... fighting for affiliates rights!Bookmaker / BetCris Poll
Audits - Terms Alerts, Latest GAU News · Tags:
We were approached by a GAU member who would like us to run a poll asking our membership to vote on whether Bookmaker and BetCris should be marked as rogue affiliate programs and boycotted by the Gambling Affiliates Union. The member laid out his case so clearly, I’m going to re-post it here (with his permission) for your consideration. The main issue is the quota they imposed retroactively – see paragraph 4.1 below for more info….
Should the GAU Rogue and Boycott Bookmaker/BetCris?
- YES (100% Votes)
- NO (0% Votes)
Loading ...……………………………………………………………………………….
A Case Against BetCris and Bookmaker.com‘s Affiliate Terms and Conditions and to Support Why They Fall Under The Category of Rogue.
Before I go into details I would first like to point out what the definition of the word “Rogue.”
The following is taken from the freedictionary.com where I’ve highlighted in bold print the definitions in which I feel is pertaining to the argument of Bookmaker.com‘s affiliate program :
rogue (r
g)
The following is taken from Dictionary.com, once again highlight in bold the definition that I feel is appropriate:
h
–adjective
11. no longer obedient, belonging, or accepted and hence not controllable or answerable; deviating, renegade: a rogue cop; a rogue union local.
Amidst somewhere at or around August of the year 2007, BetCris, Bookmaker, and 2betDSI retroactively changed terms and conditions in their affiliate contracts. I would like to note that these changes came without warning and with no correspondence whatsoever. Most affiliates where completely unaware of the fact for months and for some even years after the change.
Some of the new terms changes that I think fall under the provided definition(s) of “rogue” include the following but are not limited to:
3.2. Affiliate is required to refer a minimum of 10 active customers during the previous week to withdraw/transfer their earnings. If the affiliates chooses to close the affiliate account before reaching the required 10 active players, any and all commissions shall be forfeited.
3.6. Affiliate shall not establish any MySpace or other social network domains, blog domain, profile name or display name containing “Bookmaker”, “Bookmaker Brand” or any variation of Bookmaker, including, but not limited to: BookmakerSportsbook, BookmakerCasino, BookmakerRacebook, BookmakerPoker, BookmakerSports, BookmakerSportsbetting, BookmakerBonus.
3.7. Affiliate is restricted from purchasing any domains that include “Bookmaker”, “Bookmaker Brand”, or bidding on any keywords or keyword phrases that include, but are not limited to, Bookmaker, Bookmaker.com, Bookmaker Sportsbook, Bookmaker Casino, Bookmaker Racebook, Bookmaker Poker or Bookmaker Brand, in any format in any pay per click (PPC) search engine. This includes, but is not limited to, the following search engines: Overture, Google, Kanoodle, FindWhat, ePilot and Ah-ha.
3.8. Affiliate is restricted from utilizing derivatives of “Bookmaker” in URLs and directory names for the intention of search engine optimization.
3.10. Affiliate is restricted from optimizing any page of their website(s) for keyword or keyword phrases that include, but are not limited to, Bookmaker, Bookmaker.com, Bookmaker Brand, Bookmaker Sportsbook, Bookmaker Casino, Bookmaker Racebook, Bookmaker Poker or Bookmaker Sportsbook, Casino and Poker Room in any format. This includes, but is not limited to, meta tags, headers and body content.
3.11. Affiliate is restricted from purchasing or building off-site text links with anchor text for Bookmaker-branded keyword phrases, including, but not limited to: Bookmaker, Bookmaker Brand, Bookmaker.com, Bookmaker Sportsbook, Bookmaker Casino, Bookmaker Racebook, Bookmaker Poker or Bookmaker Sportsbook, Casino and Poker Room in any format.
4.1
a. You will earn commission fees according to the fee schedule set forth herein:
Commission fees will be based on a percentage on the Net Revenue Share Model, on the amount of revenue generated by you in any one month. You’ll earn from 25% to 40% of the net revenues from sportsbook, racebook, casino, bingo and poker. The percentage breakdown is as follows:
* Note: Affiliate is required to have a minimum of 10 active players during the previous week to withdraw/transfer their earnings.
* We reserve the right to raise or lower any affiliates’ commission rate solely at Management’s discretion.
b. If a player signs up under an affiliate account and does not make a deposit within the first 60 days, that player becomes a house account.
c. Net revenue is calculated as follows: Total net losses from customers minus charge-backs, fraud, processing fees and promotional items.
d. In the case of two or more affiliates competing over player(s) account(s), Management makes the decision whom gets the player account. Management’s decision is final.
Advertisement
Before I go into payments, earnings, and forfeiture I would first like to cover terms 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.10 and 3.11. While it is not uncommon for companies to protect their trademarks, logos, content, and name from competition it is uncommon for any business, company, or corporation to be entitled a monopoly on common names and/or terms. The word “bookmaker” is a common term in all English speaking countries. The word “bookie” is a common slang word derived from the word and meaning of “bookmaker.” Bookmaker.com is attempting to monopolize a common term. Furthermore, I would like to elaborate on term 3.10. The last sentence in term 3.10 forbids you to optimize the common word bookmaker in body content. This would mean that any rating/review website, commentary website, or any informational site would be in violation of the terms and can have their earnings forfeited without any recourse. Apparently, under these terms, you can do no more or less than post Bookmaker.com banners on you website as you are forbidden to even type the word “bookmaker” in any content of your website.
Earnings/Payments
Terms 3.2 and 4.1 go into payments and earnings. While it is not usual, some companies (primarily online casinos) have put minimum player requirements before an affiliate would be eligible to receive his/her first payment. These measures typically require a few sign-ups (5 or less being the norm) and normally restrict an affiliate from receiving his/her first payment and are designed and put in place to prevent affiliate fraud. They require realistic goals that are achievable by most webmaster’s and/or affiliates big or small. Terms 3.2 and 4.1 are not only unrealistic, they are designed to inhibit affiliates from receiving their earnings/funds.
Conversions
Term 4.1 cover fee structures, sign-ups, and conversions. It reiterates that any affiliate needs 10 active players in the previous to week to withdraw/transfer earnings. It also cover that at “managers sole discretion” they can raise or lower your earnings. Here they have a structure of payment which in essence carries no weight because your money/earnings is ultimately held at bay to management. Furthermore, they expect affiliate sign-ups to turn into a conversion within 60 days or you lose that sign-up and it becomes a house account.
Cookies/Tracking
The cookies that track affiliate ID’s via a bookmaker.com‘s banner is set at two weeks. This is well below the norm of any industry standard. While I don’t have the proof to support this, their cookies prior to the retroactive change used to be 60 days. Nevertheless, the current 14 days tracking is far too low and doesn’t give affiliates a true chance to provide referrals.
Summary
Bookmaker.com‘s affiliate program is designed to defraud, cheat, is not controllable or answerable, and operates outside of normal or desirable controls (all defined under the definition(s) of rogue. We as affiliates work hard getting sign-ups and referrals to the companies we promote. They don’t know what it’s like being up until 5am trying to figure out code to why are scripts aren’t running right. Typing, researching keywords, trying to learn php, java, web design, working hard to get our website running right. Waking up every day to check your stats, search engine placement, logging into accounts hoping our labor paid off, which most days they don’t but that doesn’t stop us from quitting. The majority of us work outside the internet, yet we invest so much of our otherwise free time laboring over a keyboard. The majority of us don’t have the traffic to generate some of these quotas that are being put in place (which are truly designed to steal from us.) Yet, we the majority combined make up 99% of their referral base. Unfortunately, companies like bookmaker.com know this as well, so they design and structure terms which makes it nearly impossible for us independently to meet these terms. Bwin is following suite, then who’s next? We as affiliates really need to start setting examples to these companies who think it’s alright to steal from us. I was going to make this summary more in dept yet I feel it’s better just to invite you to search the web yourself and see how many affiliates bookmaker decided to steal from, and how they go about doing it. They changed their terms retroactively in the middle of the night, most affiliates were unaware of the changes until they tried to receive earnings. Bookmaker.com wasn’t being transparent about this, they did as rogues in the middle of the night. They wouldn’t even let affiliates close their accounts and keep what earnings they already had prior to the term change. Look at these terms as a whole, 10 active players in the previous week, you cannot mention a common name/term, managements sole discretion to lower your earnings, forfeiture of earnings if you want out of the program. Once again read the terms as a whole, search the web, and you decide for yourself. Rogue?
Comments
12 Responses to “Bookmaker / BetCris Poll”
Leave a comment!
November 17th, 2010 11:40 pm
[...] is live! Just an update to let you all know the poll is now live on the GAU website. The Gambling Affiliates Union Gambling Affiliates Union – GAU Bwin Affiliate Program – [...]
November 18th, 2010 12:06 am
so there is now way to vote. and if there is it is not readily apparent
November 18th, 2010 12:09 am
Yup – the poll is located under the first paragraph.
November 18th, 2010 12:12 am
Well done GAU and way to go helping affiliates and prtecting them from the likes of these types of programs.
November 18th, 2010 8:00 am
most ignorant thing I’ve seen here. Bookmaker is the reason half you guys can still profit in US based sports betting. There terms are clear transparent and linked to on site. If you don’t like it GTFO. These same terms have been there all along. When the 60 day rule was added it was not retroactive. They have great customer support. model company imo. Not a level and sad to see this post.
November 18th, 2010 9:36 pm
I would also like to bring up one thing pertaining to bookmaker/Cris and/or any program that requires quotas.
We as affiliates are here to advertise and recruit sign-ups. Our job is to get referrals to the company, Conversions are (as they should be) the responsibility of the company.
The 10 active player rule along with the “losing a referral if that referral is not a conversion in 60 days,” is technically penalizing an affiliate for the companies inability to a) turn a referral into a conversion and b) the inability to keep a conversion an active player.
So what if I sent Bookmaker 20 active players in a month? Then one month later only 5 of the 20 decide to stay there? Is this my fault or the companies fault for their inability for player retention. Now in this case, I the affiliate will receive nothing for my remaining 5 players (unless of course I have to send them 5 more players) all of which I have to hope that they all decide to wager in the same week. Now if one guy decides to take a week off, I receive no earnings? So not only do I have to send them active players, I have hope that all my active players decide to play at the same time or I lose.
This is what predatory quotas do, their designed this way with intention. The intention is to make it near impossible for affiliates to receive earnings while increasing the probabilities that money will ultimately be forfeited by the affiliate.
Do you think it’s a coincidence that companies who deal in probability and odds are the ones who orchestrate these kind of terms? Their just trying to put overwhelming odds in their favor that they can reap the benefits from your work, while not having to pay for them. I rest my case.
November 19th, 2010 3:25 pm
@ Brad
You need to be a member and be signed in to vote. Joining is free and we don’t spam your email account, promise!!
@ Prop
As far as I’m aware Bookmaker changed their terms and added the quota along with the “10 new players” rule two or three years ago. There was a discussion about the terms on GPWA a couple months ago and the consensus was that the terms were added retroactively.
November 19th, 2010 9:16 pm
I’ve posted plenty on topic in this thread here: http://www.pokeraffiliatelistings.com/forums/general-poker-affiliate-forum/15077-calling-out-bookmaker-com.html
Bookmaker owes no one here anything, When affiliates want to have more power they’ll start being part of the system working as an intermediary between the players and the sites in a healthy way. As long as the “unions” “forums” “communities” continue to breed what they do this cycle will continue. Affiliates complaining about problems when as an industry they are the ones creating the need for these rules.
Make the industry better and there will be more opportunities and fair sites to negotiate with. Keep pushing scams and sites that are not best for the players and acting only to line own pockets while justifying it via whatever means possible, and the only business model left is as an accomplice.
Its the affiliates as a whole creating the problems they are now trying to solve. Build affiliate communities and unions that address source of problem and in time there will be far less problems to solve and affiliates actually will have power. We are the front line intermediates, yet as a group most of what we spew on our sites is garbage and bribe money.
End rant as I think most will miss it, but it takes only takes a little effort from a few people to make change. In gambling industry multi millionaire and billion dollar companies have been brought to their knees by a few forum posters on more than one occasion, and when players sympathize with affiliates the power is much greater. Instead what the communities now brew is “taking advantage of the players” to get the most money from sites. So many problems beyond what I addressed, and while it certainly a challenge, so many simple solutions to make things better just the same.
November 19th, 2010 10:24 pm
prop, ……. “Affiliates complaining about problems when as an industry they are the ones creating the need for these rules.”……”Its the affiliates as a whole creating the problems they are now trying to solve.”
What problems have affiliates caused? How are affiliates creating these problems? I respect your argument but in all due respect these are bold statements, however I don’t see where there being back up in your response.
November 21st, 2010 1:52 am
@pokerkeep
“As far as I’m aware Bookmaker changed their terms and added the quota along with the “10 new players” rule two or three years ago. There was a discussion about the terms on GPWA a couple months ago and the consensus was that the terms were added retroactively.”
The GPWA consensus perhaps has selective memory. The statement made is true however is decieving.
The terms were modified on October 16, 2008
The changes were positive for affiliate as it used to be required you had 10 active in your first month and 5 each additional month to remain part of their program. Yes that was the terms! Affiliates actually putting in the effort were often paid. If you were legit and their ads were on legitimate websites you owned, they’d reactive your account. They were fair, it was not a lazy policy it was one many had to discuss with them and make special deals to keep their accounts open or commission eligible.
When they lightened their terms on October 18, 2008 and the deal was you’d now keep your commission and account, you were no longer at risk.. however to be paid you’d need 10 active the previous week to request withdrawal.
Bookmaker continued to make deals and work with those who were actually active in promoting their program.
Unless were talking pre 2005, and I don’t think that’s what we’re complaining about here, the program has never been on friendly to small affiliates and that is common knowledge. However small affiliates who will eventually aspire to be larger could promote them since the 2008 changes, because commission remained in the account.
To be an active player you just need to make a bet. Bookmaker has highest player values and retention in industry. Even a casual affiliate moderately serious about it will reach 10 active here. I have people I work with who are not massive affiliates or even midsized and reach 10 active on occasions and cash out.
That’s the way it is. If you want to slap warnings about not being good for small affiliates fine, makes sense.
As far as positives:
Bookmaker has best tracking in industry. Its instant and tier right into their betting interface.
Bookmaker has a fully transparent back end where you can track every move your referrals make on their website. You can see a referrals deposit amount, open bets, archive of past bets and can every refresh in player history and follow there real time results when playing casino.
Bookmaker has an all in one affiliate program. If player bet casino, multiplayer blackjack, tournament blackjack, poker or anything else Bookmaker offers affiliates are paid on this in addition to bets.
Bookmaker has one of best customer and affiliate supports in business. Live support can handle affiliate related issues. The AMs have phone numbers which you can be patched to via a toll free phone call to their support. If not a toll free # in your area you can email them and they will call.
Bookmaker pays lightening fast to both affiliates and players. There is no need to chase them down or sweat payouts like there is at other sites.
As far as the opportunity. Most betting sites cut off anyone who bets large and to them $500 to $1000 bets are large. You need new players constantly to grow income. Bookmaker takes up to $40,000 bets per game in a single shot and pays. Based on largest limits, and the fact they go out of their way to pay anyone even the small guys fast.the retention is extremely high.
The money to be made promoting Bookmaker is higher than at any other site.
So in short they do not have terms friendly to small affiliates. They have however not changed anything retroactive (except fees on deposits, but this is reasonable and something most programs have done), there terms have always been there, so they are not “cheating” anyone. You guys don’t need to like it but they are not rouge. Calling bookmaker rouge is like calling Bill Gates broke. There are statements that just don’t go together.
You can read other thread where I share there history and roll in industry. These are the guys who run the industry, its a way of life for them more than it is a business as gamblers are there own and they’ve done a lot to protect that and make industry better.
Love bookmaker, glad they exist and appreciate all they’ve done for the gambling industry which is more here than most of you will ever know.
December 2nd, 2010 12:07 pm
Please note:
While pokerprop would like you to believe the changes were for the positive for affiliates, please refer below.
There change in terms in question are a deviation from the original change of terms. Here is the original:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070430111514/http://affiliates.bookmaker.com/terms.aspx
These are archived in archive.org. If you read the terms you will see the first retroactive change of terms which I can almost guarantee are going to be the absolute worst affiliate terms you’ve ever read. Unfortunately, Bookmaker changed the url of their original terms so people cannot look up the original terms via archive.org which can be seen here:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://affiliates.bookmaker.com/terms.aspx
I believe this to be more intent on Bookmaker’s side as to confirm rogue behavior.
December 2nd, 2010 12:11 pm
Also, forgot to add.
Bookmaker now has their term pages as “no follow” from may 2008 to present so they can’t be archived (as proven from the archive link.) Proving their transparency is less than forthcoming.