GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post - Are you more likely to promote a NATS, Mansion, Exec Stats, standard CCBill program?

jayeff · 11-26-2005, 04:07 AM

I won't knowingly touch Mansion because of the shave issue in MPA2.

NATS is okay in general (although I cannot say I have noticed any $$$ impact, which I guess anyway depends on the processors in use), but it takes for ever to pull FHG's from most of their multi-site users, since pic and movie galleries have to be generated one type at a time, separately for each site they have.

I haven't felt good about ccBill ever since I had my own cards rejected by them on a few sites. These were long-standing, UK-issue cards with high limits that I paid off in full every month, so I can't imagine what kind of algorithm trapped them. And I don't like that they make it impossible to pull detailed stats into something like statsRemote unless you have each sponsor separately in their system (which then makes it horrible to get the links and so on from the sponsors who keep that stuff "inside" ccBill).

I haven't noticed other systems in use widely enough to get a real impression of them and anyway payment processing is only one aspect of a sponsor's profile. I suspect we are losing a lot of money with all of them, since I imagine they all kill a lot of good sales to minimize their risks.

11-26-2005, 04:07 AM
jayeff Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 2,944	I won't knowingly touch Mansion because of the shave issue in MPA2. NATS is okay in general (although I cannot say I have noticed any $$$ impact, which I guess anyway depends on the processors in use), but it takes for ever to pull FHG's from most of their multi-site users, since pic and movie galleries have to be generated one type at a time, separately for each site they have. I haven't felt good about ccBill ever since I had my own cards rejected by them on a few sites. These were long-standing, UK-issue cards with high limits that I paid off in full every month, so I can't imagine what kind of algorithm trapped them. And I don't like that they make it impossible to pull detailed stats into something like statsRemote unless you have each sponsor separately in their system (which then makes it horrible to get the links and so on from the sponsors who keep that stuff "inside" ccBill). I haven't noticed other systems in use widely enough to get a real impression of them and anyway payment processing is only one aspect of a sponsor's profile. I suspect we are losing a lot of money with all of them, since I imagine they all kill a lot of good sales to minimize their risks.