|
|
#1
03-25-2004, 02:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
A new part to the affiliate debate
It's an obvious point, but one that I've never seen made here.
Mason and TwoPlusTwo are affiliates. In fact, I'm just guessing, but I would bet that TwoPlusTwo makes enough off of its affiliateships to pay Mat's salary, as well as some profit on top of that. 
|
|
#3
03-25-2004, 02:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A new part to the affiliate debate
Yep, I clicked on that little party square to the right of this message. HEFAP & TOP have helped me a lot and I figure I've probably paid 3K or so each for them by now.
|
|
#4
03-25-2004, 02:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A new part to the affiliate debate
Do they just get ad $ for the banners?
|
|
#5
03-25-2004, 02:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A new part to the affiliate debate
Is Conjelco the affiliate?
There's no question that SOMEONE is an affiliate from the banner ads to the right.
|
|
#6
03-25-2004, 02:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes, 2+2 charges advertising fees NM
|
|
#7
03-25-2004, 03:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A new part to the affiliate debate
[ QUOTE ]
There's no question that SOMEONE is an affiliate from the banner ads to the right. [/ QUOTE ] Show me the proof. rJ
|
|
#8
03-25-2004, 04:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A new part to the affiliate debate
If you do an archieve search you will see that this issue has been addressed. They are not affiliates but rather receive a set amount for hosting the banner. I think their lawyers are smart enough to advise them not to be affiliates.
regards cubs
|
|
#10
03-25-2004, 05:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A new part to the affiliate debate
word. now that you post it, i think i might recall it.
my apologies, folks.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
