FastPay Affiliates

[Guard Dog]

Hello AGD community,

Today we present you the real revenue share audit report for FastPay Affiliates.
They have 1 casino brand: FastPay Casino.

We deposited EUR 20 via Skrill and took the Welcome Bonus:

We started playing some slot games:

In the end, we lost all the funds and checked the statistics:

For the deposit of EUR 20, the Net Gaming Revenue was EUR 13.
Our commission should be 45% of that amount which is EUR 5.85.

To summarize, the Effective Net Gaming Revenue (the amount of money deposited and lost) is 13/20 = 65%.

Finally, multiply the advertised revenue share rate with the Effective NGR to see your real revenue share rate, e.g.:

• 25% = 16.25 %
• 30% = 19.50 %
• 35% = 22.75 %
• 40% = 26.00 %
• 45% = 29.25 %

 

[Zuga]

crap crap crap

 

[riih]

Usually these high fees happen with the big operators with Maltese licenses and focus on Western Europe. Kinda appalled by this one.

 

[Guard Dog]

We have audited the FastPay Affiliates again. Check the results here.

 

[AussieDave]

Usually these high fees happen with the big operators with Maltese licenses and focus on Western Europe. Kinda appalled by this one.

AFAIK Fastpay does not hold a Malta License, they're Curacao licensed. They weren't great figures compared to other programs. Though, Video Slots still holds the CRAP-CROWN for the crappiest @ 5.9% average.

---------

A lot of casinos these day are accepting Crypto.

We've seen how a player depositing fiat currency and accepting a bonus, can influence the commission earned, by referencing the previous (1'st) Fastpay Audit. That proves there is difference (if only marginally) in commission % earned on a player's deposit (based on the crypto deposit to fiat conversion being close to the same value).

@Guard Dog question is...
Will other certified casinos be given a 2'nd audit because they too accept crypto?

 

[melcb]

Fastpay were audited because they are using a new affiliate system since their last audit and they requested it.

Resources and our time will be used to first try and get programs audited at least once before performing second audits. This one was done because it was requested, it was a new affiliate system and a different currency so we decided to do another test. However we will prioritse first-time audits.

 

[AussieDave]

Resources and our time will be used to first try and get programs audited at least once before performing second audits.

If time and resources are an impeding factor, then you've basically wasted you time conducting a second audit:

1'st Audit Results:

• 25% = 16.25 %
• 30% = 19.50 %
• 35% = 22.75 %
• 40% = 26.00 %
• 45% = 29.25 %

2'nd Audit Results:

• 25% = 18.75 %
• 30% = 22.50 %
• 35% = 26.25 %
• 40% = 30.00 %
• 45% = 33.75 %

I'm not singling out FastPay. Instead, using this as an example to the BIGGER issue. Both audits, the true (bona fide) commission values fall way short of, the highly inflated commissions stated/marketed by the aff program.

Imagine placing X amount on a 'term deposit', thinking your receiving 1.65%, but on the maturity of that "term deposit" only receiving 1% in interest. People would be outraged, and rightly so.

I'd agree if a program stated 16.25% or 18.75% as their true base commission, no affiliate would sign up.

However, lets look at the elephant in the room here.

Lets compare these low-commission percentages, to other programs operating on an identical Curacao license:

Casoo Audit:

• 25% = 24.02 %
• 30% = 28.82 %
• 35% = 33.63 %
• 40% = 38.43 %
• 45% = 43.24 %

Deckmedia Audit:
100% across ALL onsite advertised commission values.

Mainstreet affiliates (not Curacao licensed) but still the correct advertised, agreed on commission values:

• 25% = 25%
• 30% = 30%
• 35% = 35%
• 40% = 40%
• 45% = 45%

There are other programs that fit into this example too.

Why are some programs able to state X and pay X % commission, while others can't and don't???