Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    595
    "Shoes.com has decided to stop reversing all Commission Junction orders except for fraudulent orders. In addition, we have doubled the duration of our return day cookie from 60 days to 120 days"
    I have them at Performics and they perform great for me. I don't understand what they said about reversing all CJ orders? and now they won't? Maybe its cuz im tired i'm not getting this.

  2. #2
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,694
    It sounds very similar to what Brooks Brothers is doing at Linkshare. They dropped the base commission a couple percentage points in exchange for (apparently) paying for all sales whether reversed or not. At least we think that's what they are saying. What it would mean is that basically, you are being paid for customer acquisition; even if the customer returns what they bought. At least that is how I interpret it.

    {

  3. #3
    ABW Ambassador mousejockey's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,494
    johnniebry,I'm confused too, maybe they'll come and shed a little more light on what
    "Shoes.com has decided to stop reversing all Commission Junction orders except for fraudulent orders" actually means, unless Eaglefire is right

  4. #4
    ABW Ambassador mousejockey's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,494
    johnniebry,I'm confused too, maybe they'll come and shed a little more light on what
    "Shoes.com has decided to stop reversing all Commission Junction orders except for fraudulent orders" actually means, unless Eaglefire is right

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    155
    Very odd and leaves a lot of unanswered questions, hopefully they will clarify. I would assume that no merchant would reverse orders unless due to fraud, or the order couldn't ship due to out of stock items, or something was returned. Maybe they're trying to say that if someone pleaces an order, and they can't ship for reasons other than fraud (out of stock, orders get returned, etc), they'll pay the commission anyway out of goodwill? Doesn't make a lot of sense, but if they want to pay for something they can't ship, etc, I'm sure no one will complain.

    A very cryptic email indeed...

  6. #6
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    346
    Maybe we've got too cynical over time. Sounds to me like they're really saying, "hey, you made the sale, and it's not your fault if goods are returned or not-in-stock, so here's the money." If so, that's very fair, very positive, and very unexpected in this field...

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,694
    I think that actually is what they are saying MJBC - even if the person returns they item, they've acquired a new customer through the publisher and the publisher should be compensated. That was the essential gist of the Brooks' Brothers' email.

    But it does also bring up the question of whether or not affiliates had been getting paid for orders when a customer simply exchanged for another item.

    {

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    155
    I agree, that's the impression I got too when I first read the email. Suprising that they would pay on unshipped or returned sales, assuming this is the case, but like MJBC said, its more of a "we got a new customer, so we'll pay you anyway".

    If that is the case, 2 thumbs up Shoes.com!

  9. #9
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,694
    I am guessing a drop in commissions will follow to offset; but with a high reversal rate merchant I'd rather have the drop and get paid for net sales.

    I don't think it's an entirely altruistic move however; I am betting that some efficiency experts came to the realization that it is far less labor intensive and would save enough man hours all the way around to justify credit for net sales than it would to extend/reverse/etc.

    {

  10. #10
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,133
    I guess this is somewhat funny to me. We have been with Shoes.com for some time and have NEVER once had a returned sale.

    What this translates to is, no benefit at all....

    The cookie period is nice, however.

  11. #11
    Outsourced Program Manager
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,191
    This post is to help clear up any ambiguity about the new Shoes.com chargeback policy. Our new chargeback policy in Commission Junction is to reverse only fraudulent orders, as opposed to reversing for cancellations, returns, etc. The idea is along the lines of what eaglefire mentioned: it is a customer acquisition and more convenient for everyone involved. We want you to be happy to do business with us.

    The Shoes.com commission is 10%. We do not plan on lowering it. To recap: The Shoes.com Commission Junction program will only reverse orders because of fraud, not for other reasons.

    Best regards,

  12. #12
    ABW Ambassador Packy's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    4,205
    Brook, WTG!

    Brook, maybe you can help me out. Last month I have around 30 sales between FF and Shoes.com. This month I am only showing 3 sales. My clickthroughs have been about half of what I sent to your sites last month so far. Any insight as to what the problem might be or what I should do to find out about it. Thanks Brook.

    [ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: DaPackster ]

  13. #13
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,650
    Are we still allowed to call them "shoes"? [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

  14. #14
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,694
    "flexible foot-protection devices"

    {

  15. #15
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    222
    LOL, I hope so. The alternative, "An outer covering for the human foot" just won't work for me...

  16. #16
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,694
    On a more serious note, WTG Brook. I am hoping this will become a trend in the industry. We've seen several come down the pike lately that make it more difficult for affiliates and it's good to see one that makes life easier and helps even the score.

    quote:
    it is a customer acquisition and more convenient for everyone involved


    We tend to only think of reversals from the affiliate's perspective, but I am sure it must be a real bear for companies and their accounting departments to have to keep track of crediting, debiting, extending, re-crediting, etc, etc, etc.

    {

  17. #17
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    222
    Sheesh - It finally just dawned on me what that { was for, Eaglefire.

    Edited for spelling. And to say I will now refrain from going OT.

    [ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: Kat ]

  18. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

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