Results 1 to 9 of 9
October 6th, 2011, 09:42 AM #1HelloLife (MicroNutra) Pays me 0% Commission for sale!
Dear (affiliate manager),
I recently made a sale of one of your Micronutra products from one of my web sites. I was disappointed to find that I received zero commission, instead of 37% that is promised on your Shareasale page.
Can you explain this discrepancy and see that I see to it that I receive the commission that your program promises?
Thank you for your attention.
October 6th, 2011, 10:03 AM #2
Thanks for the message. We have new terms that went into effect on August 18th. You can read a portion of the announcement further below in case you did not receive the original email notification dated August 11 or the newsletter reminder dated Sept 5.
Key points: "We will no longer partner with coupon/discount/deal websites(existing coupon/discount/deal websites will be removed from the program on September 15, 2011)"
"Effective August 18, 2011: Affiliates(new and existing) may not include HelloLife, a product name, or HelloLife/product name variations within any part of their domain name(s), URL(s), Title tag(s), Description meta-tag(s), and Keyword meta-tag(s)."
Note that on Sept 15 we removed or reduced to 0% many affiliates who did not meet the new requirements. We have been continuing that process. The URL that the sale was referred from does not meet the terms that went into effect Aug 18 (we began full enforcement of the terms on Sept 15). I'll give you 10% on that one, however you'll need to make the necessary adjustments to your pages in order to earn commissions in the future. Make the changes and I'll set you to 37%.
Your URLs and Title tags will need to change. Also we have not been MicroNutra for well over a year. We are now HelloLife. We no longer offer buy 3 get 3 free either.:coffeetim
October 6th, 2011, 10:04 AM #3
So I can't mention the name of the product in the URL, Title or Meta Tags?
Another merchant to yank.:coffeetim
October 6th, 2011, 10:38 AM #4
I was just informed that Vetionx (pet products) has established the same terms for affiliates.:coffeetim
October 6th, 2011, 10:45 AM #5
- Join Date
- November 25th, 2005
URLs and domain names I can understand but meta tags too? That's harsh. You are better off without them! Move on...When the only tool you have is a hammer - everything looks like a nail.
October 6th, 2011, 11:30 AM #6
October 6th, 2011, 11:45 AM #7
October 6th, 2011, 01:46 PM #8
It's not terribly uncommon to have restrictions on meta-tags... often times it is the feeling of the Merchant that they can handle ranking for their own name and product name on their own. It depends on what kind of activities the Merchant is looking for through their Affiliate Program. Usually, with a policy change, there is some kind of abuse or problem that has happened that has forced the change overall - and unfortunately that also includes some affiliates getting caught in the crossfire.
This may not be acceptable to you - and if it isn't you can definitely remove yourself from the program and move on to a different one with terms that are acceptable to you.Thanks,
President/CEO - ShareASale.com, Inc.
October 6th, 2011, 02:44 PM #9Vetionx
That said, merchants should realize that having such "funny" restrictions will also in many cases limit them to affiliates that sit and manipulate every single page individually and manually. They are really saying:
We only want affiliates that just want to mention our product in a Wordpress post. And only if they do not mention us or our product in the topic of their post. [Which the CMS typically sticks in the title/meta by default]
If an affiliate has the ability to automate many of their processes, such as using your network's APIs to download information and create SEO styled pages automatically, such rules would in many cases shoot the automation.
I normally take a worst-case (read: most legal common denominator) to all the funny contracts I have to accept from merchants. This already in many ways severely limit both some of the optimizations I can do and PPC advertising, because sometimes the promotions for the more open merchants could (by specific merchant's contract terms) be more aggressive or effective.
For example: Because of all the many new rules merchants are adding now, I am entirely prohibited from ever running ANY kind of broad match type PPC campaign, if I wanted to. Even if I tried to make it work for only one merchant, and use only common search words (no merchant name involved at all), the necessary negative keywords I would have to add to the campaign to avoid violating some other merchant's exclusion terms range into the many thousands, and the networks do not provide any easy way to download the necessary negative words for each merchant so I can automate it. They are provided only as random, unusable text in the individual contracts. So, the very limiting terms of some merchants in effect impose a limitation on every other merchant involved, whether these merchants want it or not.
I also track in my databases a set of special "permissions" for each merchant, that tells my automation whether certain, normally valid, things are specifically "not allowed" to be shown on a web-page, and adjust outputs accordingly. Such as whether I can show certain prices, whether logos can be used, ..., ... It all takes time to watch for.
On metas/titles, I would tend to probably accept if a merchant said that their terms would not allow their name to be used in title/metas. Not really good, but acceptable. I can teach my systems to automatically work within that margin and avoid that.
But I would not want to teach my systems to not allow such basics as a product name to be used. I would rather boot the merchant from my system, and honestly personally believe that if they want to limit their affiliates that much, they should not have an affiliate program.
See my previous post on the Vetionx thread for other comments.
By Convergence in forum Commission Junction - CJReplies: 7Last Post: April 27th, 2012, 12:13 PM
By buy_online in forum Rakuten LinkShare - LSReplies: 2Last Post: February 9th, 2004, 08:40 AM
By CodeJockey in forum Midnight Cafe'Replies: 1Last Post: May 22nd, 2002, 07:54 PM