USA Affiliates

[jimmiet]

This gets worse by the minute. For Steve again

I have two different groups (I think) referring me.

Who is Affiliate Edge? I'm getting messages from them too. I think I sent the email to them thinking it was Affiliatewide. ( I need a drink)
Who has the three USA casinos? Please stand up.

 

[Rhondagrace]

Affiliatw Wide is rival, and they have 3 casinos. Affiliate Edge is the former Club world affiliate program they have 6 casinos. they both take US Players. hope this helps.

 

[jimmiet]

Rhondagrace

Thank you. That cleared up this whole mess. I'll contact both and that will add nine and give me 24 total US which is much better coverage.

I'm still skeptical about Casino Coins.

 

[sunflower]

Affiliate Edge is the former Club world affiliate program they have 6 casinos. they both take US Players

Beware, they Have Negative Carryover

 

[inspiration]

I'm still skeptical about Casino Coins.

If you do not have tons of traffic better start with other casinos as they already have been heavily promoted by others. The chance you get a new player is therefore limited, just my opinion.

For the record I made $3 this month with CC, time to rake the leaves LOL.

 

[jimmiet]

Thanks Everybody

I certainly appreciate the help from everyone. I think I'm going to let the casino site stand pat for now. I'll probably add to it the first of the year when I have to update the year markers in the whole site.

I just put my Sports Book site up today and now will concentrate on my UK site which is three times as big as anything I've ever built.

Already have the line up set for it and you know who you are.

 

[igamingrevenue]

Just a quick question for everyone, considering the situation in the US at the moment, why would you not want to promote US brands on CPA as opposed to revenue share?

 

[Guard Dog]

Just a quick question for everyone, considering the situation in the US at the moment, why would you not want to promote US brands on CPA as opposed to revenue share?

I'm sure this is a legitimate question, but (FYI) can appear somewhat spammy considering the source.

Regardless, I wouldn't ever use CPA for any of my traffic. It's a waste, IMO. I would rather wait 12 months on 1 player's revshare to get what the CPA dollars are so that in the next 12 months I can make more off that player than the CPA was worth.

That's just my opinion, though.

 

[igamingrevenue]

Apologies if it does come across as spamy, not my intention.

If you consider the average numbers, the percentages are low that a player will stick around playing at one casino for more then 12 months. Especially considering the amount of un-tagged cross marketing and the depth of choice that players have today.

Obviously it does happen still but its becoming much harder these days for casinos to retain players and for affiliates to really benefit from the long term revenue share upside.

My point is that considering the processing issues in the US for example and many other issues that are expressed in this forum that relate to your players... i think that a lot of affiliate businesses can be more profitable long term if they started working on a CPA basis.

 

[bonustreak]

Affiliate Edge is great so is Intertops

 

[Engineer]

Rev-share is the way to go; CPA is far less profitable. With CPA, one side will always get the short end of the stick. I would be rather leery of a program that tried to talk me into a CPA deal.

 

[igamingrevenue]

Rev-share is the way to go; CPA is far less profitable. With CPA, one side will always get the short end of the stick. I would be rather leery of a program that tried to talk me into a CPA deal.

Dave, it very much depends on the type of traffic you are referring to. In some instances yes, revenue share can be more profitable for the affiliate but on the flip side its less profitable for the casino as they are giving away more margin to the affiliates. Its not sustainable for them hence all the issues with min player requirements and the retroactive changes to T&C's that aff programs are trying to enforce.

What I'm saying is that on average, and considering the state of the industry today and especially where it is heading, the CPA model in my opinion is a more stable model for both the affiliate and the casino. All things being equal, it can provide a happy medium between both sides of the partnership and create far less issues that exist today in affiliate land.

 

[Webzcas]

What I'm saying is that on average, and considering the state of the industry today and especially where it is heading, the CPA model in my opinion is a more stable model for both the affiliate and the casino. All things being equal, it can provide a happy medium between both sides of the partnership and create far less issues that exist today in affiliate land.

The problem with CPA is that it can be open to abuse by affiliates. You only need to go back through the years on the various webmaster forums to see this.

Also long term rev share is best all round. If the players you refer don't play, the casino pays you nothing. But if they consistently play and lose, the casino and the affiliate both earn. How can this not be the fairest model?

 

[igamingrevenue]

The problem with CPA is that it can be open to abuse by affiliates. You only need to go back through the years on the various webmaster forums to see this.

Agreed, there can be a level of abuse on CPA. It can be controlled though (IMO)

Also long term rev share is best all round. If the players you refer don't play, the casino pays you nothing. But if they consistently play and lose, the casino and the affiliate both earn. How can this not be the fairest model?

In essence it is a fair model however in practice we see from experience that some are trying to cut the affiliates residual income because their margins are suffering. The current case of Bwin is just one example.

 

[Daniel]

Sorry, somehow double posted

 

[Daniel]

Hi,‎

A bit from the Affiliate program point of view: ‎

‎

The CPA model in my opinion is a more stable model for both the ‎affiliate and the casino

‎

For the affiliate: whether the CPA is a more stable model for the affiliate is very much depends on that ‎amount and the stability of the traffic. As the volume grows, the rev-share is becoming more stable. ‎Indeed, you don't earn exactly the same amount each month (which might be a reason for certain companies to choose CPA), ‎but on the other hand, any change in traffic while working on CPA, a sudden fall for example, will ‎generate similar decrease in earnings; while rev-share model will smooth things up. ‎
In general: the only CPA deals that will last long are the ones that provide stable earnings for the ‎affiliate/marketing company, but in the long run they should be a bit lower than the earnings that would be generated on Rev-share. ‎Otherwise the deal will be terminated by the casino or readjusted to fit the module mentioned ‎before. ‎


‎

All things being equal, it can provide a happy medium between both ‎sides of the partnership and create far less issues that exist today in affiliate land.

‎

I have to admit that i don't agree with your statement that it's a more stable model. It ‎might be ok in a perfect world. But currently, if we could run a general report in the ‎industry, i assume that we would see that 80% of CPA deals don't last long. The main reasons for that, besides the ‎amount of fraud that Webscaz mentioned, it the huge demand in traffic in the industry. Because of ‎that, high % of companies/affiliates can sell their traffic for CPA that is not profitable for the casino, but ‎whenever one program terminates the deal, another one will pop up and by that keep the price on ‎the same level. ‎

Unfortunately, it's not too common to find marketing companies that work on the "right" CPA for their ‎traffic, for the "right" reasons (need in 100% stable cash flow for paychecks for example or for the ‎reason to get the earnings faster in order to invest it back in the business, like PPC for example). ‎

 

[bb1webs]

Pretty hard to beat the incentive paid model.

I'm currently advertising a spot to sponsors which is unproven therefore leaving them worried about ROI and as such if I stay with getting paid a set price regardless of results it is becoming obvious that I am limiting myself on those willing to participate whereas I have a lot of confidence in the spot, though unproven, so I'm getting ready to re-approach the matter so that it is a % on income raised so to put their worries to rest and hopefully gain a much better bottom line on the situation than otherwise would have been.

If my guess is right, their hesitation will be my benefit but one thing is sure is that at the end of THAT day there won't be either side feeling they paid or gave more than was right.

That's almost an impossible feat using CPA IMHO.