, and also has the potential to be taken up by the casino sites and help more folk in trouble. I think either ladbrokes or corals had a link to one of the blocking software programs.

I came upon your pogg site from searching for complaints, so they are a good way of driving traffic [and a good service to the player] it's a real way of finding out how certain casinos treat players in specific situations - you can learn a lot from these about a casino's ethos and values.

 

[ThePOGG]

At least that is a good cause, and also has the potential to be taken up by the casino sites and help more folk in trouble. I think either ladbrokes or corals had a link to one of the blocking software programs.

I came upon your pogg site from searching for complaints, so they are a good way of driving traffic [and a good service to the player] it's a real way of finding out how certain casinos treat players in specific situations - you can learn a lot from these about a casino's ethos and values.

All UK licensed operators are required to provide information about "blocking software" and it may shortly become a requirement for operators to provide free licenses to any excluding player. It's just a shame that at the moment so many operators are still choosing to direct players to one of the fee based services rather than BetBlocker which is free.

And I wish more players were like you and read up on the operators before they played. It would save us managing a huge number of complaints.

TP

 

[Harry_BKK]

There's a disconnect here between reality and public perception of what's going on.

The site in question is huge in Search Engine Optomisation terms. To put this is perspective - there's a half dozen affiliates participating in this conversation - if you combined the traffic that all of these participants receive, and I'm including CM and TP, you would still likely fall far short of this single site.

To try and give readers something that they can visualise here's some ranking figures from ThePOGG.com:

I've highlighted 4 important pieces of information.

Firstly the top left red arrow - this data has been filtered to show only ranking 1-5. Anything below that is not included (and doesn't get much traffic).

Directly below that you can see the number of search results we turn up in the top 5 for each country.

On the far right you can see the position we turn up in.

And in the middle you can see the volume of people searching for this term. The table has been filtered to show the terms with the biggest number of people searching for them at the top.



Here's similar data for Casinomeister:

You can see that they turn up for less search terms (arrow on the left) than ThePOGG, but those search terms have high volumes of traffic and they rank higher for them.


And here's the affiliate being discussed:

They turn up in the top 5 for around 2.5x as many terms as CM and TP combined. The volume of traffic searching just for the their top term is greater than the volume of searches for all of the results I showed for CM and TP combined. It is also a far more targeted term that is of a high value (compared with 'cafe casino review' who we don't work with and 'red queen casino' who have been closed for some time now).

Most readers here would consider CM and TP to be well known entities within this industry. That may be true, but we are far from powerhouses in terms of our ability to drive traffic. Both sites sacrifice massive amounts of revenue to try and work in an honest fashion. But there is a flip side to having integrity. And that is that large swathes of the industry are really only interested in an affiliate's ability to drive traffic. This affiliate has this in buckets. If the 'right thing' is for operators to terminate their relationship with this site and they're not inclined to do the right thing by themselves, then it comes down to how concerned the operator are about losing us as a partner. Our leverage, even if we were to get a group of affiliates working together, is minimal. We don't have the traffic to force anyone's hand.

TP



P.S. And this site would still come behind AskGamblers by a significant distance I would reckon.

Thanks for the overview, Duncan. I pulled up some results for the sites I write for and gotta admit that site has huge traffic, massive actually. And here was me thinking the numbers I am seeing were pretty good.

But to be honest, the affiliates are just the tail of the fish. As the saying goes: "the fish stinks (or rots) from the head".

Affiliates can only strive when they are supported and paid by the casino operators. The buck starts and stops there. In essence, casinos don't give a "rat's ass" how they get the traffic as long as it keeps coming. I remember one aff manager of a large group telling me once in a discussion something along the lines...... "you bring them in, the more the merrrier....our door at the front is wide open and not much less wide at the back...just keep the flow and you'll be fine".

They don't care for the player at all, never have and never will. What we see today with regards to RG is still in the stage of "window dressing", even at reputable sites. One has just to look at the fines being dished out left and right. Some might sound strange when you read the reasons but many are completely outrageous where players were allowed to deposits tens of thousands and more without a single check.

The reason I am saying it is because you just have to look at where RG is noted on a site. Every regulatory authority knows gambling is addictive, yet casinos are allowed to put a single sentence in the smallest font possible at the bottom of their site. Not at the top as you would think it should be placed and maybe prominent so people maybe click on it and read about the dangers. No, it is burried at bottom, so well that you mostly need a magnifying glass to see it. Hence, IMO, complete "window dressing".

By the way, that was the norm in the early days of online gaming. In my high times, I dropped over half a million Euro into one casino group in less than 2 years and was never asked for KYC docs, let alone SOW or AML or whatever there is today. So that is where the casino operators were at the start of the online mayhem. Changing the culture quickly is nigh on impossible. It will probably take another entire generation before those from that period have left the business (retired or otherwise) and to see the start of real change.

Don't want to sound overly negative or sarcastic, but IMO the few that raise concerns and protest (like you and us here at CM) are less than a drop in the ocean. It feels like we are fighting windmills....a lot of hot air and little result. I am pretty sure that some of the sites where casino operators terminated the affiliate contracts have in the meantime set-up new sites under different names and maybe even ownership and most of them are probably already back to business as usual, sadly.

 

[ThePOGG]

Don't want to sound overly negative or sarcastic, but IMO the few that raise concerns and protest (like you and us here at CM) are less than a drop in the ocean. It feels like we are fighting windmills....a lot of hot air and little result.

I don't think that everyone involved is engaged in faux outrage. If you got a hard time from me before for that particular comment its because in the last two years I have invested so much of myself personally, and enough to damage our business financially, in trying to get BetBlocker established that there is no question it is a raw topic for me. I genuinely believe that BetBlocker can help a large number of people who desperately need the help. That it can save families and futures. It won't be so dramatic for all our users, but if a handful of mums and dads don't split up or manage to keep their family homes in part due to the app that's a huge gain in my eyes and one that pays forward into future generations.

As this situation came to light it very quickly became apparent to me that any good that we are doing with BetBlocker is more than offset than the harm that these affiliates are doing. These terms are now drawing in big traffic:

We're not even on the front page for this search term and we have 31 clicks. Think about that and extrapolate an approximation of how many relapsing addicts are clicking on the #1 spot. And this is just one of the search term variants. To have sunk so much into helping gambling addicts only to watch other parties so casually inflict more harm than we've prevented simply because they don't care about anything beyond the money in their pockets is soul destroying.

I don't accept that I'm the only one here who feel outrage far from faux over this issue.

But setting aside the idea that everyone who works in the industry doesn't care, I do feel that many involved are engaged in PR rather than genuine efforts to protect vulnerable players. The honest truth is that your sentiment is closer to the average intent than mine. So in large part I do agree even with that comment.

And this brings me back neatly to your sentiments of negativity. This whole issue has left me feeling utterly demoralised and humiliated. Hence why it took so long to come back to. For all my bravado and grandstanding, for all the time I spent conversing with casino reps giving the most transparent of self-serving rationalisations for looking to keep money in their pocket, the sum total of what was achieved was little more than zero. We couldn't even get all of the programs that we had long standing relationships with to act on this issue. We promised a lot and delivered effectively nothing.

I agree with everything in your last post. Everything. I'll keep fighting for change as it can only be achieved where people make a positive case for it. But I'm going to need some time after this to recenter and find a positive mindset again. This one stings.

TP

 

[ThePOGG]

As far as I'm aware you are not allowed to bid on PPC terms in the UK without a UK license. Can anyone correct me if I'm wrong about that?

If I'm right then someone with a UK license is bidding on these terms and sending traffic through to the same rogue operators that are on all of the other sites (search term 'casinos not on gamstop' btw)

TP

 

[mack341]

In that recent mp's report about gambling [which the headline was the idea of a £2 stake limit[ they did say the following:

There should be increased protection against accessing unregulated gambling sites by enacting internet service provider and financial transaction blocking to unlicensed operators.

So it could be action will be taken, perhaps they don't realise parts of the affiliate sector are facilitating and promoting this access atm, and a nod to the casinos and affiliate programs/managers is required to knock it on the head forthwith.

The dodgy affiliates need the financial support from the licensed casinos otherwise they'd wither on the vine and not have the funding to get the traffic via SEO assistance.

Surely the ukgc and mga could look at this pretty quickly and issue a warning, while they then look at it in detail. Those that didn't heed the warning could expect to be fined if, subsequently, they can't show they carried out due diligence regarding their affiliate networks etc.. [I don't quite know how the system works , how many middle men there are]

Edit: maybe the management of gamstop should be in contact with the ukgc regarding this, it's undermining their program's ability to reduce gambling harm to serious addicts.

 

[ThePOGG]

So the advertiser that has placed these adverts - with very specific title tags - has provided Google with a valid operating licence number.

TP

 

[Guntis]

As far as I'm aware you are not allowed to bid on PPC terms in the UK without a UK license. Can anyone correct me if I'm wrong about that?

If I'm right then someone with a UK license is bidding on these terms and sending traffic through to the same rogue operators that are on all of the other sites (search term 'casinos not on gamstop' btw)

TP

That's insane - Sauna, steam room, gym and casinos not on gamstop...

 

[Guntis]

That's insane - Sauna, steam room, gym and casinos not on gamstop...

I bet this "trend" will be going on for a while as its an easy way for those dodgy affiliates and casino sites to make a quick money.

The main reason for this is that there is a very small competition for keywords related to "online casinos that are not on gamstop" which gives an apportunity even for new sites to get on 1st page of Google with ease.

Regarding Google ads, I can confidently say that there are "tricks" to get ads approved without providing a licence.

 

[ThePOGG]

Regarding Google ads, I can confidently say that there are "tricks" to get ads approved without providing a licence.

I think you may be right on this front. If you look at the results, two of them contain a mis-spelling on "without" (not sure how that would help) and "gamstop". To me that suggests that someone may be gaming adwords by tricking it into believing that this isn't a gambling related term, knowing that their account will be shut down soon (I'm in the process of reporting this now), but simply not caring.

I'm also drafing a complete report on everything that's been going on for the UKGC. I cannot say whether they'll take action or not but I dearly hope they do. Some of those massive fines would serve certain parties their just deserts right now.

TP

 

[News Hound]

As this situation came to light it very quickly became apparent to me that any good that we are doing with BetBlocker is more than offset than the harm that these affiliates are doing. These terms are now drawing in big traffic:

To confirm, Casino Gazette's page concerning this with the same search term as The Pogg gets similar click thrus. So those getting top results on first page, must be getting a lot of organic traffic for a variety of gamstop related terms.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I think you may be right on this front. If you look at the results, two of them contain a mis-spelling on "without" (not sure how that would help) and "gamstop". To me that suggests that someone may be gaming adwords by tricking it into believing that this isn't a gambling related term, knowing that their account will be shut down soon (I'm in the process of reporting this now), but simply not caring.

I'm also drafing a complete report on everything that's been going on for the UKGC. I cannot say whether they'll take action or not but I dearly hope they do. Some of those massive fines would serve certain parties their just deserts right now.

TP

The trick with misspellings works because Google allows some mistakes within a sequence and still rate the result. Another often used one is 0 instead of o, or simply leaving one character out. Our brain only needs the start and the end of a word to be correct as the rest is not actively read.

Just to add something, you might know it all but thought I'd better be sure.

If you register your domain via Google you get as an admin a comprehensive kit to promote your site and get it to the top spots in the shortest period possible. I know it because I used it with my own site when I still had my company (non-gambling related and shut down 3 years ago). The kit is so extensive yet super simple organized that even someone with no SEO knowledge can make sure his/her site is getting where it should be if they follow the guides to the proverbial "T".

I am no expert on SEO itself, however, I consider me somewhat versed on writing the content in such ways that it does tingle the Google algorithms for specific search words. I have written SEO content for probably 40+ companies by now, including big guns like Adidas or T-Mobile, and their editors hardly ever made changes to my pieces, hence, I assume that the text was "good to go".

Anyway, to cut a long story short, getting back to gaming. Over the years, three concepts transpired for gaming affiliates - 1,000% SEO whoring, organic development with some SEO optimized text/backlinks etc (which Google promotes heavily lately), no or little SEO tactics.

I am sure you can guess which were the best-performing sites. Employing SEO specialists costs a good chunk of money and when I see the search results for such sites I am pretty sure they do exactly that, which is again proof on how profitable that business "niche" must be.

 

[EkJR]

There are several others who have popped up.

Wellingtonpage dot com

In fact, there are loads of them now!!

 

[colinsunderland]

So it seems newcasinoway have removed the non gamstop page, but every casino I tagged are still advertising on there, alongside some of the casinos that were on the non gamstop page.

Where exactly is the incentive to stop affiliates doing this type of thing, when casinos won't cut of the revenue stream? Any of the reps feel free to answer? Please don't insult us by saying anything along the lines of its better to educate people blah blah blah, thats horseshit, as they know EXACTLY what they are dong by creating the page in the first place.

 

[mack341]

The more you look into it and think about it, this should be a priority of the ukgc to investigate. To not do so would be a failure to protect those vulnerable addicts atm looking for ways around gamstop; they may have agreed with an addiction counsellor to sign up to gamstop but are visiting these affiliate websites in question and signing up now to unlicensed/rogue casino operations.

Time is critical really, to me it's a more urgent concern than some of the other issues the ukgc seem preoccupied with, they acted quite quickly, and all of a sudden, regarding the 'feature buys' in games, hopefully they could do the same here, and get a message to licensed casinos/the industry to cut ties with affiliates promoting non gamstop casinos. past and present would probably be the message required, there was/is no excuse to deliberately target people with addiction/gamstop issues, which is clearly what they were/are doing.

 

[dunover]

So it seems newcasinoway have removed the non gamstop page, but every casino I tagged are still advertising on there, alongside some of the casinos that were on the non gamstop page.

Where exactly is the incentive to stop affiliates doing this type of thing, when casinos won't cut of the revenue stream? Any of the reps feel free to answer? Please don't insult us by saying anything along the lines of its better to educate people blah blah blah, thats horseshit, as they know EXACTLY what they are dong by creating the page in the first place.

The simple answer would be for the decent licensed casinos to prohibit ANY affiliates from advertising them alongside or in conjunction with unlicensed and unregulated sites, whatever the market. Eschew short term gain for the long term benefit of their reputations. If only...

On the other hand, let them do nothing and see if ultimately the fines and sanctions they get hit with by the regulators in various markets for breaches of advertising and/or RG codes make it all worth while.

I have a feeling thePOGG's report will be quite incendiary to the regulators that receive it.

 

[colinsunderland]

The simple answer would be for the decent licensed casinos to prohibit ANY affiliates from advertising them alongside or in conjunction with unlicensed and unregulated sites, whatever the market. Eschew short term gain for the long term benefit of their reputations. If only...

On the other hand, let them do nothing and see if ultimately the fines and sanctions they get hit with by the regulators in various markets for breaches of advertising and/or RG codes make it all worth while.

I have a feeling thePOGG's report will be quite incendiary to the regulators that receive it.

I agree, however, any decent casino would do that voluntarily. Out of all the reps, only Casumo replied and Jan liked the post, @Team.Videoslots haven't even replied, considering how active they are on here you would think they would. As long as the affiliate is delivering customers, all is ok though.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I agree, however, any decent casino would do that voluntarily. Out of all the reps, only Casumo replied and Jan liked the post, @Team.Videoslots haven't even replied, considering how active they are on here you would think they would. As long as the affiliate is delivering customers, all is ok though.

The simple answer would be for the decent licensed casinos to prohibit ANY affiliates from advertising them alongside or in conjunction with unlicensed and unregulated sites, whatever the market. Eschew short term gain for the long term benefit of their reputations. If only...

On the other hand, let them do nothing and see if ultimately the fines and sanctions they get hit with by the regulators in various markets for breaches of advertising and/or RG codes make it all worth while.

I have a feeling thePOGG's report will be quite incendiary to the regulators that receive it.

Christmas is coming!

Sounds like the comment fits perfectly for this. We can all spell out wishes but.....

To this day, the industry has not implemented anything, NADA, NOTHING that protects or informs the player on a voluntary basis. I've been a player from the very beginning (1998) and have yet to see one voluntary measure/initiative or anything in that direction. All that is available today was implemented either under pressure from authorities/public sentiment or directly because new regulations forced them. Yet, even what we see today is all watered down to the minimum thanks to some of the most intense lobbying you can imagine.

The explanation is clear. Anything that protects players is cutting profitability. Plain and simple. And casinos have yet to be known to be charitable businesses.