[William]

Yes and I don't see what difference it makes to my question. If it is a fact that some affiliates don't carry over negative balances, why should others do. In every bussiness you have to make sure one partner doesn't suddenly gets away with the biggest piece of the cake and if the % that RR gets from us has been increasing as they grow themselves, we are stucked at 27% while they get richer and richer.

Of course it is extremely difficult to know what the affiliates really get as they all stick togheter and share this precious secret with no one.

I think it is only reasonable to demand explanations/improvements every now and then to insure a fair sharing of the amount the sites give back.

And once again, if no other affiliate absorbes the store/freerolls/etc.. costs from FT and the affiliates are just as stucked as we are at a fixed rakeback %, then no changes need to be made; but from what I hear, it is not the case.