MarketLeverage vs Skrilla

[Jon]

Here's the deal guys..

I killed the poll because we are going to do an investigation into this. If ML is at fault, they'll be given a week to pay Skrilla or be banned from WF and their ads removed until they do right in the affiliate's eyes, in which we'll hold a vote to see when people think they can come back. If Skrilla is at fault, he'll apologize or just take everything back.

Either way, we're not involved directly in this, just acting as a mediator to a shitty situation. We're going to speak with the advertiser, network and affiliate until we can get to the bottom of this and see who is at fault, or if it just turned into one big miscommunication shitstorm.

The time has come where scenarios like this happen all too often to affiliates, networks and advertisers, and since no one else seems to be doing shit about it, then we will.

I am putting together a team of seasoned industry people whom I know and trust and who have ZERO ties to any of the parties involved. We're going to document our results and share them here. From now on, I want all ad networks, merchants, and AM's to know that the days of fucking over your affiliates are OVER. From now on, we are going to take a look into it and see who is at fault, and show our results here from an unbias perspective. Times are changing, and it's about goddamn time something is done about this shit, because if you guys can't see wrong from right when it comes to affiliates, then you shouldn't be in business, period!

 

[Jon]

I also just want to note that for the most part, Skrilla and MarketLeverage have handled this VERY well and pretty professionally, compared to previous spats on the forum. I hope for the sake of all thee parties involved that they can all come to a fair compromise and dead the issue immediately.

 

[lerchmo]

fuck that, the advertiser made money on the leads period. Forcing him to stop sending traffic is one thing, but witholding money they made from his traffic is another.
I think they found a way to get free leads by pointing out a technicality, 1 complaint or 10 complaints doesnt justify not paying out.

 

[cashflowrusty]

IF the rules were broken(they appear to be) and IF ML pays, they set a precedent for all future affiliates, let alone having previously denied affiliates fight to get their money.

Chalk it up to a mistake, a painfully expensive one... The TOS were broken, and it's all legal, so where is the argument? If ML gets paid or not, does not matter.

Actually, if ML was monitoring the affiliate campaigns (as I understand those companies do) with their own emails, then they should have caught it early, and stopped skrilla early on.

But ultimately, skrilla did break the TOS, and admits it (ignorance of the TOS is no excuse, I'm afraid), so he knows he is out the $$$.

No investigation needed.

 

[Jon]

fuck that, the advertiser made money on the leads period. Forcing him to stop sending traffic is one thing, but witholding money they made from his traffic is another.
I think they found a way to get free leads by pointing out a technicality, 1 complaint or 10 complaints doesnt justify not paying out.

Yep agreed.. and most of us have had this happen to us too many damn times with no way to fight back, so let's stop letting people get away with this shit if they are at fault!

 

[CPAPIMP]

true, but why should ML benefit from the mistake, as that rule was probably handed down from the advertiser, no? So if the advertiser still pays out, then ML should do the same.

They creative was obviously changed, and it violated the terms stated, but if the advertiser had no problem with it, then ML shouldn't.

If advertiser pays, ML pays.

 

[Squirrelinabox]

Gimmee a break.

Read skrilla's ad copy. He's actively deceiving people. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like he should be lucky he's not being sued for fraud, or false advertisement, or something like that. That type of emailing is a scam in my book. Meanwhile, ML had clearly written rules in their TOS that skrilla broke. He should get the money for the other campaigns (which it sounds like will happen), but he shouldn't get any money for this campaign regardless of any other factors. If the advertiser made a billion dollars off it, it doesn't matter. You break an agreement, you suffer the consequences.

 

[skrilla]

I think you guys might be missing something here. Before I took this to WF, me and ML HAD an agreement. The agreement was FULL POP (100%) on the leads for a week plus full pop on the 16k i was owed which amount to $20.5k. MARKET LEVERAGE BACKED OUT OF THIS DEAL AFTER AGREEING!!!

They never sent the wire when they were supposed to and kept making up BS why they wouldn't send me my money! The excuse they came up with was they didn't feel like sending the money because the traffic wasn't where they liked it. BOO-Fucking-WHOO! As mentioned in previous post, I sent Michael a Kohls Ad to be approved. I sent the advertisement out on Thursday night. So I was living up to my agreement.

How am I to know that I would ever get paid on the 16k or even 22k I'm owed if I didn't take it to the boards?? All I'm hearing from this company is nonsense and BS. They have delayed payments twice and backed out of an agreement!

 

[skrilla]

To clear up a few things:

• In response to the “Double – Opt in” reference in our terms and conditions. ML does not require all mailers to use only double opt in list. Lists obviously must be compliant with all laws etc. We Require double opt in only when an affiliate is using a naked non redirected link from the MarketLeverage system in an email campaign. Since nearly all affiliates redirect their own traffic for tracking purposes..this is really does not affect many people.
• The approved creative had:
  • “(Participation required. See below for details.)” in the FIRST line of the ad. Skrilla took this out.
  • Any approved subject line that offered the consumer something “Get a $500 Harry and David ® Gift Card” ALSO included “by Participating” Skrilla rewrote a new and deceptive subject line and left out “By Participating”
  • There is a detailed list of requirements for a consumer in the approved ad – AGAIN SKRILLA DELETED THIS:

To receive your gift you must: 1) register with valid information; 2) complete the user survey; 3) complete at least 1 Silver, 1 Gold and 2 Platinum Offers. Purchase may be required. Please read the Terms and Conditions for details. Upon completion of all requirements, we will ship the incentive gift to you with free shipping. eSurveyPanel.com is an independent rewards program for consumers and is not affiliated with, sponsored by or endorsed by any of the listed products or retailers. Trademarks, service marks, logos, and/or domain names (including, without limitation, the individual names of products and retailers) are the property of their respective owners.

• • Finally…the last line of the ad which skrilla also made up “Confirm your Email & Pickup your Gift Basket Online Now” is completely misleading. A consumer would believe that their email address is all they need to get a gift basket which is already “Being Sent”! How is this a legit lead? The approved ad has several notices and an explanation about what a consumer can expect to do to get the GIFT CARD (NOT GIFT BASKET). In skrilla’s ad all of these notices have been removed and consumers are told a basket is being sent and all that is required is an email address!

• I am handling this because Sal is on vacation.
• In Summary
  • Skrilla was not authorized to change the ad and did so in a damaging way for the advertiser and the consumer.
  • Skrilla admitted he sent the ad.
  • MarketLeverage received a legal notice from Harry and David directed to MarketLeverage. If skrilla would like we would be happy to direct Harry and David directly to him. Our policy is to resolve these things and only provide info on the affiliate if compelled to do so.
  • MarketLeverage WILL NOT BE GETTING PAID from the advertiser for skrillas leads.

will use Double Opt-In (i.e., when a potential subscriber checks a box wishing to be added to an E-Mail list or to receive a newsletter, and then receives a confirmation E-Mail) when sending Company urls (code) to potential subscribers, or when sending newsletters or E-Mails with Company code.

You can spin it anyway you want but you are in clear violation of your own TOS. Hell, I guarantee that 95% of your email marketers aren't using double-optin data. Now you say it doesn't have to be double-optin. This is proof that most of your TOS is bullshit. See where I'm comming from here?

 

[MikeKelly]

1. Please see my prior post about Double Opt in. To be clear: WE DO NOT REQUIRE double opt in. Every email publisher we work with knows this. We require double opt in only if the publisher does not redirect ML links and sends them naked (Company URLS as opposed to Publishers URLS). After having to replace a hosting account a few years back due to complaints we realized that we needed pubs to redirect their own traffic as opposed to running our links directly. Of course we require pubs to be compliant with all applicable laws.

2. Again, please see my first post. I acknowledged that I agreed to pay you on Monday...After my managers connected you with the Legal Notice from Harry and David, and reviewed the way you changed the creative and also took out all of the REQUIRED advertiser disclaimers...they decided to pay you under normal pay terms (net 15). We give weekly payments to people based on volume and compliance.

 

[skrilla]

1. Please see my prior post about Double Opt in. To be clear: WE DO NOT REQUIRE double opt in. Every email publisher we work with knows this. We require double opt in only if the publisher does not redirect ML links and sends them naked (Company URLS as opposed to Publishers URLS). After having to replace a hosting account a few years back due to complaints we realized that we needed pubs to redirect their own traffic as opposed to running our links directly. Of course we require pubs to be compliant with all applicable laws.

2. Again, please see my first post. I acknowledged that I agreed to pay you on Monday...After my managers connected you with the Legal Notice from Harry and David, and reviewed the way you changed the creative and also took out all of the REQUIRED advertiser disclaimers...they decided to pay you under normal pay terms (net 15). We give weekly payments to people based on volume and compliance.

You agreed to pay me last Friday too!! WHat happened there? Why dont you pay up to avoid the negative publicity?? You guys brought this on yourselves. How do I know if I'd get paid on net 15??? Since you have TWICE lied to me about getting paid. Again feeding me with you alls BS.

 

[skrilla]

And please explain to all the WF members why you backed out of our agreement?? They are dying to get a clear anwser from you.

 

[ma1lking68]

Does anyone know the law on what happens when a network/advertiser is dealt with a lawsuit from a company like that? Would be interesting to know.

IMOP, if I was Skilla I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot poll. Sounds like the rules were broken after reading the TOS, and assuming a notice was already sent by H&D (which I assume is true since it would be pretty easy to prove), who knows where this could go. Why would you even make yourself more into the culprit knowing this? That has "Bad Idea Jeans" written all over it.

Truth of the matter is the FTC is starting to really crack down on this industry due to some bad affiliate eggs as well as some bad advertiser eggs. So we best learn to play by the rules b/c I think stuff like this is going to happen more and more.

 

[skrilla]

Does anyone know the law on what happens when a network/advertiser is dealt with a lawsuit from a company like that? Would be interesting to know.

IMOP, if I was Skilla I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot poll. Sounds like the rules were broken after reading the TOS, and assuming a notice was already sent by H&D (which I assume is true since it would be pretty easy to prove), who knows where this could go. Why would you even make yourself more into the culprit knowing this? That has "Bad Idea Jeans" written all over it.

Truth of the matter is the FTC is starting to really crack down on this industry due to some bad affiliate eggs as well as some bad advertiser eggs. So we best learn to play by the rules b/c I think stuff like this is going to happen more and more.

What did ML hire you to make posts supporting their claim?? You signup today and this si your first post. Your credability is no good here.

 

[BlondeTM]

Does anyone know the law on what happens when a network/advertiser is dealt with a lawsuit from a company like that? Would be interesting to know.

IMOP, if I was Skilla I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot poll. Sounds like the rules were broken after reading the TOS, and assuming a notice was already sent by H&D (which I assume is true since it would be pretty easy to prove), who knows where this could go. Why would you even make yourself more into the culprit knowing this? That has "Bad Idea Jeans" written all over it.

Truth of the matter is the FTC is starting to really crack down on this industry due to some bad affiliate eggs as well as some bad advertiser eggs. So we best learn to play by the rules b/c I think stuff like this is going to happen more and more.

Or...we best NOT play by the rules if the rules change only in the rule-makers favor. That's how dictatorships started.

 

[jfired]

God damn it. Jon has some balls. Like the way he talks. Oh you great leader Jon, we not worth it. U Robin Hood, we followers. That's the fucking attitude that is needed to take Google the fuck down. You fuck with my hood and we'll put you down!

Hey ML boys, pay the god damn boy! He fucked up lightly, you got paid and then you promised to pay the boy and then you fucked up in our book. Deliver the fucking wire. This isn't anything serious. The boy worked for his god damn money. The longer it drags the worse it gets. Pay the damn boy!

 

[ma1lking68]

What did ML hire you to make posts supporting their claim?? You signup today and this si your first post. Your credability is no good here.

No man, sorry...would be nice though if I got paid . I'm just a mailer who heard about it from another mailer who frequents the site. Thought I would finally register.

I honestly wanted to know what the legal ramifications were to be honest. I honestly don't really know and personally don't want to find out. And with the FTC news that came back about ValueClick a little while back, I'm just not sure what that will eventually mean with us pubs if we are caught not being compliant. So was mainly voicing my opinion as well as hoping to get some insight. I'm sure you guys have seen this but will post it in case anyone hasn't.

http://blogs.barrons.com/techtrader...grades-says-ftc-probe-deters-possible-buyers/

 

[Ben]

At least pay the man the 16k when you say you will, it is separate from the headline mess. If skrilla is bringing in good leads why would you want to fuck with him on that issue?

Also, it sounds like the AM is trying to resolve the issue, but why would "Sal" be a dick to a guy that can push so much traffic and leads. He could at least offer a partial payment, unless the company is small beans and can't afford to keep big mailers on board. Sounds a little short sighted to me, not good business.

 

[Mk174]

Everyone reading skrilla’s ridiculous post “how-market-leverage-screwed-me-out-22k” should see this for the BS it is.

Skrilla -

You signed up for our network, received net 1 payments your first month because of the volume you said you could bring. We quickly put you on our weekly wire program and gave you a promising new deal “Harry and David”. You then:

- Violated ML’s terms and Conditions
- Rewrote an approved ad without permission and made your email send a liability for the Advertiser, ML, and You.
- Caused ML to receive a letter from Harry and David’s corporate Legal Department
- Caused us to have to kill the ad.
- You removed an important and required legal disclaimer from the bottom of the ad, ignored 2 instances where “ BY Participating” were required in the ad, and took it upon yourself to mislead anyone receiving the ad that a gift basket was being sent and they need only put their email address in to confirm delivery. WHERE DID YOU GET THIS STUFF?

Would an advertiser pay NBC if they completely rewrote and distorted an ad before they put it on the air…causing potential liability for the advertiser? Should an advertiser pay ML (or any network) if we completely rewrote ads ourselves, taking out all of the required legal disclaimers? Then why should you be any different?

What business do you have being an email moderator for a leading affiliate forum when you send millions of distorted emails which hurt both the network and the advertiser so you can make more money for yourself? Where are your ethics!

Then after all the trouble you've caused you go after us because we are going to pay you on normal payment terms after you have violated our agreement, caused us to lose an ad, and put us at risk!? None of this would have even happened…and you would have received your wire had you simply done the right thing.

I think everyone one in this forum knows that you can’t just log into a network and change an ad anyway you want to make people sign up. Having sat in the chair of a publisher before…I know advertisers don’t always make the best creative…that is why skrilla only needed to either ask to get his ideas approved (we would not have approved the misleading ad he wrote)..or DON’T RUN THE AD.

I made the decision after hearing from Harry and David directly to not pay Skrilla’s remaining payment on weekly terms as originally agreed. I DON’T THINK VIOLATING THE T&C’s and acting unethical was in the agreement either. Furthermore, while it is our intention to pay you the 16k discussed…if we find out between now and when your payment is processed that you have caused any other significant issues by misrepresenting other ML advertisers – I will not only hold the payment…we will consider suing you if necessary.

I hope everyone understands our position. A good network has to protect publishers from advertisers who don’t pay and advertisers from publishers who commit fraud or seriously misrepresent the advertiser. We have protected a ton of publishers over the years…It should not take a single post from someone who so flagrantly violated his agreement with us to tarnish that. We value our publishers! We knew skrilla was a moderator for WF (and he let us know it!) but we can’t let this get in the way of doing the right thing.

- Michael Jenkins
CEO / Founder - MarketLeverage.com

 

[MyOwnDemon]

Oh, snap!