Mpa3 Has No Shave Feature!!!

Hell, I would want all of them to try. LOL

I think it has something to do with supply and demand

Personally, Ive noticed a big improvement in my stats. Having promoted CoHF for over four years, I stopped sending a lot of traffic when you started using MPA2. In the last week, I've made
3 sales off 307 uniques. As soon as you drop the popups from the revshare program, I'll send more.

garce hit me up on ICQ 3427575


the convertions have been improved since we changed over and they were allready very good

Shaving is part of this industry now get over with it

Reading the tread from the top, it was not me who first brought up the fact of the shave feature Mansion once had. It's a very well known thing and it broke before NATS was even being openly marketed.

I did not program a shave feature into MPA2. Mansion did. It is their fault their software has a shitty reputation and lacks trust with affiliates, not ours.

When my product gets thown into the ring, I have to step in and speak on it. And yes, if someone asks me the differences between our product and Mansion's one of the things I mention is the reputation they each have with affiliates. It's not something to just sweep under the rug. It was a tool provided to programs (whether you used it or not) to defraud them. This is what gives MPA the reputation it has. We do not give them the reputation. We do not make things up about them. We do not lie to potential customers about pricing of their product.

It is Mansion who gave MPA a shitty name. I'm sorry you feel stuck on a software with such a bad rep. We're here anytime you might want to migrate to something else. We've done it a number of times now, and every move has been seamless.

Also, I'm sorry to hear you had to pay them to have the software send signup confirmation emails.

No shaving here ... check it out

Interesting viewpoint.

I think other have already echoed the sentiment that i have about mpa, They cheated and lied, i dont trust them..

That being said nats and mpa3 are bth shaveable..

geo redirects of rotating ip blocks

You my friend are wrong!

Shaving is part of the shady companies you do biz with in this industry!

if you are not smart enough to ask around about peoples oppinions of companies then thats your fault

I always asked people about companies even the BIG ones I asked other webmasters

1 do you see accurate traffic reporting
2 what kind of trafic do you send them
3 do you get ratios you would expect?
4 do you get your checks
5 can you cash your checks

This is the Internet there is no brick and morter shop to go look at in most cases.

You should not just except that you are getting shaved you should seek out companies that have long standing relationships with lots of webmasters. Seek out companies that have somthing unique to sell, seek out someone who you know is going to appretiate your traffic and not just think of you as another account ID.

come talk to me!


Tanker

That my friend would cause issues with the NATS backend.

Well said Tanker.

Of course, depends on a few factors. If you redirected it off to a totally random site that had nothing to do with anything it would not.

You could also change your DNS every tuesday. There ARE ways. Most of them will eventually be seen by some reseller. And I've already stated our policy should we find out.

how so, the hits are redirected before they ever hit nats

exactly... Dont be so sure, i have seen it already... but no way of proving it without being inside..

what happens if NATS gets sold like porngraph did?

See what we have to Offer:
mAffiliate

First, there is no indication at all that NATS has any chance of being sold. If it were, nothing will happen. Every NATS client has the ability and the premission to completely lock us out of their system. Everything runs on their server, it is theirs.

The Porngraph incident was disgusting and a huge disappointment. It was a non-profitable model and it was sold. What was done with it after it was sold still makes me sick to this day. I am very unhappy with what was done with it. It was very unfortunate.

see....

unfortunately you dont get a second chance to make a first impression.

if they could do this, then how could you prevent them from cheating affilliates?

Very interesting thread, and rare for GFY.

I'd like to point out that in the mainstream area (non-adult/casino) shaving occurs ALL THE TIME. In fact, the largest affiliate networks bank on it because they know their publishers won't pick up on it. One of them being cj.com.

I was sending some of their advertisers mortgage leads. Now I had a script that would automatically send a lead I got from one of my search engine sites directly into their signup form. The stats were fucking horrible. It would also fluctuate like mad, as if someone on cj.com's side was sitting there manually at different times during the day or week adjusting it themselves. In fact, I would have more weekend accepted leads than any other weekday, and the annoying part was that the weekends were slow signup days.

I would get 200 accepted leads on monday, whereas my stats would show over 350. After a while I thought it was just my site, and that maybe the leads were shitty, so I emailed them, and they told me a lot of the lead's phone numbers didn't match the addresses or names, which is understandable, so I took the leads to a private database, and sure enough, what do you know, I got credit for about 340 or so of the 350 leads that cj.com only accepted 200 of. Motherfuckers ripped me off for well over $30,000 because of their inhouse shaving feature.

Mainstream webmasters really are in awe of the adult webmaster. Mostly because we are ahead of everyone in terms of marketing tactics and methods. The fact that we are constantly on top of our shit doesn't hurt too. So again, thanks for pointing this one out, because I was debating on using MPA3 for my new mainstream affiliate site.

Yes, it can be done with any system. But NATS is promoted as a 100% shave free software.
That's why I find it odd that you have put so much effort into stopping more sofisticated ways of shaving and didn't stop the least sofisticated one.

I should undermark my former comment a bit...

I said....
"I will never support a program that supports a company scamming webmasters
fuck if its MPA 2, 3, 4 or 23

That product is dead."

My thoughts behind that were:
- Why support a program that is actively supporting a convicted scammer by making BOTH of them money where there are tons of other programs out there that in fact can be trusted in a certain way. I've talked to people involved in NATS privately and heard very interesting things that make me signup at ANY program running on nats without worrying to be fucked in the ass.

I don't say that every program running on MPA is trying to fuck me in the ass... both raffi and darren - who run programs on mpa - do have their points which I accept and understand (even though I would love to see them switch). I promised Raffi on our cab ride to the airport already: The day you move off MPA I will signup and send both: traffic and signups.
Also Darrens stuff kicks ass. Mensniche is truely top of its league. Congrats to that

Exactly.

Many sponsors will publicly feign shock that such a feature was offered - but privately kick themselves for not knowing sooner...

Perhaps Mansion made an unfortunate choice regarding feature set inclusion, which they have remedied, and are now paying the price for in forums such as this, but the folks who run the show are outstanding (and trustworthy) people who offer cutting edge products.

As a side note, most of the criticisim seems to be coming from competitors

Thank you!

Bam.

I really like Oystein and the Mansion crew, and I really never had many problems with the support department. MPA2 and MPA3 are both great pieces of software, BUT once I switched from CCBill to MPA2 I lost alot of traffic and in turn sales because many of my webmasters were upset that we started using MPA2.

We have been around for almost 7 years now, and even though all the webmasters that have worked with us before know we are honest and above board, some of them started to shy away from using the MPA program we had. I had no choice but to run MPA and CCBill together which defeats the purpose of using it.

We have now switched to NATS and many of the features that I wanted in MPA that I would have had to pay extra for, are all included standard in NATS.

The bottom line to me was credibility. MPA worked fine, but the stigma that is carried with it, and me having to reassure my affiliates that we were NOT shaving them was more than I wanted to deal with. We have been getting alot better response from our affiliates, and we now can offer them alot more features for the same money.

Mind if I use that?

Trustworthy? wtf , did you totally miss the point where they included the ability to defraud us? That qualifies as trustworthy? How does empowering program owners with the means to rip me off make someone trustworthy?

Tell me he's a great guy, he buys you drinks, he makes you tons of money - I can stomach that. But dont piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

looks like a base64 encoded string:
10002:3:

if possible, you could still modify it... not 100% secure.

Didn't this strike you as a little odd? Maybe start some alarm bells ringing back then?

You are correct, it is a base64 encoded string. And yes, you can modify the contents, but that would of course change the base64 string also, thus you would see the difference.

The base64 is not done for security, but for removing the plaintext contents of the variable. Via the base64 we get a clean a-zA-Z0-9 string from it.

Sponsor X has 20 sites to promote. I have wm ID 10001.

If I click a particular link just to try it and I see that it redirects to 11111 instead. Pretty easy to spot, right?

If I would click a NATS link with my wm ID MTAwMBgyOjM6Ag and I would end up at MTAvMBgvOjM6Ag, not that easy to see unless you look at each character, right?
Since the sponsor has 20 different sites, you will never be able to remember your "code". You have to compare the codes side by side to see if it's the same.... which will never happen.

Would be heck of a lot easier to spot a simple redirect if the nats variable was "10001:3:2" instead or some other easy way to spot that it's actually my link code.

Just my

There's actually a better way to stop sponsors that redirect to their own wm ID. Instead of leaving it up to the webmaster to find out if it's really their link code that they see, leave it up to NATS.

Someone clicks my link code. IP is logged and cookie is set (haven't checked if NATS does that, or what ever you do to track users). If that same user comes back within x seconds with another wm ID, bingo. We got a redirect. Can even check if it's an internal ID or another users ID.
If it's internal, then you got yourself a cheating sponsor.
If it's a different user, then you got yourself a cheating sponsor, rogue designer or someone that hacked your stuff (like what happened to another sponsor a year ago).


Damn, I write way too much. I've just painted my ceiling so I'll blame it on the pain fumes

Shaving is evil.. very evil.. unethical too

All i can say is that this is more of drama than professionalism from people who just talk....

like some people have mentioned everyone is capable of this so called nasty word " shaving " ..... i mean, Paycom, Ccbill, WTS, atc....can also shave our sign ups if they really wanted to...but it will always come out...and they wont risk such a thing...because like AdultLounge.com they are a reputable company and here for the long run...

i know and gaurantee everyone that this kind of business practice will NEVER be tolerated here at AdultLounge.com...i mean wake up people, its not the software you should trust, its the people who own the affiliate program....

some of our smart affiliate partners track their own hits to our sites and compare with ours....it all matches 100%

for example : if we say " Site A " gets 1 sign up for every 80 uniques but your traffic shows 1 sign up for every 500 and you have compared your traffic with other affiliate programs that it is quality traffic, then something is wrong....

i think blaming other companies and using this "shaving" issue to scare webmasters not to use them or affiliates programs scaring webmasters not to use other affiliate programs because of this so called shaving is very very unprofessional and a terrible way to gain your business...damn this shit is getting confusing and as you can see its all just politics....

keep in mind...not everyone is always going to be happy with every company...today you might be unhappy with one company and happy with another but tomorrow that can change...its like your cell phones...today is Verizon tomorrow its T-Mobile... :-)

Have any programs converted to NATS to prove they don't shave?

so i guess you and hooper are not best of friends

This is what ccbill does. Not sure about the seconds. Could be longer then seconds

Not 100% sure, but 98

Andre

if they were willing to put it in there once they are willing to put it in again.

i think its still there if thier customers want it. its too highly requested to not put in.

i think they appreciate your doing this, help restore the faith in them that they lost bu aiding sponsors in ripping off thier affiliates(read: business partners). webmasters are like fish, they always forget though.

I will never support MPA... Fuck that

not true at all....MPA3 does NOT have a shave feature and its NOT requested from reputable clients of theirs. I was PISSED when i saw it first in MPA2 and DEMANDING to be removed IMMEDIATELY!

And NOT TRUE...webmasters are NOT like fish they are our affiliate partners which are on the same boat as we are and i will do everything in my power to protect our webmasters because thats what PARTNERS do...back eachother up! And dont you ever forget that!

Now this is getting ridiculous. I have stood on the side line here while NATS have done their aggressive marketing and even called up our customers to talk shit about us and tried to take them away from us. I have also stood on the side line when I have watched the NATS people go on the boards to trash my company just to try to get a few webmasters against us and to possible win a few more clients.



But its time to start the fight back. I will not just sit around any longer and take this.



Personally I don't mind having competitors. The internet is more then big enough for us all. The better the competition is the better it is for the clients. The quality of the products get better and we all work our out hardest to try to be the best. But a business model where you talk shit about the other companies is not something that I personally feel is any good! If you guys want to work with a company that are willing to walk over dead bodies just to win a client then that is your business.



When it comes to the opportunity to shave or not - Why in gods name blame the company that wrote that in to the script. It is YOU the webmasters that have created the need for having such a thing! You are the ones that are always sending your traffic to the company that offers the most per signups. And the only way to pay anyone $100 per signups is to be able to adjust the stats.

You can shave with what ever program you use. No matter what anyone else tell you it is very easy to adjust the stats as long as you sit on the database of the program your self. Try rather to choose witch companies you do business with.



Now we have learned our lesson and have corrected our self.



If you do not choose the company that makes you the most money then that is your issue. Luckily there are a lot of smart webmasters out there so this isn't really a big issue for the mpa2/3 owners.

It?s like not buying a Toyota because people have crashed with it and died. Or it can break the speed limits. It is really not the company who built the cars fault now is it?



The funny part here is that some of the worse webmasters in this business, who do everything in their power to make the most money they can use every trick in the book to cheat the program owners are the once that are shouting the loudest here.



Now we have been in this business the longest. We have constantly worked with our customers to improve the program and added features that help the webmasters promoting them. The program works great but of course not totally free for little issues. THAT is something that is common for all scripts. Especially scripts that are depending on third-party suppliers.

And yes, we to have had people choosing MPA3 over Nats. We to hear that there are and have been issues with nats. But do we choose to go on the board and post about it OR call their customers and tell them to come to us instead and bad talk them? NO!



We have been quiet for the last six months now simply because we have had more then enough to do with all the upgrades from mpa2 to mpa3 and the new installs. And we also wanted the new mpa3 program to be the best that it could be. But now those times are over, now we will get back to business again and start our little marketing campaign.



Yes we did a bad choice when we gave after for adding the module and for that we are sorry, but we have learned and we have paid our price.



Now must the one who have never done anything wrong please throw the first stone.

Becasue they wrote it ... I'm NOT gonna promote anybody that helped paysite owners shave .

This have nothing to do with nats .

You guys are like :

Yes we did the bad choice
But it was WEBMASTER's fault if there was a such t hing . You made it possible

Ok ... great attitude ...

Dont tell me that you think that we where that came up with this idea first ? If you do then you need to wake up.

Garry, you posted this in 3 threads. I'm posting my same reply again....

We have not bashed your company. We have only pointed out things that are fact when they come up on the boards. You are the ones who built a theft feature into your software, not us.

We do not solict your customers, they come to us. They do so becuase your software was having performance issues. Or having support issues. Or having issues with all of the data not making it in to the system.

We have moved a number of people from both MPA2 and 3 to NATS. I am not aware of one customer ever leaving NATS yet for any software. Yours or not.

MPA2 may have been around longer than NATS, but that doesn't mean much. Both myself and my partners have been in the online adult business since 1996. One of my partner has been in the adult business for over 25 years. We're not the new kids no the block.

We are never looking to bash your company we are only looking to offer people a better solution. We never paint you in an untrue light. We have NEVER made things up about your company or mislead people like Oystein did when he claimed to a potential client we had "hidden fees". This is bad business. What we do is point the truth. I don't expect good business tho from someone who builds fraud features into affiliate software. It's to be expected I guess.

I don't know what you mean by mpa2/3 making the program owner more money. I'd really like to know how you claim this? I hope it's not a reference to the shave feature which you seem to think is the fault of the affiliate not the fault of the program owner or yourself for building it into the software.

There is a reason the biggest companies in adult choose NATS and not Mansion. It's called integrity.

I guess it's NATS

You guys use every opertunity you have to bash our company. You do not need to be much on GFY to see the way you guys do business. But this is your choose and not mine.

And you have and are calling up our customers. I have clients comming to me telling them about the phone calls they get from you guys. I didnt belive it the first time I heard it, but when it was several of them saying the same thing then I didnt have any other choose.

And yes, both me and oystein have been in this business since 1996 as well. So the point of your statement is ? What I was talking about was the experience we had when it came to building and manage an script like this.

By stating that the mpa3 program makes the webmasters more money we mean that we have real cascading, that works like a real cascading software should do. In other words, the clients dont have to fill out all the info several times if their CC is declined.

And please about the biggest programs using nats and not mpa3. Now that is rubbish and you know it!

Why don't we continue this in one thread instead of three: http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...adid=399261&s=