is this how the 3rd world talks about their mother?:1orglaugh

Here's where my head went after the first post.

"It's not offered to affiliates yet? OK, now lets talk about how I'm going to promote it while you prepare me a custom link."

Something along those lines.

if you knew something about my mother, you would shoot yourself right into head ... but wait, you are 12dicks, so all clear now ...

:1orglaughMy argument is 100% leakfree... you just don't want to see... for the reasons you have...
It's simple... you settle with what you get... you accept being fucked even if you can point your finger on it... When you accept like you do... yes... then you're right then it automatically includes everything...

Really?

Affiliates don't run the paysites they promote... If site owner wants links on it he must decide and affiliate most decide if or not to promote... very simple
A good paysite with quality content still converts even with a 1000 links (leaks) on it...
Visitors know what they want... they are not stupid... but affiliates can decide to promote or not.

But.... having a few subscription offers on the subscription page and half of those subscriptions are being tracked within the program and half of it not... that's not a little fucking leak that's just not done. That's not a link to clips4sale that's fucking treating people like idiots. That's not targeting traffic that's like gambling in a fucking casino...
You can put a 1000 links on your site... i don't give a fuck, but don't fuck around on the fucking goddamn join-forms....

Someone pays you $20.00
How much did they pay you?

THAT is "leakfree" :2 cents:

:1orglaugh You send traffic to a site which has half of the subscription-offers being tracked and the other half not... Now explain me where your $/clicks were not getting ass-raped...

Your theory is about accepting being fucked out in the open as long as your check is fine... Well... good for you!

I'm unsure if you are pretending to not understand math or if you actually do not understand math....

SponsorA pays me $80 for 100 clicks. I put that real money in my bank.

SponsorB pays me $40 for 100 clicks. I put that real money in my bank
SponsorB claims to pay me up to X and be a great guy.
SponsorB gives me 20 excuses why his $40 is worth more than $80 from SponsorA.

My bank tells me $80 is STILL actually worth more than $40.

Therefore SponsorA paid me the most and is the winner of this auction.

It's MATH.

100% correct, and if those sites with all the leaks in the world still pay you 1 cent more per click than it's nearest rival, where are you going to choose to send your traffic?

That's what relentless is saying (though I obviously don't speak for him, and he may want to clarify), and he is spot on.

All I'd clarify is to make sure the site is legal, pays on time and doesn't hurt your bookmarkers. Also as Sly previously mentioned correctly, this assumes your cost of generating the traffic is the same for both sites. We are talking about NET $/click only. :thumbsup

i am sorry for all the people who will send traffic better to known thief who pays more than a good guy who cant afford to pay that much because he dont scam that much ... oh guys ...

I completely understand your $/clicks theory...
You don't have to repeat it... Now focus on trying to understand mine

Why can't a webmaster point out a leak at sponsor B and trying to get $30 with 3 sales? Instead of $20 with 2 sales... Then it would be 30/100 = $/clicks instead of 20/100 = $/clicks...

That's math too...

Lucas... we aren't talking about scamming consumers or doing anything that harms bookmarkers. If they scammed customers that hurts long term revenue for everyone and I am 100% against it. A 'leaky tour' is not scamming customers in any way. High check payout fees aren't scamming customers. A high minimum payout threshold is not scamming consumers.

We are talking about programs who pay more without scamming customers. I can tell you for a fact that the RUC sites treat customers very well and their content is among the most popular anywhere online with consumers. If they can pay you the most while doing that... good. :2 cents:

You chose a very good board name for yourself. You left out all the important parts of my post. But typical take out of context to try and appear cool to the BRO(ke) club

If you actually understood $/click you wouldn't focus on 'yours' either.

When someone pays $80 for 100 clicks, whether they pay 80 before or after a leak doesn't change how much they paid or how much traffic you sent. If they pay 80 before or after 'being a great guy' that doesn't change the amount either. Not even 1 tiny bit. :2 cents:

This industry is it's own worst enemy!
Sure they do shady shit, but they make me the most money
Sure they fuck over other affiliates, but they haven't fucked me over and make me money!
and so on.......

bump for page 4

We know.

I know everything about your mother I need to know by the actions of her idiot son:thumbsup

If they pay you the most for your work, they didn't do anything shady to you. If they provide exactly what their tour promises customers at exactly the price they clearly state on their tour they didn't do anything shady to the consumer. Your attempt to "feel" good about "up to" an amount instead of focusing on what people actually pay you for the clicks you actually send is your own choice. :error

Nobody in this thread believes the sites in question are harming consumers. Nobody here is saying they pay less per click than an alternative. So your comment is all about how you "feel" - and that has zero actual value in a discussion that is really about MATH.

2+2 = 4... no matter how you "feel" about it :2 cents:

We are not talking about a leaky tour....
We are talking about subscription-offers being kept out of the tracking... without any good argument for it.... like if the traffic of webmasters was not meant to be for those non-tracked options...

Webmaster sends traffic... traffic ends on subscription page... then it's like gambling in casino... which subscription type will visitor join... the tracked ones or the other ones...

In best case it's 50/50 chance... so... you talk about best $/clicks and "could haves" that are imaginary... but a leak like that is so rude and obvious that talking about "imaginary could haves" is an insult to every well thinking person.

ehh, tried to write something, but my english is not good to explain everything i want, so fuck it, waste of time :) i am out of here, but doesnt mean i agree, i dont :) have luck with your legit business everyone :)

and 3+3= would (not could) have been 6

you are piece of shit and one day someone will step into your fucking face with your attitude, that is without doubt, so have luck, ego idiot

Are we talking about sites that treat bookmarkers fairly? Yes.
Are we talking about sites that are legal? Yes.
Are we talking about sites that pay out on time? Yes.

That leaves ONLY one question:
Do these sites pay you more per click than any other you could send the same traffic.

/End

Contact me any time you want high quality text written for your sites Lucas :thumbsup

No.
3+3 = 6
Always.

If you are paid 4, you aren't paid 6.
You are paid 4. 4 is the amount you are paid.
If you are paid 2+2... you are not paid 3+3.

You know exactly how much you were paid.
You can "feel" about it whatever you want.
It does not in any way change how much you were actually paid.

Actual $ / Actual Clicks = Actual Value

It's MATH.

I'm not trying to be cool to anyone... I'm an idividual and not in any faggot club...

I didn't take anything out of context... calling it a "little leak" is just not the correct description... imho

We are not talking about a leaky tour....
We are talking about subscription-offers being kept out of the tracking... without any good argument for it.... like if the traffic of webmasters was not meant to be for those non-tracked options...

Webmaster sends traffic... traffic ends on subscription page... then it's like gambling in casino... which subscription type will visitor join... the tracked ones or the other ones...

In best case it's 50/50 chance... so... you talk about best $/clicks and "could haves" that are imaginary... but a leak like that is so rude and obvious that talking about "imaginary could haves" is an insult to every well thinking person.

With this i agree :thumbsup

except you usually get paid extra for this I guess is what he is saying.

Also. I would never trust anyone who couldnt come up with a better name then 'really useful cash'

:1orglaugh

If you are looking for a reliable Dating Network that pays on time and has been in business for over 14 years then send me an IM....would like to work with you.

Relentless, your argument is never going to be valid no matter how many times you repeat it.

The primary concern in doing business with an affiliate program that is shaving/leaking is the threat of future "adjustments" and an inability to process traffic data due to unknown variables (the shaving/leaking).

One thing you've never explained in your shaving-doesn't-matter campaigning is how you drill down to figure out what the problem is for a low EPC affiliate program. How exactly do you determine if the problem is the tour, your own promo efforts or shaving/leaking?

My argument is valid as long as simple math continues to work.
I'll bet on Math over how you "feel about things" every time.

I know what my clicks are worth (from SponsorB). If SponorA isn't sending me more $/click, I'd go to SponsorB or SponsorC. Nobody is telling you to go to any specific sponsor. The professionals in this thread are telling you to send traffic to the sponsor that pays you the most per click.... or if you think you can do it better, to build a site of your own that earns you more per click than any available sponsor.

Why would anyone waste time trying to figure out WHY SponsorB has such a low EPC... why is their problem not my problem. Whether the 'problem' is the tour, shaving, leaking, a fad, over-saturation, high scrubbing, weak content updates or anything else... that doesn't change the fact that their $/click is LOW.

Similarly, if their $/click is very high, I might want to make sure they aren't doing anything illegal or anything that hurts my bookmarkers (high $/click actually needs more evaluation than low $/click for that reason). Other than that, as an affiliate I don't care why or how... and neither should you.

On the other hand, if I am seriously considering building a site to compete in a market, then all the why and how matters a lot. If you are a paysite owner your job gets 10000x more complicated. If you are sending traffic as an affiliate the analysis is as simple as $/click. The hard part of being an affiliate is generating traffic...

By the way Matt26v, what sites do you own? Name one? Just one?

why are you dodging the issue, faggot?

:321GFY

More nonsensical gay bashing?
... and you own what site? :error

Welcome to page 5 by the way

Relentless, you know damned well as the owner of review sites that not all business models support this strategy.

And why argue for it? In the end, maybe processor B has better sites that convert better and retain members for longer, but they have this little trick where you lose a bunch of your potential sales through... y'know... blatant stealing... So A paid you more in the short term, but you wrote off B too early and due to their stealing you can't use B's sites to make as much money as you could.

Also you have to throw away all the work you did for B just to do this test, it's all lost time and potential revenue.

Wouldn't it be better if B just didn't steal, and you could make money from both programs and diversify where you send your traffic to?

Socks,

When you work with a program on a review site you add a few reviews. You see how they do (and how they treat your bookmarkers). You get great feedback from the consumer side from those bookmarkers too.

1 - Let's say SponsorA got 3 sites on your review site and you sent them 10,000 uniques. You look at your stats and see that their sites are badly under-performing compared to other sponsors with sites in the same niches. Now they ask you to review their two new sites. How fast do you hurry to add 2 more sites from that under-performing sponsor?

2 - Conversely, you add 3 sites from a sponsor that blows the doors off your average $/click for a specific niche... your bookmarkers tell you how awesome their sites are and thank you for recommending them. Now they ask to add 2 more sites to your reviews... how fast do you hurry to add those sites?

As a review site owner your investment of resources isn't a blind move. You can base it on past performance, trusted information from your bookmarkers, other useful review site owners, etc... If you are just randomly allocating resources... that would be an error.

3 - Now the big question for you....
You review a few sites from a program. Your bookmarkers are happy with it. Your $/click is much better than the average for that niche. The sites are completely legal and arent scamming your customers. You notice they have a leak on their tour. What do you do? Do you send your traffic to a lower paying sponsor instead and yank down their reviews even though your bookmarkers love them and they are top sellers on your site earning you a high $/click? Nope. You add more of their sites because your customers are happy with them and their $/click is higher than the alternatives available.

$/click matters. Whatever excuses or promises someone makes about $/click don't mean anything. You know how many clicks you sent, how many dollars you earned, how your bookmarkers were treated and whether or not you should continue sending more traffic. It works the same for my review sites, tubes, blog network and any other site based on the affiliate business model.

You know that as well as I do. :2 cents:




P.S. - Wouldn't it be better if everyone paid $10,000 per click?
They don't... so why waste time on it.