Ladbrokes stealing (even more) money from their affiliates

[Brooklyn]

Go on and press it.




Did they not learn anything from Grand Prive? I don't understand.

Ladbrokes is making a huge mistake. Let's just see if in a few years they change software and come crawling back?

Gross.

 

[Dave]

Ladbrokes rep, are you planning to respond here, or is the discussion over?

 

[Brooklyn]

This is surely not a way for an accredited casino to act. This thread has been lost for days, no response on their part at all.


I am going to PM them and ask them to come clear some stuff up.

 

[Casinomeister]

Ladbrokes rep, are you planning to respond here, or is the discussion over?

Actually she responded to me via PM last Thursday. I haven't had a chance to update the thread. She said the Score is in the process of contacting all affiliates who have had active accounts in the past six months (referred traffic and generated income) and are actively discussing compensations.

I'd like to hear from affiliates who have been made offers - to see if they deem them fair or not.

I'm still perplexed as to why Ladbrokes made this move. It still doesn't make any sense to me. Who is to say that Bonustreak and I aren't partners? (or any other affiliate physically in the States) Is Ladbrokes worried about sending money to the States? Then they could just send it to me and everything is kosher. Right?

 

[Ladbrokes]

Update from Ladbrokes

Hello everyone,

Responding to this thread, I would like to express our apologies on behalf of Score Affiliates for the abrupt and sudden loss of business this move has caused our affiliates. Yes Bryan is right, the Score Affiliates Team has contacted all affected affiliates and is actively discussing how to mitigate the negative impact this decision has on their business continuity and revenues. As discussed previously, we were advised to avoid any direct or indirect US commercial activity that might be used against Ladbrokes in any potential future US business ventures. Unfortunately, this explicitly included affiliates and other marketing partners based in, or with bank accounts in the US, regardless of them marketing towards the US or not.

All of you are more than welcome to contact your affiliate manager or affiliatequeries@ladbrokes.co.uk, we are happy to discuss each case separately.

Regards,
Liva
Score Affiliates
by
Ladbrokes

 

[bonustreak]

We can offer a report from February 2012 onwards with the Score-affiliate program as you do not have access anymore.
However when we closed the old affman system, we notified affiliates to load past reports for their benefit.
Unfortunately we cannot issue historic reports prior to February 2012 for your account.

I requested a 2 yr back audit on my account because we stopped really pushing them as much as we use to due to the lack of support, taking a year just to be paid out our earnings. The reason we were not paid
was because they could not send money to all the avenues I presented to them why I have no clue it was really strange. Not to mention it was a revolving door I just gave up trying to plead my case to a new AM each month.
I have had the impression they really just didn't care about affiliates or marketing partners, heck they didn't care about their own employees!

Anyway I was given a settlement offer that I quickly said no way! Given 6 months average is a joke to be honest if I had the chance to sell my player database to a non US affiliate I would have asked for at least 2 yrs of generated earnings since IMO that is the average player lifetime.

Thank you Bryan for taking the time to look into this situation it is very much appreciated!

 

[Dave]

Ladbrokes, thanks for the response.

Personally, I think the entire Ladbrokes legal team should be fired for incompetence; this decision seems to be based entirely on speculation.

I can't help but wonder what will the decision-makers at Ladbrokes will do next. Will affiliates in other countries be affected? Will players be affected negatively? Hopefully not, but I guess we will see.

Regarding the buyout offered to bonustreak -- 6 months seems low to me. I think 2 or 3 years is more like it, especially if the account is a few years old and generates steady income each month.

Thank you Bryan for taking the time to look into this situation it is very much appreciated!

Agreed.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hello everyone,

Responding to this thread, I would like to express our apologies on behalf of Score Affiliates for the abrupt and sudden loss of business this move has caused our affiliates. Yes Bryan is right, the Score Affiliates Team has contacted all affected affiliates and is actively discussing how to mitigate the negative impact this decision has on their business continuity and revenues. As discussed previously, we were advised to avoid any direct or indirect US commercial activity that might be used against Ladbrokes in any potential future US business ventures. Unfortunately, this explicitly included affiliates and other marketing partners based in, or with bank accounts in the US, regardless of them marketing towards the US or not.

All of you are more than welcome to contact your affiliate manager or affiliatequeries@ladbrokes.co.uk, we are happy to discuss each case separately.

Regards,
Liva
Score Affiliates
by
Ladbrokes

I see no reason why US affiliates can't simply sell on to no US affiliates. This would serve the purpose of removing all ties between Ladbrokes and the US. It seems this was not JUST about severing ties with the US, but "confiscating" good revenue generating affiliate streams by ensuring only a 2 week window was available between notification and completion of sale. It seems a few of the bigger affiliates were able to dodge this particular bullet by switching the Ladbrokes side to their non-US subsidiaries, which could be done simply by logging in and specifying a non-US company or bank account.

Most affiliates are not that big, and would need to sell out to a non-US entity, or even partner with one as suggested by Bryan. The ONLY real difference is that rather than "confiscation", Ladbrokes would still be paying commission on those players until they ceased playing.

The whole idea seems illogical, as it implies you can have NOTHING in the way of products and services from the US, whether or not it relates to gambling. Well, you had better ditch MGS then, as the software is tied into Internet Explorer (lobby plugin), a product made by a US company. Back office had better switch to Linux too, as Windows and OS (Apple) are the products of a US company.

It doesn't end there either. There are a whole bunch of EU countries that have now banned offshore companies from offering gambling services following the US moves, so by the same argument based on the same legal advice, many other affiliates had better get their exit strategy sorted so that they can act within 2 weeks of any formal notice.

What the legal team has failed to assess is the risk of being made a pariah among the various affiliate collectives, and thus ending up on blacklists alongside Grand Prive.

It seems affiliates are under attack from all angles, and those that play by the rules are going to suffer the most. Maybe it is this pressure that has caused so many to resort to spamming and other dodgy tactics in order to survive. It is the same in any sales driven structure, unrealistic targets that have to be achieved just to survive creates a culture where the rulebook is kicked to the curb, and anything that works, no matter how dodgy, is used. The fallout from this type of culture comes much later, just ask any UK bank

 

[P.V.]

If the OP is correct with the clause pointed out within the T & C's then it appears they have the right to terminate at their discretion and for whatever reason.

How many times have we heard around here to read the T & C's, it's unfortunate but a contract agreed upon.

This seems pretty clear, again if the OP is correct with the post and link, haven't looked into it.


OP Quote:

In accordance with Clause 12.6 of our terms and conditions (a copy of which can be found by clicking on the following link xhttp://www.score-affiliates.com, we hereby provide you with written notice that we are terminating our contract with you with effect from 23:59 on 31 October 2012.

 

[P.V.]

I looked at it an it actually says:

12.6 Without prejudice to clause 12.3, we reserve the right to terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason immediately by delivery of written notice to you.

 

[vinylweatherman]

All affiliate programs have this type of clause, and was the initial justification Grand Prive used when they threw out all their affiliates and closed the program.

What this terms does NOT do however, is give them the right to not pay for work already done. If I had a builder work on my house, and then terminated the agreement just before he laid the last brick because I had made sure there was a term allowing me to do it, I would still be liable to pay for the work already done.

The issue with affiliate deals is that they have this "life of the player" payment schedule, much like casinos that pay progressive jackpots over an extended period. Casinos that wriggle out of continuing to pay out a progressive to a player because either party has exercised their right to terminate the agreement end up in the rogue pit. The Ladbrokes program is also likely to end up in affiliate rogue pits if they can't work out a fair exit strategy for US affiliates. It would be even more damaging for Ladbrokes as they still have an active program, but they may find affiliates reluctant to put much effort into promoting a brand that may close their accounts at 2 weeks notice because their legal team identifies another country they need to cut all ties with.

I wonder what the legal situation is for a US business that promotes gambling ONLY to customers in countries where it is legal. Surely this is governed by normal laws of international trade, where it is common for a US business to sue a non US business for damages, and even ask for extradition to have the case heard in the US.

There was the case of the "Nat West Four" some while back, who did something considered illegal under US law, but that was perfectly legal under UK law. The US demanded the UK extradite them to face trial in the US, and from what I remember, the UK government gave in rather than dismiss the case on the grounds that they were in the UK at the time, and thus did nothing illegal. It could also be a warning to non-US providers that have assisted US players to process gambling transactions or take US bets. This shouldn't bother Ladbrokes surely, as they never took US players when UIGEA was in force.

 

[P.V.]

I see your point but they clearly have it worded to do as they warrant. I haven't really studied this in detail but I'm assuming they're terminating all U.S. affiliates and the affiliates will be paid up until time of the termination notice, correct?

As pointed out above it clearly states within the T & C's: Without prejudice to clause 12.3, we reserve the right to terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason immediately by delivery of written notice to you.

Nowhere does it say anything about compensation after termination, or that you'll continue to receive payments for active accounts but no new accounts shall be initiated as we are terminating our agreement with you for future accounts.

I truly understand the frustration on behalf of all the affiliates whom have promoted this operator but when negotiating these type of agreements one should not allow them to be so self serving and one sided.

As with any legal agreement, before signing on, one should identify how a clause like this can hurt you financially and try to negotiate a better deal or don't sign on. JMO.

 

[baldidiot]

Unfortunately a lot of affiliate programs have some kind of term like this - known as an FU clause - and a lot of it comes down to trust as to whether or not it will be used. Only very large super affiliates would be able to negotiate a full custom agreement that overrides the aff T&C's.

It will be interesting to see what Ladbrokes do in a year or two when they suddenly decide they do want affiliates again (a la grand prive)...

It would also be interesting to see terms like this contested in court (not just ladbrokes). In contractual law any ambiguity or conflicting terms benefit the person who didn't write the agreement. So if ladbrokes used the words 'for the lifetime of the players account' in their aff agreement, it could be contested that this term overrules the termination agreement and whilst the account can be terminated, revenue needs to continue to be paid on existing players.

But I'm not a lawyer...

 

[vinylweatherman]

I see your point but they clearly have it worded to do as they warrant. I haven't really studied this in detail but I'm assuming they're terminating all U.S. affiliates and the affiliates will be paid up until time of the termination notice, correct?

As pointed out above it clearly states within the T & C's: Without prejudice to clause 12.3, we reserve the right to terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason immediately by delivery of written notice to you.

Nowhere does it say anything about compensation after termination, or that you'll continue to receive payments for active accounts but no new accounts shall be initiated as we are terminating our agreement with you for future accounts.

I truly understand the frustration on behalf of all the affiliates whom have promoted this operator but when negotiating these type of agreements one should not allow them to be so self serving and one sided.

As with any legal agreement, before signing on, one should identify how a clause like this can hurt you financially and try to negotiate a better deal or don't sign on. JMO.

That's the big problem. There is no negotiation, it is a take it or leave it presentation. Most programs do NOT screw affiliates because they NEED them, thus this term is almost never used. Grand Prive used this term because they felt they could do away with affiliates altogether, but after 2 years they realised how wrong they were.

The problem is that the screwed affiliates don't just pull the banners, they actively market AGAINST the program that screwed them. It actually makes good business sense to do so, as it would persuade players to join a brand they still promote rather than one from the program that screwed them. Ladbrokes don't care if US players are seeing this message, but the affiliates they are screwing over do NOT market to the US, having switched their efforts to marketing to those countries where players can freely join the casinos being promoted. It is these "core market" potential Ladbrokes players that are going to see the brand blacklisted on sites run by US affiliates. If non-US affiliates stick with their US counterparts by ditching Ladbrokes voluntarily, the negative message will become even more widespread.

Even now there has been some backpeddling by Ladbrokes, although 6 months projected revenue as compensation does not seem too popular.


What affiliates should be doing is find a non-US partner, and call on Ladbrokes to cooperate in moving their players over to a non-US based company. This is, after all, the reasoning allegedly behind this move. If Ladbrokes react by again changing the goalposts by objecting even to a non-US affiliate taking on US affiliate's Ladbrokes players, then it would appear that the REAL reason for this move was to find a means to terminate a few active earning accounts to save money. It's not that different to detagging players other than the fact that they have found a way to weave some rather dubious legal reasoning into the process to make it happen according to the terms and conditions.


Maybe C-Planet should have tried it, rather than detag players in secret, come up with a legal argument to allow them to close out whole groups of affiliates at a moment's notice, starting with the US, or maybe Spain or Italy.

 

[P.V.]

That's the big problem. There is no negotiation, it is a take it or leave it presentation.

That's my point within the T & C's and that's all I can comment on.

 

[bonustreak]

Anything new from Ladbrokes or are they just hoping this goes away because that will not happen!!

 

[Brooklyn]

I was thinkin the same thing.

Terrible.

How come this isn't important to them, you would think they'd be here trying to help, not just when someone sends them a PM.

 

[bonustreak]

Seen this at CalvinAyre.com today....

UK bookie Ladbrokes is rumored to be in “turmoil” as they look at making redundancies in certain parts of the business. CalvinAyre.com has learned the company, as of today, put the entire Horse Racing Dealing Desk and Specials Team at risk of redundancy and an anonymous source told us the “place is in turmoil”. There will also be a further meeting tomorrow morning at 11 a.m. to further discuss the problems that are currently affecting the companies Trading Team and performance.

We contacted Ladbrokes to either confirm or deny whether this was the case and at the time of writing we hadn’t heard anything back.

 

[Dave]

Interesting. If they are cleaning house, they should be sure to fire the incompetent legal department while they're at it.

Sooner or later, these major issues are going to start affecting players in a negative way. Ladbrokes belongs in the rogue pit, not on the Accredited list.

 

[anniemac]

I don't think this question is off-topic as it deals with foreign entities doing business in the US.

Does BetFair (I know they are on the S**t list) still have US affiliates? Reason behind asking this - Betfair has it's fingers in the horseracing industry in the US up to owning racetracks and the DailyRacingForm.

If they still have US affiliates for their casino then what is the big deal with LadBrokes? The US horseracing industry couldn't kiss Betfair's behind enough so I don't see what LadBrokes is squirming about.

 

[Dave]

As far as I know, Betfair has no problem working with U.S. based affiliates.

I won't promote them, though, because of the happy hour bonus fiasco (which got them rogued here). And even if that hadn't happened, I still wouldn't touch them because their affiliate program has extremely predatory terms and conditions. One would be a fool to promote them with such unfair, one-sided T&Cs in place.

So, while U.S. affiliates are welcome to join the affiliate program, there probably aren't many that actually do so (and if they do, they are likely suffering from Head in the Sand Syndrome).

 

[vinylweatherman]

If Ladbrokes are trying to get rid of staff, it would suggest that money, not legality, is the driving force behind the decision to manipulate the mass detagging of players brought in by US affiliates. The last thing they would want is those smaller US affiliates managing to sell off their players to much larger affiliates, who would then have an even bigger hold over Ladbrokes than they do already. Shafting big affiliates is more dangerous than shafting smaller ones - it's a matter of PR, and the much larger reach a big affiliate has when things turn sour.

UK "bread and butter" business may have been falling due to the long recession. We have many bookies competing for what remains, with some towns having more than one brand in the same street. I have Coral in the local neighbourhood shops, and in town there are two others almost next door to each other (and right next to the 4 big banks).

 

[universal4]

I personally think it is only a matter of time before those "big affiliates" as you stated Vinyl are affected and they too will be shafted...

The loss of hundreds (in reality thousands) of smaller affiliates from the US, WILL AFFECT BRANDING!

Do the math, let's say it's only 200 affiliates and they average a few thousand impressions per month (very conservative) multiply that by 200 and that is millions of people that will NOT see their ad. I have for many years that having (even non-producing) small affiliates does not cost, but losing those affiliates does.

Being rogued and blacklisted by those hundreds of affiliates will certainly not help their bottm line either, and as it erodes even more they will look for additional "cost cutting" measures and that will likely translate to more affiliate contracts being cancelled. They will likely move on to other countries that are currently in legal turmoil to justify their moves publicly.

I wonder if they are considering making themselves look like a more attractive take-over target or if they are just trying to trim down because they are bleeding money.