Suck a Dick Vivera/Opes/Mike/Mitch/DEE

They could still drop a cookie, which most people wouldn't have been able to figure out - I think they are doing this already.
 


Most advertisers don't have problems with dupes. It has never been an issue with the leads we have done. If you do, then you should have spent more time setting up your infrastructure to block them or work it into your biz model.

Basically, keep tight terms, check company financials beforehand, get exclusive (so you know exactly how much money they are making and compare to bank balances) and don't get greedy. 4 pretty strong things to stay safe in this from a network point of view (at least in getting paid..FTC/AG/Compliance issues are another subject)
 
mkrongel said:
I figured i would post in here to set some things straight.

The scrubs from these offers are related to two things.

Duplicate orders- the advertiser has been firing the pixel for people who come back two three days in a row and attempt to buy the product again. These people will result in chargebacks or are fraud. Either way they are bad orders for the business model, it is a shame the advertiser cant technically stop this on the front end. They say they are working on it but we will see how long that could take.

Pick up card declines - These are cards that get through for the 99 cent charge but then get flagged as stolen when the 1st reoccuring charge is attempted. These are the nastiest of all charges on the advertisers side and will result in high chargebacks and what has brought other continuity offers down. This is most likely consumer fraud, they know the game, and how to get around it, they buy the free trial then call and cancel their cards.

Between these two issues it makes up 6-10% of orders coming through. We have requested the advertiser absorb these scrubs on their end. We have continued to go back and forth on a resolution that satisfies all. The advertiser doesn't want to pay for what they see as fraud. Pubs want to be paid for what they see as being credited, as a network in the middle we want to ensure both sides are happy, will either side get their way 100%, definitely not but there is a middle ground to be had to help keep things going.

We work with other continuity advertisers in the space like Gunthy Renker, P90X, and others. These offers explicitly state chargebacks will be scrubbed from publisher payments, this is very common in the as seen on TV/infomercial continuity space and is finding its way in to affiliate marketing as well.

I am sure we will resolve the scrubs issue with the advertiser. We have already agreed on a go forward to offer a no chargeback/scrub offer that pays less but wont be hit with chargebacks due to the lower payout helping to cushion the 2 issues above.

I have told the advertiser and others in this space that the only way to really stabilize this space and ensure its long term growth is to control the distribution of offers to a small group of individuals. Just like in ringtones (The previous wild west) it grew, got hit with scrutiny, cut off many partners and worked with a limited few they could ensure quality and reduce the scrutiny. Same thing will happen here, either a handful of pubs will be direct or one network will have the products. Its really the only way to ensure that the lines are not crossed on either end.
Click to expand...

i agree that all this should just be priced into the payout. if 10% is going to be scrubbed for all the crap you mentioned, how about just lower the payout 10% and don't scrub? Maybe I'm incredibly naive but stated payout means nothing to me (who is constantly split testing offers and networks) and a non scrubbed more consistent EPC that stays within 10-15% of an less consistent EPC is much more preferable.
 
Why would you have the advertiser try to absord this on their end and come up with a bullshit lower payout? You guys socialist or something?

Just make it as transparent as possible and have each publishers take the hit for their shitty traffic. Srsly, this isnt socialism wtf
 
brick-loud-noises-b.jpg
 
flysarescary said:
lol wut? adsonar magically proxies visitors through their own IPs?
Click to expand...

AOL properties have disproportionate share of captive AOL dialup traffic that has many customers sharing IPs.

As far as these rebills go, what I am wondering about is whether the industry-averaged rate of merchant account cancellations has stabilized. In other words, how much shake-up is ahead before we have a bit more sustainable way to run these offers.
 
if opes is hurting, pulse360 must be too, i heard they were buying 80-90% of their available inventory.
 
mkrongel said:
Yes.

You cant put the CC number on a DB thats open on the net its against PCI compliance, so to check the CC's in real time is impossible. If someone buys 3 free trials of acai berry on one CC when it comes time to rebill those orders the one CC will have multiple charges on it for the same product, causing the bank to charge it all back automatically.
Click to expand...
Im assuming by duplicate orders you mean orders from the same CC to the same offer (acai optimum). The advertiser should be able to easily eliminate this by having it cross check the DB of names/card in the gateway before allowing it to be charged. They can do this while staying PCI complient either through the CRM or have it setup in the gateway to not accept new orders from xyz CC number.
 
sgtryan said:
so that would assume that 20-30% of the customers attempted to purchase the product again some way or another? that is bullshit :-/ and YES, they can stop this on their frontend.. if they recognize a duplicate IP, then don't fire the pixel! it's not rocket science
Click to expand...
AOL traffic doesn't all come from different IPs, so none of it would end up backing out if they ended up doing this.
 
iliketurtles said:
how about we all chargeback on pulse360 and adsonar?
Click to expand...
have fun with that bro

and who the fuck still uses AOL dialup? seriously?

let's get some facts straight:
- Opes made up the "duplicate" scrub reason, it is logically not possible
- Copeac went back on their policy of "paying affiliates even if they don't get paid"
- Copeac & Opes are legally OK because everything both parties did was within their TOS (whether affiliates like it or not)

I think Copeac should pause all of Opes' offers until they pay or get their shit straightened out. The problem with that is that Copeac relies _heavily_ on Opes right now and they would be fucked if they lost Opes. Copeac is sacrificing their reputation with affiliates in order to keep their relationship with this fucked up advertiser.. Opes just realizes they have the most control in this situation, and they are going to fuck it up for everyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gutterseo, erect and bb_wolfe
sgtryan said:
let's get some facts straight:
- Opes made up the "duplicate" scrub reason, it is logically not possible
- Copeac went back on their policy of "paying affiliates even if they don't get paid"
- Copeac & Opes are legally OK because everything both parties did was within their TOS (whether affiliates like it or not)

I think Copeac should pause all of Opes' offers until they pay or get their shit straightened out. The problem with that is that Copeac relies _heavily_ on Opes right now and they would be fucked if they lost Opes. Copeac is sacrificing their reputation with affiliates in order to keep their relationship with this fucked up advertiser.. Opes just realizes they have the most control in this situation, and they are going to fuck it up for everyone.
Click to expand...

^ this and if there's a scrub - it would eventually end up e-mail submit style and we all know where those "no scrub" emails submits went
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom