RakeReduction, why are you so cheap?

[Sinister_Kane]

[ QUOTE ]

There are countless threads about this in the IG forum. As usual, nobody wants to mention names.

Another matter are the transactions fees when using a Visa CC to deposit to FT.
From what I can see, those fees amount to 12,26% of the transfer.
This assuming that I am paying 27% of the fee Visa actually is charging FT. Can this be true? Or is there also here something I have misunderstood?

[/ QUOTE ]

Name 1 rakeback affiliate who carries over the balance that let's you cash out everyday??? Huge difference between one that allows you to cashout everyday and one that does not. Let me ask you a question. If you do a chargeback at Full Tilt for $4000 in a month, would you expect Rakereduction to wipe that debt out starting a new month? Who is supposed to pay for that?

Also, I believe your issues are with Full Tilt and the credit card processors, NOT with rakereduction. It seems to me you are mad at the high fees and since rr shows you what they are, you are for some reason pissed at them. Everyone gets charged these fees that gets rakeback, everyone.

You sir, are way out of line

[William]

If you do a chargeback at Full Tilt for $4000 in a month, would you expect Rakereduction to wipe that debt out starting a new month? Who is supposed to pay for that?

As usual, we are dealing with morons that are desperately looking for totally out of contest and extreme examples. If you truly believe I expected RR to absorbe for my eventual chargeback (I may add that it might be in your habits to cheat, rob or whatever you want to call it, but not in mines) then I am really sorry I started this thread. You people must love being taken advantage for.

[Pokeraddict]

[ QUOTE ]
(I may add that it might be in your habits to cheat, rob or whatever you want to call it, but not in mines)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is where the problem lies. Just because you would not abuse the system does not mean others would not either. Fraud is a much bigger problem in the industry then most think. Abusing a cashback now system would not be fraud in most cases but it could certainly be used to abuse promotions if they absorbed the end of month negatives. The $4000 chargeback is an extreme example, a better example would be the large deposit or plasma TV.

[William]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(I may add that it might be in your habits to cheat, rob or whatever you want to call it, but not in mines)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is where the problem lies. Just because you would not abuse the system does not mean others would not either. Fraud is a much bigger problem in the industry then most think. Abusing a cashback now system would not be fraud in most cases but it could certainly be used to abuse promotions if they absorbed the end of month negatives. The $4000 chargeback is an extreme example, a better example would be the large deposit or plasma TV.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you. I also mean that absorbing the expense a plasma tv generates would not be out of place as the player in question has been playing a LOT to afford the TV; and assuming the affiliate has grown big enough to be making a serious benefit from its players.

Of course it would be easier if we knew what a large affiliate such as RR gets back from FT. I am not asking for somehting the numbers show can't be done, I just want a fair share of what WE generate but nobody will tell us how much WE generate. This specially applies in this case because the 27% limit set by FT is VERY convenient for the affiliates but they could do a "gesture" by absorbing other costs.

That RR has been saying "it will soon happen" for almost a year now when asked about the freerolls (or any other kind of gesture towards their clients) without nothing really happening shows at best a lack of big, big enthousiasm about giving anything away.

Every bussiness deal needs to be renegociated when one of the partners show clear signs of suddenly having the best of it. Affiliates deals should not be an exception.

Notice as well the total silence from other affiliates in this thread when they usually are all over the place commenting everything and trying to pick up an extra player or two by promoting their own site.

Touchy subject, I agree.

[Sinister_Kane]

It's my understanding all the big time affiliates get 35% off players they send to Full Tilt.

While 8% may seem like alot to you, surely have to consider running costs which include paying staff, contests, freerolls (Although these don't apply from what I read), advertising, charge backs from other players.

It is also my understand the 27% is not negotiable at Full Tilt.

[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
Every bussiness deal needs to be renegociated when one of the partners show clear signs of suddenly having the best of it. Affiliates deals should not be an exception.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wait, what? Sometimes businesses will do this, but it is certainly not a given. How happy would you be if an affiliate wanted to lower your RB?

[ QUOTE ]
Notice as well the total silence from other affiliates in this thread when they usually are all over the place commenting everything and trying to pick up an extra player or two by promoting their own site.

Touchy subject, I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]
Fairly professional of them, I think. They do business a little differently, but they are abstaining from jumping on RR for the way they do things. Plus, I doubt PA would put up with much of that.

Unfortunately for you if you are so unhappy with RR, FT is one of the few sites that seems to be extremely loyal to their affiliates, and this leaves you in a poor bargaining position. RR can basically say "take it or leave it", and there's not a lot you can do. That being said, I'm sure they want to get continued business from you and others, and are listening to your concerns.

The way I see it, this cap FT has put in place means there are fewer areas for affiliates to use to stand apart from one another. Daily payouts is one, no negative carryover is another. Unless I'm mistaken, FT only pays out to their affiliates once per month, so RR is already giving back some of their money when they give it to you as much as a month or more before they get it. It seems that's the trade-off you make when you sign up with RR...you can get daily payouts, but your negative balance carries over.

[Pokeraddict]

[ QUOTE ]
Unless I'm mistaken, FT only pays out to their affiliates once per month, so RR is already giving back some of their money when they give it to you as much as a month or more before they get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct they only pay once a month. Also RR is taking the risk (albeit an extremely small one) that the poker room defaults on affiliate payments. Who remembers PokerNow? I'm sure there was another but can't think of who it was.

[R*R]

4 of 7 twoplustwo rakeback affiliates carry over negative balances. Of the 3 that do not at least one will carry it forward if negative is over $200.

The rakeback sites that offer daily cashouts (like rakereduction) are at far greater risk in carrying over negative balnces than the monthly cashout sites. It would make no sense for daily cashout sites to carry over negative balances given the associated risks.

William, I think your concerns should be taken up with Fulltilt and not the rakeback sites. They do not get paid these amounts and I don't think they should have to absorb something they don't receive. I also think it was irresponsible and unfair to isolate one affiliate (especially given their daily cashout program and the accompanying difficulties associated with carrying over neg balances) as it is very common for rakeback affiliates to carry over negative balances.

[R*R]

Wasn't PokerNow a Party Poker rakeback skin? That would probably explain it.

[William]

Wait, what? Sometimes businesses will do this, but it is certainly not a given. How happy would you be if an affiliate wanted to lower your RB?

From what I recall, they have no problem changing RB% when sites merge or change their RB policy. I have absolutely no problem with that, I do not expect an affiliate to lose money on me or anybody else.


If the 35% mentionned is a fact, then my request is, of course, unfair. I just wonder how the affiliates of the many posters that keep saying that their negative balance is not carried over manage under those conditions. I admit though that there is always the possibility that posters in these forums are lying about their affiliates practice (wouldn't that be a surprise!!!).

There is also the fact that I am being charged $20 in Visa transaction fees for a $600 deposit. I am probably wrong about this, but shouldn't I be paying for 27% of the fees? Hard to believe that Visa charges FT over 12% when it only charges me 3% if I make a cash withdrawal abroad.

Finally, I am not at all unsatisfied with the way RR operates, I just want to make sure that I am paying what I should and that I am receiving what I can expect.