Quote:
Originally Posted by signupdamnit
It's really bizarre how you accuse me of insulting you but in every post you get these little digs in.
Sorry Mr. Peabody! This is it man. I promise.  |
No worries, you bring up a LOT of excellent points. And I agree, the litte digs should stop because you both have intelligent things to say and contribute, albeit from slightly differant perspectives. Of course, GFY can make anyone a little prickly. LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Far-L
The "free sales" you are talking about are worse than Markhams "magic joins". You are simply oblivious to the fact that Peter must be robbed to pay Paul in that scenario. You have been around how long not to realize that?
|
Actually I think DWB may have it right. Not saying some Sponsers who do this don't take sales from Affiliate A and give them, magically, to Affiliate B. But I could see how type-ins re-directed to "preferred" Affiliates is more than possible.
In Scenario 1 (let's call it) Sponser takes legitimate sale/rebill from Affiliate A and gives it to Affiliate B ("re-assigns" it). This would be BAD.
In Scenario 2 a Sponser assigns type-ins, or "uncredited sales", to Affiliate B. This would be GOOD (for Affiliate B; the Sponser may not think it's "good" short-term but is banking on future love from that all-important Affiliate B).
Again, I think this depends GREATLY on volume (or future volume, as it were) from Affiliate B. Otherwise why go through all that effort and shuffling sales/rebills around?
I STILL think that if a Program Owner/Sponser put that kind of effort into making his sites stickier, conversion ratios better and increasing Member retention he'd be better off long-term rather than trying to think of ever-cleverer ways to shave hard-working affiliates (who are getting squeezed enough as it is).