Maybe old news . . . Party killing rakeback?

NateDog · #1 05-05-2005, 10:18 PM

I don't have rakeback at Party, not sure if anyone else does, but I'm pretty sure you do. This post was at IGM affilaite's forum . Interesting read.

Yobz · #2 05-05-2005, 10:25 PM

So this is probably the dumbest question anyone here has every asked, but: why does party care about rakeback? More specifically, why are affiliates so happy that you can't track individuals anymore?

Somekid · #3 05-05-2005, 10:29 PM

all of the friendly posts from affiliates just look like affiliate greed to me. I had no idea affiliates felt this way.

Punker · #4 05-05-2005, 10:32 PM

Tracking individuals means being able to pay rakeback. If Party disables the ability to track individuals, the rakeback paying affiliates cannot pay accurately. So, the non rake back paying affiliates are happy.

krazyace5 · #5 05-05-2005, 10:32 PM

These people really are douche bags. Rules aside these people are idiots.

krazyace5 · #6 05-05-2005, 10:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So this is probably the dumbest question anyone here has every asked, but: why does party care about rakeback? More specifically, why are affiliates so happy that you can't track individuals anymore?

[/ QUOTE ]

They get to keep all of the rake and make more money.

bpb · #7 05-05-2005, 10:34 PM

Affiliate A puts in effort to sign up player B. Player B becomes a regular player, and generates revenue which goes to affiliate A. Player B learns about rakeback. Player B opens a new account using affiliate C, who agrees to kick back some revenue.

Affiliate A gets pissed off. He's the one who acquired player B, and now he's getting nothing. He bitches and moans at party, and threatens to stop sending new players to party.

Party is pissed off because Affiliate A is pissed off. They have also incurred some small fixed cost due to the new account opening. (ie ... Neteller fees associated with the removal of money from the old account to the new one)

Basically, the player and affiliate C win. Affiliate A loses big. Now, if affiliate A acquired the player by spamming message boards, or hijacking google searches, etc., then screw him. But if affiliate A acquired player B through some active marketing, then you can surely see how rakeback really sucks for him.

The thing that pisses me off, is party gave explicit permission to certain affiliates to provide rakeback. By disabling individual trackers, they essentially went back on their word.

bpb · #8 05-05-2005, 10:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
These people really are douche bags. Rules aside these people are idiots.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, these people are not douche bags. They have a revenue stream that is being hijacked by the rakeback providers.

I would guess that 95% of the rakeback affiliates are signing up existing players (either on a new skin, or a duplicate account). They are therefore taking money from the original affiliate who signed up that player.

I love rakeback. I'm glad I have it. It's great for the players. But at least try to understand why the affiliates who are actively recruiting new blood (FISH) aren't happy.

krazyace5 · #9 05-05-2005, 10:48 PM

Your post make sense. I may have been too harsh.

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the complainers are the spammers though.

justin D · #10 05-05-2005, 10:52 PM

One of my best friends was my original party affiliate. I didnt know how affiliates worked back then. "Sign up and use code XXXXX and get XXX bonus, you have to use this code and only this code or you wont get a bonus at all."

It was a great deal, took him all of 30 seconds to explain it to me. I got $100 in bonus money and he collected 25% of my rake for about 90,000 raked hands.

When I found out how much money he was making off of me, I wanted to kick his ass.

I guess my point is do affiliates really deserve that big of a cut to bring in a player?