Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46
  1. #1
    Newbie
    Join Date
    February 23rd, 2006
    Posts
    4
    Affiliate commissions -
    Hi Everyone:
    I am an affiliate manager and new at Abestweb. I have a question for whoever that could answer it.
    I am currently managing an affiliate program that partnered two different networks at the time (CJ and Affiliatefuture). The problem is that several orders numbers have been reported for the two networks at the time. I would like to be fair with the affiliates and credit the sales to the one that deserves it. All the affiliates at CJ have the earliest click time. What would you recommend to do in cases like this?

    I appreciate your help.
    fabi

  2. #2
    Moderator MichaelColey's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Mansfield, TX
    Posts
    16,232
    If it's fairly isolated and it's not the same affiliate in both networks and neither is a parasite, I would let both affiliates keep the commissions. A little bit of good will goes a long way.

    In the meantime, I would recommend looking into a solution so that you only report to one network or the other, depending on which one was the most recent click.
    Michael Coley
    Amazing-Bargains.com
     Affiliate Tips | Merchant Best Practices | Affiliate Friendly? | Couponing | CPA Networks? | ABW Tips | Activating Affiliates
    "Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Join Date
    February 23rd, 2006
    Posts
    4
    Michael:
    Thank you. I kind of feel that the earliest click should be given the commission.
    but I wanted to ask anyway. What I find interesting is the fact that the 5 orders that I have with the same problem involve mostly the same afiliates in each network.
    Is there a reason to belive that there is any parasite situation here?

  4. #4
    general fuq mrbshouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Argieville
    Posts
    1,381
    fabi,

    what is the time difference between the clicks and do you have the refferal url? Look into how the traffic is being generated and you will have a better understanding of the second affilaite.

  5. #5
    general fuq mrbshouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Argieville
    Posts
    1,381
    Fabi,

    what is the time difference between the clicks and do you have the refferal url? Look into how the traffic is being generated and you will have a better understanding of the second affilaite.

  6. #6
    15 years and counting
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    6,121
    The last click should be given the commission. It's the rule.
    But. Something is not kosher. You need to investigate further if the 5 orders involve mostly the same afiliates in each network.
    If one of them is a parasite, he will get the last click and he don't deserve it.

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Join Date
    February 23rd, 2006
    Posts
    4
    Zeus, yes...something is not clear. Three of the 5 orders involve the same affiliate.

    The other two orders are coming from different affiliates. However these are the highest orders amount earned by the network.

  8. #8
    Full Member fg20878's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 29th, 2005
    Posts
    356
    Talking
    I like MichaelColry's suggestion. But if you don't want to pay both of them and can't decide which one should be rewarded, flip a coin.

  9. #9
    ABW Ambassador Snib's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,303
    I think it should be the last affiliate link that was clicked as Zeus said.

    - Scott
    Hatred stirs up strife, But love covers all transgressions.

  10. #10
    Moderator MichaelColey's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Mansfield, TX
    Posts
    16,232
    I agree about it being the last affiliate link (assuming you're not going to compensate both).

    But you probably need to research things a little closer based on what you said. You might have a parasite or an affiliate trying to double-dip.
    Michael Coley
    Amazing-Bargains.com
     Affiliate Tips | Merchant Best Practices | Affiliate Friendly? | Couponing | CPA Networks? | ABW Tips | Activating Affiliates
    "Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela

  11. #11
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Nunya, Business
    Posts
    23,684
    "All the affiliates at CJ have the earliest click time."

    Last click gets the sale, thats just basic. I would drop you if I found out you didn't do that.

  12. #12
    Newbie
    Join Date
    February 23rd, 2006
    Posts
    4
    Thank you for your help. This is the case that involve mostly the same affiliates in both networks.

  13. #13
    15 years and counting
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    6,121
    A rogue affiliate can set two cookies with a click, one for each network. The best is to look at the originating URL and check closely the information in each cookie.

  14. #14
    Internet Cowboy
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,662
    If you didn't have two affiliate programs on separate networks your life would be much easier, more quality affiliates would work with you and you would not have to spend so much time figuring stuff out.
    You can reach as many affiliates on one network as you can on two, unless you are lazy and do not do your job of recruiting.


  15. #15
    Internet Cowboy
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabi
    Thank you for your help. This is the case that involve mostly the same affiliates in both networks.
    I just saw this. Let me guess...this affiliate also has a 40%+ closing ratio in your program.


  16. #16
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Nunya, Business
    Posts
    23,684
    "If you didn't have two affiliate programs on separate networks your life would be much easier, more quality affiliates would work with you and you would not have to spend so much time figuring stuff out.
    You can reach as many affiliates on one network as you can on two, unless you are lazy and do not do your job of recruiting."

    What? A merchant would have more affiliates if they were only on 1 network instead of 2? Some affiliates won't put up links to a merchant if they were on 1 network, they would if they were on another. And last click shouldn't be hard to figure out. Some people will only put up links to merchants on SAS. So if a merchant on CJ opened up at SAS, they would get those affiliates and still have the ones at CJ.

  17. #17
    Lite On The Do, Heavy On The Nuts Donuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Winter Park, FL
    Posts
    6,930
    Trust, you lack the same perspective / opinion that Uncle Scooter and I share concerning parasites - we've discussed it many times. Us doomsdayers and naysayers and whining, uncreative, lack of passion types who feel that parasites are a very significant and real risk, view dual platforms as a way of blindfolding affiliates to the truth while exponentially growing the damage that a cheater can commit.

    While Uncle Scooter's wrong about the total number of affiliates (being in a network will get you quantity), he really meant quality of your overall affiliate pool and it's earning potential. Power affiliates step away from dualies, tri-lies, quad-sies, quintup-sies....

    But it cuz we're just negative people in general and look to blame random things around us.

  18. #18
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Nunya, Business
    Posts
    23,684
    Makes no sense. So if a parasite free merchant on CJ opens up on SAS what horrors will happen? Power affiliates will drop them, huh? You're now blaming dual platforms for the parasite problem? How about blaming the affiliate managers for lettting them in. You seemed pretty excited when parasite free Rugman (CJ) opened up on SAS. Now you disagree with yourself?
    Last edited by Trust; March 7th, 2006 at 04:47 PM.

  19. #19
    Lite On The Do, Heavy On The Nuts Donuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Winter Park, FL
    Posts
    6,930
    Rugman is a dualie, both SAS and CJ, and says they are moving towards SAS only - and that excites me. And I never said Rugman was parasite free at CJ, in fact I posted the opposite here at ABW - but your memory fails you. I have continuously urged them to leave CJ because of the usual players that CJ sticks in there, pushes to be in there, mischaracterizations to good intentioned AMs to gain approval and more sneaky tactics that you know CJ uses every day.

    I do blame affiliate managers, and when there's more than one of them involved, there's a greater chance of not all of them being tuned in to the issue.

    OmahaSteaks, I was part of outing that issue. Ink merchant at CJ who now has a private deal with SAHS - a dualie - and tells no one - I outed. There are others that I have been privately communicating with merchants and networks about as well.

    As I said, we have very different perspectives on the parasite issue. You think it's a minor issue that's just another cost of doing business. I think it's a aberration and an insidious crime committed against our community. And I can tell you one thing's for certain, parasites are quite happy with the recent trend of dual platforms - it expands their ability to pickpocket without them having to lift a finger and it helps to conceal their true activities.

  20. #20
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Nunya, Business
    Posts
    23,684
    "Rugman is a dualie, both SAS and CJ, and says they are moving towards SAS only - and that excites me."

    And if they opened up at Avantlink too, you would do what, drop them?

    "Power affiliates step away from dualies, tri-lies, quad-sies, quintup-sies...."

    Complete nonsense you can't back up. A power affiliate I think we can agree is one that makes money with said merchant? So if they open up elsewhere, they won't make money anymore with them? They'll drop them?

    A merchant can be just at one network and have plenty of parasites. They can be at just one network and be parasite free. And they can open up on another network and do the same thing. You should focus the blame on where it should lie, that's on the affiliate managers letting parasites in. Now you want to blame dual platforms. All this time and the answer to the parasite problem was merchants just staying on one network. Amazing.

  21. #21
    Moderator MichaelColey's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Mansfield, TX
    Posts
    16,232
    I've never dropped a merchant because they've had programs available on multiple networks. In fact, with some networks I consider that a plus. I've found probably a dozen LinkShare and BeFree merchants that pay more than double the base rate on a CPA Network. And often at Net 15, to boot.

    Then again, I've never dropped a merchant because they have parasites or because they convert poorly.

    If I think a merchant has potential, I try them out. If they convert well, I promote them more. If they convert poorly, I promote them less. (And if they're parasite-infested, that will negatively impact their conversions.)
    Michael Coley
    Amazing-Bargains.com
     Affiliate Tips | Merchant Best Practices | Affiliate Friendly? | Couponing | CPA Networks? | ABW Tips | Activating Affiliates
    "Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela

  22. #22
    Affiliate Marketing Consultant Andy Rodriguez's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Sunny Miami
    Posts
    8,384
    Ok, time to jump in....

    been watching this thread but with 2 new merchants coming onboard, the AMC seminar around the corner and keeping the steam going on our merchants, had no time but the rugman issue came up.

    I will expand on it further.

    While I "can see" the reasoning for Scoot and Donuts feeling how they do and agree to some extent, it all depends on the intention of the given merchant and the reasoning for the dual networks running at any given time. You have to take each case and disect it, taking into consideration (a) the merchant, (b) the AM or OPM, (3) the reason behind the dual networks and (4) the programs performance within the affiliate channel.

    I will use ARC as an example:

    1) We have several merchants in the transition phase from xyz network to SAS. I would be doing an injustice to any of my merchants if as a consultant I would tell them to shut down active program on one network to make an overnight switch to another network. Affiliate programs don't work that way and changes can not be made on a dime. Here is a reason why a given merchant will operate as a "dualie" and IMO, is perfectly ok.

    Case in ChecksUnlimited - Parasite ridden, and I mean every known para with a download was in that program at BF. We opened on SAS in November, kept BF running and ramped up SAS. The program is smoking to say the least on SAS, BF will be shut down come April 1st. This is a dualie that many have here who have posted have promoted and have made tons of money. Has the fact that every para is on BF affected the programs performance on SAS? I do not think it has, our purpose was clear and our focus was targeted.

    The program is still a "dualie" as of this post and is doing 50K a week in sales, parasite free. In BF, the most it did was about 30K per month with paras.

    Case in ReStockIt - one affiliate that "can" be considered a para, UP. Not even a blip on the radar. Am I concerned about them, yes, have we discussed, yes. I am not the the merchant though. As it stands now, we are getting ready to open on SAS. Will we be "dualies" as we ramp up SAS and phase out CJ. Can we do it overnight, no...

    Case in Rugman - A few paras tried to sneak in, some may have but Liz did an excellent job at policing, sometimes taking time away from other activities that were more essential to program management. We came onboard and first thing we did is make the SAS launch a top priority. Lower cost of operation, less time policing and more time activating and growing the program. We will be "dualies" for a good 9 more months at least....this is one huge program that won't turn on a dime.

    To sum it up, I would not be doing my job if I did not use the "dualie" process to migrate and effectively run the programs in a manner thatwas conducive to keeping sales volumes up while making the transitions.

    Using a blanket statement like the ones mentioned here, "dualies" merchants are bad, "dualies" merchants are not worth promoting etc. are not only wrong, but are an example of the lack of knowledge within the affiliate marketing community and the lack of understanding of the affiliate managers work by affiliates that make such statements.

    When talking about "dualies" - many factors need to be taken into consideration as to the "why" they are 'dualies". Care should be taken to avoid the wide negative brush strokes used in this thread implying that a merchant is doing something wrong or the merchant is "out to cheat" their affiliates...

    Some may well have that intention, but for others it's a necessary transitionary process to improve their program...
    Andy Rodriguez Consulting, Affiliate Program Management and Consulting Services, Since 2001
    www.andyrodriguez.com | E: abw@andyrodriguez.com | P: (888) 931-ANDY (2639) | Skype: affiliatedoctor | AIM & MSN: AffiliateDoctor | Subscribe To Our ABW Forum Posts | Follow me on Twitter | Join Our Affiliate Programs

  23. #23
    Internet Cowboy
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,662
    Andy,
    I will make an exception, actually I will make two. One is for a merchant who is in transition. If a merchant has been on CJ and is now also on SAS and plans to be ONLY SAS, that is wonderful, but I need to know that and that information is not available to me unless it is one of your programs and I ask you. My second exception is for the programs managed by ARC. You will look after the interest of affiliates better than any AM I have met yet, so that is worthy of notation.

    Where my problem lies is in the case of Omaha Steaks and others who clearly have every parasite in the book in their programs and open up at SAS or AvantLink to get the affiliates who are concerned about sharing their income with forceably downloaded applications.

    My other problem, more of a question really, is who sets up the code in the merchant's shopping cart that determines who the commissioned affiliate is. Does the merchant do that? IS it the same merchant who has no clue of how theives are stealing from him and his other affiliates? Is this the same merchant who has UP in their program because they think that UP is a viable business model and would never ever do something like steal a sale from their other affiliates even if the person infected with their software clicked the "No, I do not wish to use UP and save for college with this purchase" link? (as clearly demonstrated here) SOOOOO many merchants and Affiliate Managers are so incredibly clueless when it comes to these issues, yet out of either laziness or a desire to play both sides of the parasite issue, they have programs on multiple networks.

    The AM who started this thread said:
    Thank you. I kind of feel that the earliest click should be given the commission.
    but I wanted to ask anyway. What I find interesting is the fact that the 5 orders that I have with the same problem involve mostly the same afiliates in each network.
    Is there a reason to belive that there is any parasite situation here?
    With all due respect to this person and not to be too rough on him, how in the hell can this AM do a good job of policing his program when he is unable to determine what is happening in the quote above? What are the odds of the same affiliate's cookie being set in two programs on multiple sales unless this affiliate is into some kind of trickery?

    Fabi,
    I mean no harm, but your post has driven home my point that an inexperienced affiliate manager running a program on dual platforms is an environment in which cheaters will do well and the others get screwed!!!

    So, I remain convinced that
    A) unless the AM doing it is a seasoned veteran
    and
    B) unless the network discloses to the affiliate that a merchant is offering their program on more than one network
    the network and/or the AM are doing a serious dis-service to the affiliate.

    I welcome more debate on this as it needs to be brought into the open because it is no longer a trend. It is here and it is happening every day.

    Affiliates need to know when a merchant is on more than one affiliate network. Whoever fails to disclose this information is not being fair to the affiliate.


  24. #24
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Nunya, Business
    Posts
    23,684
    Debate what? There's always been merchants on more than one network. It's not hidden or anything, just look. The problem you have with Omaho Steaks is more that they have parasites, not that they're on more than one network. If you best parasite free merchants on parasite free SAS opened up their program on parasite free Avantlinks, what's the problem? It seems you and Donuts think the problem is dual networks when it's really a merchant having parasites in one network and opening up on a parasite free network.

  25. #25
    Internet Cowboy
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,662
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustNo1
    ...when it's really a merchant having parasites in one network and opening up on a parasite free network.
    BINGO!! This is deceptive on the merchant's part. Operating on dual platforms empowers this.

    I really don't have a problem with the individual components of a nuclear bomb, but when assembled, these components can spell trouble for everyone involved. The same applies here.

    Is it ultimately up to the affiliate to research this? YES!!!

    Does the network that claims to be parasite-free have a responsibility to let the affiliate know that a given merchant is running their program on multiple networks to let the affiliate know they need to research it? Only if they are truly interested in serving the affilaites who have come to trust them over time.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hostgator affiliate program does not pay many affiliate commissions
    By Azam Marketing in forum Commission Junction - CJ
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: October 15th, 2012, 10:58 AM
  2. Warning - Entireweb Affiliate Program Does Not Pay Affiliate Commissions
    By Affiliateoldguy in forum Unethical Merchants
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 16th, 2012, 08:48 PM
  3. Not getting any affiliate commissions
    By ukpianos.co.uk in forum Commission Junction - CJ
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 15th, 2006, 11:21 AM

Posting Permissions

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