Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48
  1. #1
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Post Cookies Preferences, Please advise
    Hello All, We are a new merchant formulating our affiliate marketing program and wanted to know how affiliates felt about cookie re-writes.

    Specifically, if an affiliate had a choice of a cookie that cannot be overwritten (therefore the first affiliate to refer the customer receives the commission) or one that can be overwritten (last referring affiliates gets the commission) which type of cookie would the vast majority prefer?

  2. #2
    Newbie
    Join Date
    July 2nd, 2011
    Posts
    49
    I don't know about the majority of affiliates, but as far as I know standard practice is that the last referring affiliate gets the commission.

    That seems to make more sense to me than first referrer winning.

  3. #3
    The "other" left wing davidh's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,492
    If two affiliates have set cookies, then the first one did not send a customer, they sent a window shopper who had not decided to buy anything and continued to shop around; they most likely would have wound up buying from one of your competitors if the second affiliate had not corralled them and sent them back to you.
    CUSTOM BANNERS by GRAPHICS CANDY ~ Banner Sets and Website Graphics ~ Professional design, reasonable rates
    DESIGNER DOG CHECKS ~ We double-dog dare ya to write one!

  4. Thanks From:

  5. #4
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Thanks guys for your feedback.

    permit me to play devil's advocate. I read several hundred threads here before I posted and one particular post was not pleased with a program called Fetchback.

    The argument goes - that maybe the customer had intended on coming back but was just doing additional research. ((Base on our own internal market testing and visitor browser patterns I think this is the case for our product)

    So what if that second click was simply the most convenient way of coming back to the site to close the sale? Would the argument against a Fetchback type service not be similarly relevant to the second affiliate's click?

  6. #5
    ABW Ambassador JoyUnltd's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 19th, 2005
    Location
    Emerald City
    Posts
    2,019
    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    If two affiliates have set cookies, then the first one did not send a customer, they sent a window shopper who had not decided to buy anything and continued to shop around; they most likely would have wound up buying from one of your competitors if the second affiliate had not corralled them and sent them back to you.
    I guess coupon sites that overwrite a first cookie at the last minute if a shopper leaves to see if they can find a code or perhaps a better one...whether or not the coupon site actually provided a legitimate coupon code no longer applies.
    Renée
    Pay no attention to that woman behind the curtain. -Wizardress of Oz

  7. Thanks From:

  8. #6
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Dear: CFW, davidh, JoyUnltd

    I would like to thank you three for your feedback. We launched our Grey Defence affiliate program and have done both types of cookies. "Last in" cookies on SAS and "First in" cookies for our In-House program. Details can be found in the new program announcement forum.

    I personally think that "First in" cookies are the right profile for our product because I am able to see in "real time" what search words bring a customer to our site what page the exit on and what search word brings them back. Many times what brings them back is a search on our brandname with "review" next to it.

    Once again thank you for your feedback.

    GC

  9. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    February 5th, 2009
    Posts
    141
    I think you have made the wrong choice. I am an affiliate and have been on both sides of this, and I think that over all "last click" will credit the right party. Using your example, if someone Googles brandname review and then buys, it was that review that convinced them. Perhaps I had recommended the item to them earlier, but I didn't close the sale. I am sorry to lose the sale, but it is fair.

    Using "first click" can lead to very unfair results as I discovered recently with a merchant on CJ. Apparently CJ uses first click (which may well account for my dismal results with it). I had searched for coupons for this merchant several days earlier. I went to coupon sites, clicked on their "purported" coupons - none of which were valid. Guess what? They got a cookie. Then, when I decided to buy (I was buying from my own link to generate a sale to keep my CJ account active, something that is permitted and encouraged), days later, I clicked on my link. The coupon site that didn't have a working coupon got the sale.

    In a normal situation, with an outside buyer, I think it's fairer for the site that is the last visited to be considered the one that closed the sale. Again, if I lose out, so be it. But if my site is as good as it can be, then my recommendations will result in sales - and credit - most of the time. If someone read about xyz product somewhere - a site that did a poor job of providing information - and the visitor clicked, and then did more research, the site with the research that closed the sale deserves the credit.

    I suggest that you rethink your decision.

    PS: I agree that last minute coupons can be a problem, but it can be dealt with (perhaps via commission splitting) but I still think that last click is the better policy.
    ---
    Valerie Magee
    [URL=http://mageenet.net]MageeNET[/URL]

  10. #8
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by shuvee View Post
    I think you have made the wrong choice. ...

    In a normal situation, with an outside buyer, I think it's fairer for the site that is the last visited to be considered the one that closed the sale. Again, if I lose out, so be it. But if my site is as good as it can be, then my recommendations will result in sales - and credit - most of the time. If someone read about xyz product somewhere - a site that did a poor job of providing information - and the visitor clicked, and then did more research, the site with the research that closed the sale deserves the credit.

    I suggest that you rethink your decision.

    PS: I agree that last minute coupons can be a problem, but it can be dealt with (perhaps via commission splitting) but I still think that last click is the better policy.
    Thanks for your feedback, very lucid and well reasoned and I appreciate that.

    Now here is why we believe first visit cookies are the right way to go for us. Our product is a brand new product in a new niche (a huge niche, but nonetheless very new) as a result our focus since April has been tweaking the site build to optimize for educating, convincing and converting prospects into customers and that work continues everyday.

    This means our site is designed to be a conversion machine with literally thousands of hours gone into making it so.

    This allowed us to have clearly defined roles in this marketing partnership between ourselves and our affiliate partners. Our affiliates' role is to drive new traffic and our role is to convert that traffic and pay the affiliate.

    Now you are correct, the better affiliates will send better quality traffic by pre-selling the product and getting the prospect excited and this will be reflected in a higher conversion rate for those affiliates. That however does not absolves us from our obligation to convert convertible traffic (clearly if the customer eventually buys then they were convertible).

    Now keep in mind our life-blood is FRESH traffic, not retreaded traffic. So as a business we must put processes in place to encourage that which will keep us strong. Similarly, if an affiliate believes they will not be able to send us fresh traffic then joining our program would not be a good business decision on their part and they should pass on the opportunity. However an affiliate who is capable of sending fresh traffic our way is almost guaranteed to make money in our program.

    BTW it's very hard not to send us fresh traffic since 99.99982% of the Internet don't even know we exist.

    Paying out on last click punishes the affiliate who first sent that convertible traffic for our failure to convert that traffic and we believe that is unfair.
    Last edited by Grey Defence; September 10th, 2011 at 01:14 PM.

  11. #9
    The "other" left wing davidh's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,492
    Paying on first click punishes the affiliate who brings back the customer who was back out in the wild, still shopping around a week or two later. If the "last click" affiliate won't get commissions for intercepting the customer who is shopping around at your competitor's stores.... then why bother promoting you? We have "thousands of hours" invested in our endeavors too.
    CUSTOM BANNERS by GRAPHICS CANDY ~ Banner Sets and Website Graphics ~ Professional design, reasonable rates
    DESIGNER DOG CHECKS ~ We double-dog dare ya to write one!

  12. #10
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Paying on first click punishes the affiliate who brings back the customer who was back out in the wild, still shopping around a week or two later. If the "last click" affiliate won't get commissions for intercepting the customer who is shopping around at your competitor's stores.... then why bother promoting you? We have "thousands of hours" invested in our endeavors too.
    Hmmm, the question is not whether we are paying the affiliate - since there are two (first click and last click). The question is which affiliate are we paying.

    As mentioned above, our life-blood is fresh traffic, if an affiliate doesn't believe they can generate fresh traffic then the truth is our program would not be a good fit for that affiliate and therefore they should not "bother promoting" our products.

    But what doesn't appear to be getting through in this discussion is that ALL affiliates are treated the same without preferential treatment and in a transparent manner. This is not a contest of merchant vs. affiliate; instead this is about affiliate vs. affiliate and which get's commissioned.

    All business whether it be an affiliate or a merchant needs to take decisions that is in their long-term best interest. Fresh traffic is in our long-term best interest and processes put in place by us needs to be supportive of that. Doing it in a equitable, even-handed and transparent manner allows the potential partnering affiliates to make an informed decision as to whether our program is a good fit.

    We recognized that in the short-term we may lose some very able affiliate partnerships, but making long-term decision consistent with out life-blood is what is right for us and overtime will bring us the success we foresee from this marketing channel.

  13. #11
    The "other" left wing davidh's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,492
    You are looking at only a part of the big picture.

    What you are calling "re-tread traffic" IS "fresh traffic" for your competitors.

    If that "re-tread" traffic is intercepted and brought back to you, to spend their money on your product instead of spending it elsewhere, how is that customer any less valuable or important than a "fresh" one is? There really is no stable argument for not giving credit to the affiliate who delivered a "ready-to-buy" customer who may have been a window shopper in the past.
    CUSTOM BANNERS by GRAPHICS CANDY ~ Banner Sets and Website Graphics ~ Professional design, reasonable rates
    DESIGNER DOG CHECKS ~ We double-dog dare ya to write one!

  14. #12
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    You are looking at only a part of the big picture.

    What you are calling "re-tread traffic" IS "fresh traffic" for your competitors.

    If that "re-tread" traffic is intercepted and brought back to you, to spend their money on your product instead of spending it elsewhere, how is that customer any less valuable or important than a "fresh" one is? There really is no stable argument for not giving credit to the affiliate who delivered a "ready-to-buy" customer who may have been a window shopper in the past.
    Hi Davidh,
    Thank you for continuing to advocate for your position, it provides me, as a merchant, the opportunity to learn about the things that are of concern. It also allow me, as a merchant, to more clearly detail the reasons why we make certain strategic decisions.

    Let me kick that off by sharing with you some additional information on our visitors, our niche and our competitors.

    First, before a visitor makes a purchases from us, they on average visit at least 10 pages on our site. Next they go back to Google and do a brand name search to see if there are any independent reviews of the product class in general and ours in particular.

    They then return to our site and either make a purchase or ask our help desk a few questions - so they are reassured - then go ahead and make the purchase.

    This typical takes around 7 days. This pattern has been repeated enough times that we can tell in real-time, with some degree of accuracy, whether someone will become a customer, simply by seeing what pages they are looking at and how many pages they looked at (of course there are 2 key pages that EVERYONE that eventually buys, end up visiting - and no I am not talking about the shopping page).

    Now our niche is a little different, there are literally 5 major players including ourselves. But we are confident in saying we don't have an issue if our visitors head over to our competitors because ...well, it's sufficient simply to say they will eventually return to our site to make a purchase if they are interested in this class of product.

    So in short we are OK with our customers leaving to do more investigations because they will come back if they are interested in this class of product, this is why we are more interested in that First Visit than the re-visit visit, since we believe the re-visit is already baked in.

    Now all this discussion about the clashing of the first visit and last visit cookie may simply be academic - as I mentioned before, 99.9998% of the Internet has never heard of us. However it is also important for us to set out our strategic direction and be transparent with our partners.

    Hope that helps you to understand our stances on why first visit are the most important and why we are less concerned about our visitors not return after they leave especially if they are interested in our class of product.

    GC

  15. #13
    Newbie
    Join Date
    July 2nd, 2011
    Posts
    49
    Interesting discussion.

    Gray Defense, I can see where you are coming from, and I understand you chose what system(s) is best for your business. But from an affiliate's point of view, there would be no reason to join your SAS program. With SAS, you would be using last click, but if any potential customer came from another affiliate who was in your in-house program (and therefore using first click), that first click cookie would invalidate the affiliate's last click cookie (I assume, or is it the other way around?). Why would an affiliate put themselves at that disadvantage? You said customers visit your competitor websites, so I could expect customers to visit other affiliate sites in the niche.

    Would going with first click or last click exclusively make sense?

    Shuvee, does CJ use first click exclusively, or was that a setting that particular merchant chose? I thought CJ used last click wins.

  16. #14
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by CFW View Post
    Interesting discussion.

    Gray Defense, I can see where you are coming from, and I understand you chose what system(s) is best for your business. But from an affiliate's point of view, there would be no reason to join your SAS program. With SAS, you would be using last click, but if any potential customer came from another affiliate who was in your in-house program (and therefore using first click), that first click cookie would invalidate the affiliate's last click cookie (I assume, or is it the other way around?). Why would an affiliate put themselves at that disadvantage? You said customers visit your competitor websites, so I could expect customers to visit other affiliate sites in the niche.

    Would going with first click or last click exclusively make sense?
    You are partially correct. If you are on Shareasale then within the Shareasale sandbox/channel the the last click wins. So if we have no participating In-House affiliates contributing to the sale then there is no issue. If there is in-house participating affiliates then it's a simple matter of channel de-duplication where the first visit channel wins.

    We are a new merchant so because of issues of trust many may want to first participate via Shareasale until they feel more comfortable. Unfortunately our SAS program does not take "coupon only" affiliates, however our In-House program does. SAS does not natively support first click,

  17. #15
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    Shuvee, does CJ use first click exclusively, or was that a setting that particular merchant chose? I thought CJ used last click wins.
    Never heard of CJ using first click.

    GD, search for "conditional representation" if you want a system that doesn't require de-duping.

  18. #16
    The Seal of Aproval rematt's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 19th, 2006
    Location
    The Windy City
    Posts
    4,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Grey Defence View Post
    You are partially correct. If you are on Shareasale then within the Shareasale sandbox/channel the the last click wins. So if we have no participating In-House affiliates contributing to the sale then there is no issue. If there is in-house participating affiliates then it's a simple matter of channel de-duplication where the first visit channel wins.
    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it would appear to me that if the first cookie is from your in-house program, then first cookie wins regardless of which program subsequent affiliates are participating in. And since in-house affiliates have a 2 year non-rewritable cookie, it doesn't matter if the customer doesn't decide to make a purchase 9 months from now after visiting 30 or 40 other affiliate sites. I'm not really sure the in-house affiliate deserves the sale at that point.

    And while I understand you not wanting to punish the first click affiliate for your inability to convert, I fail to understand your willingness to penalize the affiliate that may very well have helped to overcome that inability.

    Some observations I've made over the past few years in this industry:

    - The more complex the program, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.

    - When there are multiple programs in place, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.

    - When a new comer decides that they are going to rewrite the rules of affiliate marketing, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.

    JMHO.

    -rematt
    "I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Richard Nixon

  19. #17
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    Never heard of CJ using first click.

    GD, search for "conditional representation" if you want a system that doesn't require de-duping.
    Will do!
    COORGA Nutraceuticals Corporation
    Makers of [B]GREY DEFENCE[/B] the [URL="http://www.greydefence.com/"]gray hair pill[/URL] that reverses gray hair
    website: [url]www.greydefence.com[/url] | Telephone: 1-800-288-7729

  20. #18
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by rematt View Post
    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it would appear to me that if the first cookie is from your in-house program, then first cookie wins regardless of which program subsequent affiliates are participating in. And since in-house affiliates have a 2 year non-rewritable cookie, it doesn't matter if the customer doesn't decide to make a purchase 9 months from now after visiting 30 or 40 other affiliate sites. I'm not really sure the in-house affiliate deserves the sale at that point.

    And while I understand you not wanting to punish the first click affiliate for your inability to convert, I fail to understand your willingness to penalize the affiliate that may very well have helped to overcome that inability.

    Some observations I've made over the past few years in this industry:

    - The more complex the program, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.

    - When there are multiple programs in place, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.

    - When a new comer decides that they are going to rewrite the rules of affiliate marketing, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.

    JMHO.

    -rematt
    Hi rematt
    Totally reasonable concerns to have. Please allow me to address them individually.

    ... it doesn't matter if the customer doesn't decide to make a purchase 9 months from now after visiting 30 or 40 other affiliate sites. I'm not really sure the in-house affiliate deserves the sale at that point.
    You are correct and I am sympathetic with this view. One of the solutions is to reduce the cookie days, then do some customer programming to the In-House software to manage the 2 year recurring payment so its not dependent on the cookie being on file for the 2 years. We are willing to do this so we can be fair. Now the question becomes what do you folks think the new cookie length should be (keeping in mind it WILL NOT affect the 2 year recurring commissions).

    The more complex the program, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.
    If manually managed yes, great deal of room for errors. But if the logic resides in the software management system and the logic was well constructed then its no more complex that running a pre-configured query in real time.

    When there are multiple programs in place, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.
    My view is a good partnership is built on trust. Trust is enhanced by transparency and consistency. So judge us on how we execute and how we react to issues that comes up with our specific program. Without trust (earned or otherwise) a partnership will be dysfunctional.

    When a new comer decides that they are going to rewrite the rules of affiliate marketing, the more likely affiliates will get screwed.
    Being new the affiliate marketing does not imply being "new to sales force management", "joint venture management" or "partnership management", all have which we are experts in.

    In all fairness, nothing we have suggested will be rewriting any rules of affiliate marketing, 'first click' payment has always been part of the industry - though maybe not the dominant part. Once again, let me remind everyone, this is not merchant against affiliate situation. This is about which affiliate gets attribution, so in either event an affiliate is getting paid.

    We only ask our partners to judge us on our own execution, not what others have done in the past. We cannot speak for other merchants only ourselves and as it pertains to making sure a fair structure is in place, one that balances the needs of multiple stakeholders, I believe we are up to the challenge.

    You just need to decide for yourself whether or not you want to try us out, if the decision is not to, then we respect that. If the decision is OK, let's give it a shot, then in us you will find not only a capable partner, but also a committed one.
    COORGA Nutraceuticals Corporation
    Makers of [B]GREY DEFENCE[/B] the [URL="http://www.greydefence.com/"]gray hair pill[/URL] that reverses gray hair
    website: [url]www.greydefence.com[/url] | Telephone: 1-800-288-7729

  21. #19
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    ...

    GD, search for "conditional representation" if you want a system that doesn't require de-duping.
    Thanks for the reference, I read the available threads and now have a better understanding of how to do this - we would not have thought of this solution if not for the referred material.

    One thing to note is that Shareasale requires that we place their pixel in the "thank you" page. I am not sure if they are OK with doing this programmatically or whether it must always be present (hard coded). Do you know what their view is on this?
    COORGA Nutraceuticals Corporation
    Makers of [B]GREY DEFENCE[/B] the [URL="http://www.greydefence.com/"]gray hair pill[/URL] that reverses gray hair
    website: [url]www.greydefence.com[/url] | Telephone: 1-800-288-7729

  22. #20
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    They request it but can't mandate it.

  23. #21
    Outsourced Program Manager Chris -  AMWSO's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    11,273
    I'm surprised no one raised the issue of cookie stuffing so far.

    GD, one other core issues (on top of those raised above) is the issue of unethical affiliates targeting your program to tag as many consumers as they possibly can knowing that they have a lovely 2 year period to sit back and see if that converts into any sales for them.

    Not only are these folks going to be adding no value they are going to be blocking and killing the value other affiliates are adding, WORSE taking advantage of what ethical affiliates are doing in fact as they can benefit from the marketing being done to drive those cookied consumers back to your site.

    Cheers

    Chris
    Affiliate Marketing by AMWSO. Skype - chrissanderson ::: TEL 1-720-336-1784 ::: www.amwso.net
    Join our affiliate programs :Vaper Empire, Iolo, Art of Tea, or See ALL our Programs here

  24. #22
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris - AMWSO View Post
    I'm surprised no one raised the issue of cookie stuffing so far.

    GD, one other core issues (on top of those raised above) is the issue of unethical affiliates targeting your program to tag as many consumers as they possibly can knowing that they have a lovely 2 year period to sit back and see if that converts into any sales for them.

    Not only are these folks going to be adding no value they are going to be blocking and killing the value other affiliates are adding, WORSE taking advantage of what ethical affiliates are doing in fact as they can benefit from the marketing being done to drive those cookied consumers back to your site.

    Cheers

    Chris
    Hi Chris thanks for the feedback. You are correct, this is a serious area for potential abuse. Our team did discuss that during our deliberation and it will be up to us as program managers to make sure we maintain the integrity of the program by ferreting out and booting cheaters.
    COORGA Nutraceuticals Corporation
    Makers of [B]GREY DEFENCE[/B] the [URL="http://www.greydefence.com/"]gray hair pill[/URL] that reverses gray hair
    website: [url]www.greydefence.com[/url] | Telephone: 1-800-288-7729

  25. #23
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    UPDATE 1:
    Based on the feedback we have received regarding the drawbacks of First Click cookies (especially as explained by Rematt) our team have discussed the best way forward. We have taken into account the concerns expressed herein, while at the same time trying to maintain fundamental fairness to the affiliate who first made the customer aware of our product.

    Our solution: a hybrid cookie.
    When first issued, this cookie will be non-rewritable for the first 30 days - protecting that initial referrer from instantly being overwritten when the customer goes offsite to find additional information. On the 31st day onwards the cookies will lose its write protected status and become essentially a last click cookie.

    UPDATE 2:
    As a direct result of learning about "conditional representation" on this thread #hat tip Chuck Hamrick#, we are also implementing this on our In-House platform to manage both In-House and Network originated sales in real time to make sure that the correct affiliate is credited with the sale.

    SUMMARY
    as a direct result of the feedback received on this thread, our organization reached out to the software developers on whose platform our in-house program runs and they have agreed to implement the above discussed hybrid cookie, as well as, conditional representation in the next version of their software coming out in a few months. So we have temporary postponed the launch of our in-house program until these capabilities are in place and are only accepting affiliates in our Shareasale network program.

    Thanks All for the feedback, in our view they have allowed us to improve our overall affiliate compensation strategy. Please continue to keep the feedback coming...
    COORGA Nutraceuticals Corporation
    Makers of [B]GREY DEFENCE[/B] the [URL="http://www.greydefence.com/"]gray hair pill[/URL] that reverses gray hair
    website: [url]www.greydefence.com[/url] | Telephone: 1-800-288-7729

  26. #24
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    "conditional representation " is server side and doesn't rely on the network.

  27. #25
    Affiliate Manager Grey Defence's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 4th, 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    "conditional representation " is server side and doesn't rely on the network.
    The solution under consideration is server side and does not rely on the network.

    Cheers!
    COORGA Nutraceuticals Corporation
    Makers of [B]GREY DEFENCE[/B] the [URL="http://www.greydefence.com/"]gray hair pill[/URL] that reverses gray hair
    website: [url]www.greydefence.com[/url] | Telephone: 1-800-288-7729

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Preferences Defaults
    By JoyUnltd in forum PopShops
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: August 27th, 2008, 11:00 PM
  2. New Communication Preferences Option
    By l_adams in forum Google Affiliate Network - GAN
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 5th, 2008, 12:38 PM
  3. Data Feed Preferences
    By Allen - AMWSO in forum AMWSO
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 29th, 2004, 06:50 PM
  4. Data Feed Preferences
    By Allen - AMWSO in forum Rakuten LinkShare - LS
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 11th, 2004, 10:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •