Wagering Model Versus Rev Share

[AussieDave]

Been making some nice coin at RA for the past few months, which got me thinking. Scrapers and BH'ers have taken a chunk of my traffic. While I still have a reasonable player base, 99% of my players, play slots. When I go over my numbers at other aff programs, I'm starting to wonder if, in the long run, I'd be better trying to negotiate for a wagering model.

Albeit some months I make (rev share) $15K or more BUT other months, I can be wiped out across a couple of programs and I might make $5K tops. What with high-roller policies being enforced these days and that fact I'm not getting any younger, the wager model does have a consistent earning appeal to it.

Add in the fact it's getting harder to get new depositing players, what's your take on my idea?
(I appreciate sensible feed-back)

 

[Kadabra]

I think whatever advice you will be given, it won't necessary be accurate for your specific traffic. As i understand, you have long history with solid traffic, meaning you have enough data to check things out and see what is the best model for your player type.
It takes a bit of time, but if you pull all the stats - you can run a check to see which model would've brought you more money up to date.

Of course you need to check first what % you can get for each type of deal. You can also add CPA in the mix - so you cover all main options.

To keep it more accurate - you better start from some point in time when your traffic got more or less stable (not the first 6 months or a year). If you do check CPA as well, you'll need to add some % on top for the rev-share and wager models, since on these ones you will have future earnings on your existing database.

That is of course just the basic reference on which you can make your decision, since as you said, there are other parameters involved such as stability, etc...

 

[pdjoe]

I love the wagering model.

One thing you have to be careful of is that some programs will let you do it and then take it away. My problem was with Fortune Affiliates. I was on the old rev share with no no neg co and no bundle and moved to wager model. They removed the wager model and wouldn't revert back to my old wager model they stuck me with bundling.

 

[slotplayer]

I suppose you could get a ball park from the rev share program if they show player wagering (wins/losses) to see if its even close. I think RA pays 1.3% for slots.

 

[Vladi]

Rewards calculates the wager share based on a slots house edge of 3.71% (96.29% rtp). 35% of that is 1.3%.

If money is your only concern I would not choose that model as reported payout rates at Microgaming casinos suggest that the average payout rate of their slots is less than 96.29%. I'd say it is closer to 95%. Having no negative carryover on revenue share also works in your favour as when someone does win big you don't have to pay the lost commission back once the month rolls over. If you have a lot of progressive slots players I would also avoid the wager share as the payout rates are generally lower on those.

 

[KasinoKing]

I spoke to Renee at LAC 2014, and she said I had earned more on the Wager Share model than I would have on the Rev Share model, so I decided to stick with that.
It is a hard choice, because you never know when you might catch a high-roller, but at least with WS you are guaranteed to earn something all the time you have active players.

KK

 

[AussieDave]

My problem was with Fortune Affiliates. I was on the old rev share with no no neg co and no bundle and moved to wager model. They removed the wager model and wouldn't revert back to my old wager model they stuck me with bundling.

Had an identical issue there.
My account was opened in 2003 and somehow got switched to bundled. I protested it heavily with David G. Wasn't until I complained to Chad B (upper management), that he realised they're been an error. However by that point, least what I was told, it was too late to revert the account back to the Classic Rev Share and I was stuck on the bundled account.

Least to say I don't promote them anymore.

 

[AussieDave]

It is a hard choice, because you never know when you might catch a high-roller

That's what I've been mulling over.
All of the places I promote have high-roller clauses. My HR at Buffalo has been fenced since August. Meaning, I've made jack on him since then. There is always that risk of getting a high roller, though they seem to be few and far between these days, just like player longevity. I'll admit it's a hard choice for sure!

 

[Kadabra]

When you say "risk" of getting a highroller- It sounds like a bad thing

Regarding the highroller closes- correct me if i am wrong but you do not really loose on them. You just do not earn for rev-share which is created due to no negative carryover (like someone depositing $25, winning $10,000 and then losing the next month thus creating $10,000 netgaming).

 

[AussieDave]

When you say "risk" of getting a highroller- It sounds like a bad thing

Regarding the highroller closes- correct me if i am wrong but you do not really loose on them. You just do not earn for rev-share which is created due to no negative carryover (like someone depositing $25, winning $10,000 and then losing the next month thus creating $10,000 netgaming).

In your scenario, I agree, it's not a "bad thing".
However what I'm seeing, are my larger players winning, being fenced into a HR policy and never clearing the negative net-gaming. Strangely this phenomenon is reserved to a few large MGS groups, who shall remain unnamed. Don't want to risk what I make now to strangely start disappearing too.

Speaking of the devil...

Microgaming casinos suggest that the average payout rate of their slots is less than 96.29%. I'd say it is closer to 95%.

We've all been led to believe by Microgaming's poster boys, their slots RTP are set-in-stone - maybe Talc but definitely not Granite.

 

[Kadabra]

In your scenario, I agree, it's not a "bad thing".
However what I'm seeing, are my larger players winning, being fenced into a HR policy and never clearing the negative net-gaming. Strangely this phenomenon is reserved to a few large MGS groups, who shall remain unnamed. Don't want to risk what I make now to strangely start disappearing too.

Maybe it's worth checking that your overall netgaming= deposits-withdrawals-chargebacks. If it doesn't add up there is a problem. Of course it shouldn't be exact since you have players with money in their accounts, but should be close (especially if you take long periods)

 

[TheGooner]

Unless you are a whale of an affiliate generating a substantial percentage of new accounts you will PROBABLY find it difficult to get an affiliate program to implement a functional wager-share turnover based system of remuneration.

There must be a significant amount of work in getting it up and running.

I'd also expect that it might be treated like monthly fees and CPA plans are, in that periodically the effective return to the program will be checked and verified - and if you are making too much money compared to a standard rev-share deal then there will be pressure to revert back to standards.

So yes I think that wagershare is a good idea, but getting it set-up and locked in at programs that don't have it already will be a very, very tough task.

 

[CasinoKev]

The problem with the wager model is it shifts more risk away from the affiliate and onto the casino. Unfortunately, there is rarely incentive for affiliate managers to consider this model.

 

[Kadabra]

I think similar to CPA, the affiliate program will agree only when they estimate that by taking the risk on them, they will earn more. I agree that it's not really an incentive for AM since in most cases they prefer no-risk model.