Should CAP be rogued?

Should CAP be rogued for their business model?

  • Yes

    Votes: 42 61.8%
  • No

    Votes: 17 25.0%
  • Unsure

    Votes: 9 13.2%

  • Total voters
    68

GaryWatson

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Location
Europe
I know the decision process comes down to CM's investigations but I feel their business ethics is an insult and has been for a long time now. Many people lose sight that the player comes first, that doesnt matter whether you are an affiliate, operator or both.


Following on from here

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/29330/

I didnt want to derail an active thread with one of my rants.

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


On reflection I dont think that thread will bring anything positive, only cover up the negative aspects.

CAP is first and foremost a business, which is fact.

It is a grey area where CAP's motives lie regarding affiliates. Without sidetracking with the certification issue it comes down to one point, CAP care only about the bottom line "money". They dont give a rats ass whether affiliates are being scammed as long as they are sitting pretty.

Now that I have got that out of the way, there is no solution to the problem. Cardspike is only a side issue; it has been going on for as long as I've known about CAP.

It is the active forum members that make the site what it is. They should see it as a slap in the face, if they walk; CAP no longer has the power to victimize its members. If you think victimization is a little strong, many members have been banned at CAP for providing solid evidence that a site has ripped them off. Their threads have been deleted, their account taken over and mocked by staff. Talk about bite the hand that feeds them?

There is always fresh blood to prey on so CAP doesnt worry too much about pissing off innocent newcomers. It shows a total arrogance and lack of respect for its members. Decent sites should take note and walk away and leave the rogues to fight over placement. Decent operators should build their own affiliate forums and prosper through integrity.

My solution would be to eliminate CAP from the decision making process. There are more affiliates than ever before and more to come. They do not need rogue sites like CAP dictating to them. There will be newer super affiliates around who do not rely heavily on a false certification program.

CAP might feel they can bully the operators into keeping their over inflated position, maybe they can but not if the operators stick together and eliminate the rot once and for all. I think its high time CAP step back into line and chose what side of the fence they want to sit on.

When I see their label on a site I know I better not have any issues because they have a dishonest record and the operators seem to kiss their arses.

So as it stands, we are left with a scenario that not only are CAP collecting affiliate subs income, they are also collecting certification/sponsorship fees from the sites. Its anyones guess what goes on behind the scenes but my guess is, the only mutual benefit going on is between CAP and the operators. If you are lucky enough to have signed up through a CAP link, you might have a chance, otherwise you are a gonner.

I think CAP is bad for the industry as a whole. I think it gives pro UIGEA idealists a reason to keep out US players. I would like to see an end to these sort of self regulatory bodies with no substance. Maybe one day we will have a fully regulated industry but in all probability it will be littered with these parasites.

I vote to put CAP on the rogue list and let them work out what to do with their certification program.
 

slotplayer

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
webmeister
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Location
USA
I voted no for these reasons.

As an affiliate and I get more positives from CAP than negatives and no offense to CAP or those who run it I knew long ago by reading a few posts their agenda was money driven and what was said should be taken with a grain of salt.

Granted perhaps they do some things that I personally would not do but that is their choice to make and since I'm not behind the scenes drawing any conclusion as to their motives for they decisions they make is only speculation.

After over 28 years in high tech working for a dozen plus companies I learned not to second guess the management.

I don't have rouge section on my site. If a program stiffs players they're history. I have a zero tolerance policy. However, I rely on you guys and CM for this information. Plain and simple I trust your posts.
 

BingoT

Nurses love to give shots
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Location
Hartford,Ct
We all know you can't fix CAP's in a week.
I say if it's the same in a two week period Yes rogued them but I see a turn for the better is in the works.
For the best of CAP's they should sell it out and move on.
You can't run a place that had bad blood in it.
A Fresh New Start is needed.

I say the best person would be Bryan (CM) to take it over.
This way Bryan will have one for the players & one for the affiliates.

My 2 cents


GaryWatson Thanks for some good points that you posted.
 

Webzcas

Winter is Coming!
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Location
Block S25, South Stand, Ashton Gate, BS3
I have voted no. As I believe you cannot rogue the CAP Community and by roguing CAP that is exactly what you would be doing.

Changes need to be made at CAP undoubtedly of which Bryan has come up with some very good ideas in the Cap Solutions Thread he started a few days ago.

To be honest I feel this poll is ill timed and regardless of it's intentions could prove another outlet to bash CAP with, which we don't need to be honest.

If you are unhappy with the way CAP is run and the lack of percieved transparency which has been well documented over the last month, then do what I have done. Vote with your feet and refrain from posting there and boycott their numerous conferences.

However I am willing to give CAP the community and Affiliate Media the chance to turn CAP around and if in the coming weeks and months they make the necessary changes needed in my view, then I would gladly return.
 
Last edited:

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 29, 2004
Location
England
I'm with Webzcas. There is a distinction between CAP and Effective Media, despite ownership interests, and any Roguing could only be justified by the Cardspike incident. And even then, until ownership, and consequently responsibility for payment funding, is known it would be based on conjecture. Strictly speaking, the infamous PDF file is not a contract, merely intent.

While CAP has it's critics and hitherto has not responded well to criticism, it does provide a very valuable service to affiliates. A service that can be improved (and probably will be if ongoing discussions are anything to go by) I must add, but nonetheless, in my opinion not deliberately deceitful in any aspect.

So it has to be a "no" from me, although I accidentally clicked "unsure". D'oh!
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
I agree with Simmo! and Webzcas.

Roguing a community (which is what pretty much what CAP is) is unnecessary.

I want to see CAP lift itself out of the mud and get its shit together. Lou and Warren messed up, and they know it. And I think everyone who matters knows this as well.

I can see roguing Cardspike for allegedly screwing over affs and players (FWIW - there have been NO PABs submitted concerning this operation). But that's about it.

The Certificate could be considered "bogus" if the aff program is not meeting its requirements perhaps. But I wouldn't go further than that.

The CAP affiliates should be trying to fix what's broken via their voices, or vote with their feet like a number of us have chosen to do. I don't think it's a time to continue to slap CAP around at the moment.

There are discussions at the moment that gives me hope that change for the better will be happening. Time will tell. It's to early to talk about rogue-dom.

LOL "rogue-dom", get it? :D (just jivin' you dom) :thumbsup:
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
...I say the best person would be Bryan (CM) to take it over.
This way Bryan will have one for the players & one for the affiliates.
...
And I can call it CAAP (Casinomeister Accredited Affiliate Programs) :lolup:
 

mercy

Banned User - multiple banned accounts
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Location
us
Better yet, instead of taking over Cap, you can start your own affy program:D
 

GaryWatson

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Location
Europe
Some very valid points on the "NAY" side but I still firmly beleive that CAP/EM cannot police themselves, their interests lay elsewhere, a point which is becoming increasing appparent. A leopard can't change its spots.


I would like to point to the page below

https://www.casinomeister.com/rogue-casinos/

and a quote at CAP

[email protected]
Certified Partner - Totesport

From a merchant's point of view, I rather naively considered the 'certification' to mean that my program would be screened by CAP and if it passed I'd have the opportunity (at a cost) to promote the program alongside other reputable brands who operate to similar standards.

On top of that the group has reinvested in a venture "Cardspike", which has systematically ripped off they community, they claim to protect. (Note : Still under debate)


IMO, the intent is worse than the crime itself.

This issue goes far beyond the CAP community and should be distinguished as such.

There are 2 sides to every story but a disagreement over the word "Certification" will never in a million years fix the underlying problem.

If they want constructive critisim I feel there is no other option other than to start off with the negatives and balance them off.


Time form me to bow out of the conversation. :thumbsup:
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
This poll was public. However since I voted no, I am now unable to view who voted. Has it been made private or am I missing something.?
Checking...:confused:
 

GaryWatson

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Location
Europe
I can see the results but not who voted for what like you. I guess the OP made the poll private. Which kind of makes sense.

I made it a public vote which has been changed (moderated). In hind sight the later is probably a safer option. People have their own reasons for wanting to remain anon and thats fair enough.
 

BingoT

Nurses love to give shots
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Location
Hartford,Ct
Can I ask
Does it matter who Votes Yes,No or Unsure?
And if you vote yes watch out lol
I voted unsure because I want to see what goes on for a little bit.Give it time things will change for the better. (I Hope)
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
Actually, I left it be. When Webzcas mentioned that it was no longer pubic, I checked into it, and I can't seem to edit it to make it so (public). I'm still checking into this to see what's up. The software was recently upgraded so it may be a bug.

I think the people were voting initially with the understanding that their votes would be public, not private. I find that "private" polls get a better response because some people don't want to show their colors outright.
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 29, 2004
Location
England
I made it a public vote which has been changed (moderated). In hind sight the later is probably a safer option. People have their own reasons for wanting to remain anon and thats fair enough.

I may have done that inadvertantly when I went in as admin to change my false vote. Didn't notice but seems likely.
 
Top