Sorry... I just like poo... :2 cents:

If the OP wrote that it would have had more value than this thread has had otherwise. :error

yes? i would just make good proof and send it to newspaper or someone who will care ... and thats nice that people on the world are not thinking the same way :)

Knowledge is not your strong point, huh ?

A newspaper won't care... unless they believe it will help them sell more copies of the newspaper.
They will take your news about it and use the exact same 2 steps I suggested above.

1 Is printing a story about Lucas naked on the toilet in McDonalds legal
2A - How can we profit the most by printing that story?
2B - Is there something else we can do instead to profit more if we don't print that story.

The fact you think it's an added insult to include the age of 40 says a fuck of a lot about how little you know, as well as broadcasting the fact you are some idiot fresh out of school :1orglaugh :error

I remember when I was a little kid and thought 40 was 'old', then I grew up and realised 40 is prime, especially when it comes to your earnings/biz experience/communication/sense

but hey, well done on announcing you still have the brains of an uneducated child :thumbsup

Relentless always pulls this kind of shit.. He reads the OP up to the part he doesn't agree with, then swoops in on this high horse to ask the 'real questions' about the affiliate doing their homework, etc. Then defends his websecure broclub with all this might and 120wpm of bullshit.

Then he makes a retarded analogy taking everything out of context -- which is like a distraction maneuver.

So, somehow now this thread is about the morality of McDonalds taking naked pictures of people shitting, and selling them. I guess. But WHO gets completely nude while shitting in a public toilet?

Anyway +1 for RUC shady as fuck sponsor.

Keep being delusional about 40+ being prime age :1orglaugh
Looks like that comment got your little feelings as you didnt bother commenting on cardbanging and the issues.Way to keep deepthroating that old bro cock :thumbsup

1 - The 'retarded analogy' was posted by Lucas. I replied to his question.

2 - The 'real question' is the same every time. What is your net $/click?

3 - Apparently Lucas gets completely naked and fears he is being photographed. Hence his question.

4 - "Go to the program directly, focus on your $/click, and figure out how to do it better or monetize it best..." is hardly a 'high horse' to be on. It's common sense.

5 - GoFuckYourself :winkwink:

when you grow up, you'll look back on that line of thinking and laugh :)

And I didn't bother commenting on the other 'issues' because you pulled some shit out of your ass, and made them into words on a forum. I just find it funny you think calling someone 40 is an insult - one day you'll understand why, and be in on the joke :thumbsup

That's not what I'm saying, what I am saying is that if I can make more sending there even if there's a leak then its better to send there then somewhere else.

Whoever pays me the most money for the traffic wins my traffic the rest doesn't matter is what I'm saying.

even markham understood this :2 cents:

No it's not what really matters here... that's not what this thread is about... and if it was about that then one could argue that the reveneu per click of this program would be higher if webmasters were credited correctly.

This is 100% correct. The OP posted a legitimate post.

Really? If you ever get ass-raped by a gang of faggots... will you think afterwards that it was probably your own fault you got raped because you shouldn't have wore those pantyhose?

You are a sophist. This is distracting uncorrect logic. But logic is not the goal here. The goal is bending something curved straight. Because there are interests at stake. It doesn't change anything about the legitimacy about OP's post.

There wasn't anything retarded really regarding to Lucas his post...
The only thing that was retarded actually was how you would not be upset and not were going to scream about McDonalds taking pictures of you sitting on a toilet.

No... that's not the question here... and if it was about that then the new question would be how much $/click could it be without the leak...

Do you know what is common sense? Common sense is that when you as a program decide to implement an affiliate program... you do the best you can to credit affiliates for their efforts... otherwise... don't choose for a fucking affiliate model. It is so fucking childish to try to set up structures to minimise affiliates being credited... Is i so fucking difficult to credit affiliates regarding these bundled Sites-packages?

problem with these McD's naked toilets and ass raping is that those things are illegal.

better analogy would be 2 jobs, 1 has a dental plan, the other does not. Do you go for the job which leaves you more money, even without the dental plan, or go with the lesser paying job without? Neither are illegal, immoral, etc etc, and the choice lies with you which one to take, as there are plenty of people going for both those jobs.

I use a sponsor which only pays $20PPS instead of the $35PPS I used to get there, back in the old days that are now irrelevant. Bottom line is, they have the content that makes me more per click, than the similar programs that don't have that specific, good selling content. So I send that traffic to that 'bad' sponsor that doesn't pay me *what I would prefer them to*, but pays me more than anyone else can.

Your use of pejoratives about gay people notwithstanding, your comment has nothing to do with the profitability question. There is nothing distracting about $/click. Most of what is being posted by you is actually an errant distraction away from $/click.

If screaming about it was profitable I'd consider it. It isn't, so it becomes a complete waste of time. The question isn't "how much could an affiliate earn compared to what they would earn if the same program paid them more" - that would be sophistry. What is actually a useful question is "how much more (or less) would an affiliate earn by sending traffic elsewhere. If they would earn more, they should, if they would earn less they shouldn't. Oh wait, that's exactly what is meant by $/click.

You have that backwards, which is unsurprising based on the rest of your comments. When you start a business of any kind, you are making an offer to people. In this case you are offering to pay them for their traffic. Affiliate marketing is an auction, nothing more. Each program pays X per Click. The one that pays the most (legally and without hurting your bookmarkers) is the one you ought to CHOOSE to do business with... the rest is all distractions.

Have Luck.

What I was saying is... even if you have highest $/click in a certain program doesn't mean you have to accept they are leaking. There is nothing wrong with OP to bring this to attention. Some people here like to act that affiliates have a choice in what to promote or not. Well... that's correct... so sharing information is crusial because people need all info to decide what to and what not to promote. And some people take morals into consideration. If you only take $/clicks into consideration... youre free to do that...
If you accept being fucked over... people will constantly push to fuck you over more...

There was no profitability question in op's post... He wanted to bring a leak into attention... If you want to make it a profitability-thread... fine.. i'll simply tell you your $/click would be higher without leaks... simple...

That's exactly what i meant with: Really? If you ever get ass-raped by a gang of faggots... will you think afterwards that it was probably your own fault you got raped because you shouldn't have wore those pantyhose?

You accept being fucked over... simply because you have highest $/click. That doesn't make the "fucking people over" right and besides that... again... if you care so much about $/click... your $/click would be higher without the leaking...

I understand your $/click-story... but this thread isn't about that... you say it is always about that in the end... i say... no it's not.

[QUOTE=Nickatilynx;20134130]Are crosssales "legit"? - yup
Are upsells "legit"? - yup
Are member area upsells "legit" ?- yup
Are exit consoles "legit"? - yup

Yes this is the norm on PPS - but we are taking revshare here :(

Struggle with this...

If someone shared "I earn X per click more from sponsorA than sponsorB' they would be posting useful information. Instead, posting I earn the most from sponsorA, more than anyone else would pay me... And I admit I can't make a better site to earn mor myself, but I wish they paid me even more money than they already do" is utterly useless. If I offer to pay you .00000001 cents per click and never have any kind of leak at all, would you send me all your traffic? Someone else may pay you ten cents a click, but if they have any kind of a leak, even though they pay you much more than I would, you'd still send me all your traffic, right?

Of course not... Because $/click is what actually matters.

Would you rather have 25 cents per click after a hundred leaks, or would you rather have 10 cents a click with no leaks.
Go ahead... Think about it a long time. Then admit you want 25 cents, or lie about wanting a dime.

Relentless,

Struggle4Bucks hit on pretty much every point correctly, so I won't repeat him.

But let me add one more detail. RUC added this deceptive Join option sometime after I initially became an affiliate. In other words, I accidentally discovered what they were doing.

RUC is cheating their affiliates. Your argument of, "Hey, I still make money" ignores the point that you are being ripped off. That might sit well for you, but it doesn't for me.

And for another poster (CS, I think) who said, "Well, you should have done due diligence on the organization", is nonsense because to assume all people have the same information as you is ludicrous.

Stop with that $/click retoric... this is about morals...
The way you talk... you could sell zyklon B to the nazi's and still justify it for yourself

Sabadii,

A) How much do you earn per click from RUC?
B) How much do you earn from your second best choice for the same traffic?
C) Can you build a paysite that earns more than A or B above?

If RUC pays the most, send them your traffic. If they don't, post some stats about B and show us who pays you more.
If you can build a better option, build it and let's see it.

D) is Nonsense.

Ok... a few simple questions for you to see where you're standing:
-Do you think it is technical possible for a program to credit affiliates for these bundle packages?
-If yes... do you think affiliates should be credited?
If no... why not?

So far you have gay bashed and invoked Godwin's law in the span of a half-dozen posts. That's awfully weak.
It still isn't as weak as the 'send porn traffic to the most moral sponsor' nonsense.
If morality was your goal you'd be funding charities, not selling digital images of vagina.
You also wouldn't be gay bashing or invoking Godwin's law in your arguments.

Profit is your goal. Lie to yourself if you like.

To answer your specific question... anyone who does this professionally does not give one single fuck how a sponsor arrives at their payout amount. I don't care if they have 26 leaks, 2 leaks, PPS, Revshare, pay in wampum beads, giftcards, dollars or doughnuts. I take the TOTAL VALUE of whatever they ACTUALLY paid me divided by the total number of clicks I sent them and determine the one TRUE $/click for their program.

Then I try to find someone else who pays more per click than that sponsor does. Until I find someone better, they get my traffic. Why they pay more... not my problem. Why they pay less, not my problem. Those kinds of questions *only* matter if I am considering building a paysite to compete with them... as an affiliate they are 100% meaningless.

If one program pays you 35PPS, and another pays you 50% revshare... how do you decide which is better? You start by figuring out exactly how many clicks you sent to each and how much they paid you total for those clicks. Then you might see the 35PPS site is actually paying you 14 cents per click while the 50% site pays you 32 cents a click... or you might see the opposite is factually correct.

Back in the day programs used to give points for giftcards and console gaming systems and all kinds of other bonuses. How did you know what they paid per click? You added the value of the bonus items to the payment amount and divided it by the number of clicks along with any cash those clicks earned.

Apples to Apples is $/click and it *always* works because you *and only you* track exactly how many clicks you sent and exactly how many dollars you cashed as a result. The stat relies on nobody else.

if its good $, he will sure sell it no problem ... $ is the only that matters ... :upsidedow

As long as it is LEGAL and does not hurt your bookmarkers. :2 cents:

You have short term memory... you started hopefull but after 5 words you forgot to write the actual answer to my questions and started your $/click retoric again...

Please answer...

What you seem to be missing is this, if they are happy to take from you right infront of your face, what are they doing in the background ? ? ?

It is the latter that always worries me. :2 cents:

All this $/click shit means nothing if it can all come crashing down in a second.

Regarding to Godwin's law... You simply remove "hitler" and Nazi's" and replace it with $/clicks...

I did answer it. Nobody doing this professionally cares whether it can be tracked or not tracked. Nobody cares how a program arrives at the actual $/click. Back in the day programs advertised payouts of "Up to 200PPS" - nobody with a brain gives one flying fuck what a payment can be "up to", the only thing that matters is how much the payment "actually is for the traffic I sent."

A sponsor paid you 18 cents a click. He could have paid you 18,383 dollars a click. He could have paid you 5 million dollars a click. He also could have paid you 4 cents per click. Why didn't he? Who gives a fuck. What matters is he actually paid you 18 cents per click.

Your idiotic question framed differently could be posed as "Is it technically possible for a sponsor to pay me 96 dollars and a goat for each click I send them?" Yes, it is technically possible to send 96 dollars and a goat per click... but nobody is offering that so who gives a fuck what is technically possible. :2 cents:

Wow... making confusion and distractions to de-rail threads is a service available to all WebsitesSecure.org-customers?

Nobody CAN take from you in front of your face or in the background.

Do you know how many clicks you sent with 100% accuracy? Yes.
Do you know the exact amount of the check you cashed for that traffic? Yes.
Therefore nobody in the world can fuck with what your actual $/click is at any moment.

The fact that you are trying to rely on a fantasy of 'payments up to nonsense' with 'leak free tours' when those definitions change constantly is your own error. When you look at a sponsor site (any sponsor site) completely ignore what they say they pay per sale. Ignore what they promise to include or not include. Now go look at your own stats. How much did they pay you per click? That number doesn't change, that number isn't a promise, that number is a fact.

The only way that number doesn't "work" is if a program goes under or fails to pay out. The list of sponsors who HONESTLY failed to pay because they went out of business is a thousand times longer than the list of sponsors who failed to pay because they were shady. Anyone can go out of business at any time for any reason. Watch your money, make sure payouts are on time. Never leave a balance in a 'payment solution platform wallet' - and go after actual $/click.

It really is very simple.

You did not comprehend the Godwin's Law Wikipedia page you read. The point of it is that hyperbole about gay bashing and Nazism is misplaced in garden variety message board threads. There is no hyperbole about $/click and it is the core relevant fact of this discussion.

I translated your post for you, free of charge. You have no reason to attack me or my company simply because you fail to understand the single most basic element of the affiliate marketing business model.

So you do understand that people want to be paid for their traffic...

Your "could haves" would have made sense in an abstract enviroment. Now there is a concrete issue and "could have" suddenly becomes real... And then people want their "could haves"...

So what you're saying is: yes it's technically possible to track and credit affiliates for bundle packages, but because no one is doing that you should not give a fuck about that.

Yes... you are absolutely right! People want their maximized $/clicks by making sure all their traffic is being tracked and credited...

So what's the problem of bringing to attention an issue that would improve peoples $/clicks...

Better than that... I understand HOW MUCH they are paid for their traffic.
You seem not to understand it.

I am saying, you can see exactly how much you actually earn and how much you actually earn is what matters. What someone promises, how pretty the graphic of the number might be, whether or not they seem like a great guy, how badly you want to bang their wife.... does not matter a lick.

A sponsor pays you X... is anyone else offering more than X?

It's a very simple auction.

NO they do not.

If you send 3M clicks and get paid 1 million dollars by someone who shaved 300K clicks, while someone else pays you 100K for 3M clicks and never shaved any.... where would you send your next 3M clicks?

Nobody doing this professionally cares how many clicks THEY count. I care how many clicks I count. If I see I sent 200K clicks and the sponsor stats show 1M clicks or 100K clicks or 4clicks that doesn't matter at all. If their stats say they sent me $10,000 that is 100% irrelevant.

What matters is what my bank says they deposited and what my internal stats say I sent to them. Their stats are 'cute' for show and only get looked at frequently by people who blindly fail to have their own stat tracking in place.

Actually, I didnt say that... Possibly implied it slightly, (AS IN YOU HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF GFY SINCE Sep 2010 - & Could have easily used the search function...) but I really didnt mean it that way....

What I was TRYING to say, is that life is unfair. Everyone is looking out for number one, and if someone CAN rip you off... Then they probably will...

(As I have learnt the hard way - To the total tune of about 1/4 Mill in my short 45 years on earth...)

Its certainly NOT RIGHT. Its certainly UNFAIR.

But its the reality of life...

I dont agree with it. But its happening left right and center, day in, day out, online / offline etc.... So be aware and be careful :thumbsup

Sorry to hear they are pissing you about, but thing is, they have...




Peace :upsidedow

Yes they do...

If you send it to the shaver and get paid 1m dollars... that is maximizing your traffic too...
Finding out where the shave is and bringing that to attention is further maximizing your traffic.

Or you could accept the shaving like you do... because you're happy anyway because it's the highest $/click you can get...