|
|
#51
03-07-2006, 07:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
[ QUOTE ]
you guys are making it seem like its A) pt stats or B) he keeps all the money have your affiliate contact me if he needs help I work for Party Poker and we like solution C) PARTY keeps all the money [/ QUOTE ] FYP 
|
|
#52
03-07-2006, 07:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] you guys are making it seem like its A) pt stats or B) he keeps all the money have your affiliate contact me if he needs help I work for Party Poker and we like solution C) PARTY keeps all the money [/ QUOTE ] FYP [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] what would be the purpose of me posting then? i already know who your affilaite is if you think thats the motive...he's been outed in this thread multiple times already, but the mods keep deleting it i just want his players to know that he does indeed have other options, whether or not he chooses to take them or take the money and run, is up to him
|
|
#53
03-07-2006, 07:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
[ QUOTE ]
you guys are making it seem like its A) pt stats or B) he keeps all the money there are other options for this affiliate... have your affiliate contact me if he needs help [/ QUOTE ] you've pretty much nailed it. originally he chose option B with no further discussion. he's now trying to see what other options are out there, we'll see if he figures something out...
|
|
#54
03-07-2006, 10:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
I think without the individual trackers, the best way is probably to distribute the fund based on players' January stats after the affiliate takes his cut for profit. For example, if player A generated $5000 MGR and player B generated $2500 MGR in Jan. and the total fund after his cut for Feb is $3000. then player A will get $3000*5000/(5000+2500)=$2000. and player B would get $1000. This way, the affiliate still gets his profit and for the players obviously any money is better than nothing which probably would be the case if no solution can be found.
|
|
#55
03-07-2006, 10:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
[ QUOTE ]
I think without the individual trackers, the best way is probably to distribute the fund based on players' January stats after the affiliate takes his cut for profit. For example, if player A generated $5000 MGR and player B generated $2500 MGR in Jan. and the total fund after his cut for Feb is $3000. then player A will get $3000*5000/(5000+2500)=$2000. and player B would get $1000. This way, the affiliate still gets his profit and for the players obviously any money is better than nothing which probably would be the case if no solution can be found. [/ QUOTE ] thats not the best way. thats not even a good way for some players. there are far more accurate options.
|
|
#56
03-08-2006, 08:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
Party will not get rid of the affiliate for a long time, if ever. The economics simply don’t support it. Like any business, Party views the affiliates as one channel they must manage in support of customer acquisition. Affiliates compete with other sources like referrals from existing players and TV advertising.
I’m sure Party has segmented the market into different segments and is using different channels to reach potential customers (ie. TV ads for total newbies, affiliates to generate switching from other sites, etc.). I’m sure Party has figured out what their cost per acquisition is by channel, and I’m sure they have a $ figure in their database associated with the value of a particular player (ie. joetall is worth $2,304 to Party a year in profit to them). Affiliates who can deliver lots of $$ value to Party in rake that Party will not be acquire for a comparable cost in other ways are generating value for Party and Party will pay for that and they always will. It has nothing to do with whether affiliates are “highly regarded” – it has to do with whether they can generate a lower cost per acquisition than Party can get via other avenues. Calling Party “unethical”, or saying they will “screw their affiliates” seems naïve to me. Of course Party will try to modify arrangements over time to try and shift some of the profit from affiliates to themselves. Of course Party will get rid of affiliates who are not able to generate more profit for them than they can get from other sources. That is standard business practice no different than a consulting company firing an unprofitable client or a retailer threatening to take its business elsewhere if a manufacturer. I work for a manufacturer who sells to WalMart and you should see the [censored] they pull –it makes Party look like choirboys. I won’t argue about whether I think what Party has done in the past with other sites or affiliates is “fair” or not, but I will say it is very typical business practice (witness Microsoft for case study on squeezing partners out over time) and I’d be surprised if they acted any other way. Affiliates who want to stay in business must adapt and follow standard competitive strategy by building their value to Party (ie. bringing in higher volume players, influencing whether those players play at Party vs. elsewhere, strengthening relationships with players like thru coaching, building a niche like in HU limit, merging with other affiliates, etc.) and to newer players (why rakeback will always be an option). And identifying what value they bring vs. other acquisition sources (i.e. they can more easily persuade newbies to try out scary gambling sites). And studying the standard transitions that most emerging markets that evolve into mature markets go thru wouldn’t hurt either (sites will consolidate, profits will erode, focus will shift from customer acquisition to retention and so on). Personally, I think as the US Govt cracks down on big affiliates for being sales agents for gambling businesses, it will disperse the power affiliates have and will trigger add’l Party changes to affiliate programs. And as poker becomes more mainstream/accepted, newer players may be less reluctant to sign up without some guiding help. Stuff like that. You should look to affiliates various sources of power vs. suppliers/competitors, etc. to figure out whether affiliates will exist and how profitable they will be. -g
|
|
#57
03-08-2006, 11:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
[ QUOTE ] If an affiliate has more than 100 active players, I guarantee you that at least a few will try to screw him. Given a the small percentage that that affiliates keep per player, compared to the percentage that they pay out, a few overzealous players could bankrupt an honest affiliate [/ QUOTE ] I'm no expert with this, but say the affiliate makes X% and pays out Y% to his players, the affiliate could simply take X-Y multiplied by his reciepts and pocket that (His/her profit) and then distribute the rest. How that distribution goes is another arguement, but none of the players would be able to "screw" the affiliate out of any of his money. He's taking his percentage off the top.
|
|
#58
03-09-2006, 02:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dealing With He Who Shall Not be Named
So what are we going to do with Great Cthul...I mean the affiliate who cannot be named? Is is still possible to achieve the unnameable at Party Poker if our affiliate is cut off? Is there a better place to talk about this?
|
|
#59
03-09-2006, 02:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
I think that we need 3rd party software that tracks play, so affiliates wouldn't be so dependent on PP. Please someone code this program like this, there are a lot of people willing to pay money for it. I'm sure it would be very profitable. Maybe people behind PT or PA Hud want to expand their business?
I don't think relying on PT stats could be long-term solution and I hope someone is already designing that tracking software.
|
|
#60
03-09-2006, 07:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Think Party will ever kill off the affiliates?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If an affiliate has more than 100 active players, I guarantee you that at least a few will try to screw him. Given a the small percentage that that affiliates keep per player, compared to the percentage that they pay out, a few overzealous players could bankrupt an honest affiliate [/ QUOTE ] I'm no expert with this, but say the affiliate makes X% and pays out Y% to his players, the affiliate could simply take X-Y multiplied by his reciepts and pocket that (His/her profit) and then distribute the rest. How that distribution goes is another arguement, but none of the players would be able to "screw" the affiliate out of any of his money. He's taking his percentage off the top. [/ QUOTE ] I suppose it would be possible to take that one sentence MORE out of it's context, but it would be extremely difficult. If you are going to critique my post, read the damn thing first.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
