Beat me to it :)

...and to jcnlv, I'd only say that rather than risking higher CB's or refunds it's simply making the most of the different systems. There' s a lot of criteria and diffferent processors will scrub slightly differently and even harder on certain times of the month than others depending on their systems. Using cascading simply means that you have the best chance of catching one on a 'good day' and/or with a scrubbing system that likes your particular customer. All IPSP's still in business have effective scrubbing but that doesn't mean they all use they same 'rules' for it :)

While I think of it... there's also a reason that programs like MPA2 only use certain processors. It's simply because many processors out there do not have systems in place to allow data to be shunted back and forth via a script. Even CCBill which has superb tools for this, is a little limited in that they wont allow any of your 'own' data to be sent to them and back if you use their own affiliate system. Mind you, other than that CCBill do have the best tools out there.

You always seem to spam this offer in any thread where MPA2
is mentioned. So let's see a demo of this stuff you have. For that
kind of money you must have sold a few already so I'm sure
getting some demo up is no problem at all.

And no I'm not dissing you I'm just curious to see what you've
got and I'm sure I'm not the only one. That said I AM a bit
sceptical that you can deliver an program with the same/similar
features/functionality as MPA2

So show us the goodies......it's SHOWTIME!

DynaMite

Actually, our product is still being coded as i type this as it is going to have more features than MPA2 along with the option of using more processors.

Once we have the source code completed i will be happy to post a demo url on the board so that everyone may compare products :)

We currently estimate completion within the next two weks given all the functions that our program will have in addition to those of MPA2, TrueStats and, other likeable products on the market.

Regards,

Lee

DV: The problem with this is that there are a lot of affiliates that prefer being paid from a 3rd party processor. So many companies mess with the stats and shave.

Interesting point. I too would like to know the answer.

I don't think MC requires this kind of reporting at this point but, from what I understand, this could theorectically happen with Visa since they now require reporting.

However, the MC chargeback thresholds and fines seem to be tougher, so you could have additional problems with MC just from the chargebacks alone, since the fines on those are pretty hefty these days if you go over.

From my experience with different programmers the past seven years.... that estimate of two weeks more than likely will end up being two months at best :1orglaugh

Tipsy, DynaSpain,


Thank you for the responses... 'cleared up some of my concerns.

Well you have obviously not used the same programmer / s we do ;)

We have been working on this program for a while now (at least 6 months) and it has already past its anticipated completion date because we keep adding things to it that will ensure our program is far superior to others on the market at the present time.

That said, if it does go over the two week time frame it will be because we have added more stuff to it or had to de-bug it :thumbsup

Regards,

Lee

hhhmmmmmm..... debugging... another 6 months :1orglaugh :1orglaugh
(and I don't even get paid for doing it for them....)

as you can tell my experiences with programmers has not been quite as good as I would have liked.

I look forward to seeing your system when it is ready...

We started using the MPA2 last month, and it already pays for itself and more, so we are happy with it.

Plus it's nice to know if a processor pulls a "WSB" we can switch on the fly to another:thumbsup

I am happy to see that more people now start to understand the significance of cascading between good processors. The bottom line is, it makes you more money. Proven over a year of clients using our program, and proven by other companies using their own proprietary software and programmers.

Reason why MPA2 works so well and why we chose the processors that we use in the cascading is because we have very close relationship with the processors in question. Also, I personally come from one of the major ones and have quite significant experience with processors going back to '97

To make a good cascading affiliate software is not just to gather a bunch of codes and smack them together. It is years of experience being a webmaster, knowing the ins and outs of the processing business, and not the least knowing what the problematics of this industry can give any webmaster on any given day - And then present a viable and strong solution built up over 1,5 years of initial programming and testing, then a year with clients, of whom most highly recommend it. Why? Because it makes them more money.

I personally hope that we do get more good competitors like OZ's TrueStats (to be frank, there are no other real competitors than him. Much respect...) so that more webmasters can see the importance of taking control over their business.

And this is one of the ways to do just that...

:2 cents:

MediumPimpin - ;-)

I don't doubt the ability for the cascading system to generate more signups on the same traffic -- which is very nice in the short term -- however will it really make more money in the long run, or could it ultimately help to bring on the demise of a operation?

As for "taking control of their own business"... sending signups to a list of processors until one accepts it is only a small aspect of "taking control". These days that actually seems very risky.

It sounds as if MPA2 was conceived and developed in a prior era. Things have changed dramatically in the last months. Is the system still viable?

We all know how tight the Visa/MC regs have become, and now see some IPSP's passing on chargeback fees and huge fines to their clients. It looks like it may become the norm. Do the IPSP's still have the incentive to actively do everything possible to prevent fraudulent transactions from entering their systems for every one of their clients, if the clients are the ones paying the fines? Siteowners are at the mercy of the IPSP -- they control our fate more than MC/Visa does.

Couldn't the cascading processor system put a site and its owner and their entire internet business in jeopardy? All of the transactions -- whether heavily or lightly scrubbed, and from any of the recommended IPSPs -- that would ultimately become chargebacks, would all be credited to the clients domain and the siteowner's business. Couldn't this raise the red flags with MC/Visa and result in the possible closure of all of the clients IPSP accounts?

It seems like if you use cascading, you potentially multiply your liabilities by sending signups through processors until you find someone who is willing to take it.

I know that you recommend cascading only the "top" processors, however even the "top" guys can have problems that can cause huge numbers of chargebacks. ( I know this all too well, as I never recovered from the Y2K hit I took from one of those "top" processors back in 2000, when they accidentally overbilled customer recurring charges by some $9,000 in a three day period.... and then "fixed" it by refunding them $18,000 from my merchant account!!! - a total freaking mess that cost us a merchant account.)

Having faith in a single IPSP is tough enough, but having faith in a rotation of them...?

I still think the concept can have considerable value but I don't know if it is the ultimate processing/affiliate solution. Maybe I just don't know enough.

Does MPA2 offer any optional pre-submission fraud protection tools that would allow a licensee, to do their own fraud control prior to even submitting to the cascade of processors?

Everything works well, may be it was a moment, when we were changing our server.

Why do you think it's not possible to make a program with same features as MPA2? Look at my sig, we have a lot of customers now... And we have a lot of features and we work with any billings!

I don't mean to be rude or diss you but I've checked out your
program and it is NOT similar to MPA2, it does NOT have the same
features and I'm pretty damn sure that it doesn't come anywhere
close in performance either.

I'm a pretty decent coder myself but I don't even think about it
to build something myself. I've build 2 affiliate programs myself
(3/4) years ago. I know what it takes to build them so I also know
that doing it myself is not an option in today's environment.

Affiliate programs need constant tweaking/updates especially
if you run multiple sites in it and have a decent amount of
webmasters promoting those sites. You have to track millions
of hits per day, there are tons of people that continiously try to
scam you or the system and I can go on for hours about possible
pitfalls.

Building a system that works and building a system that works
with millions of hits are 2 different things. Keeping it work without
problems and loopholes is a fulltime job that should NOT be
underestimated.

An affiliate system controls your money and the money of your
webmasters. It is a huge responsibility and if you fuck up it's
bye, bye business.

I'm not saying your product is bad.....but I very much doubt it's
in the same league as MPA or Truestats. The reason I won't build
my own is simple. I'm pretty damn sure I can't build something that
is better or comes very close to what MPA2 / Truestats is today.
These guys work fulltime on this stuff with multiple people.
I won't be able to keep it tiptop at all times.

Oystein has YEARS of IPSP knowledge

MPA2 has gathered a LOT of information over the years which
helped to improve MPA2 all the time.

Their program is running on numerous sites in different environments.

They have a team that is dedicated working on their software.

The above also applies for Truestats.

It would be interesting to compare a few programs and run the
same batch of Test traffic/signups/cheats to each system and then
compare results. I'm quite sure it would give very interesting
results and a lot of people would be very suprised and rethink
their options before building something themselfes.

p.s. I'm not in any way related to Truestats/MPA2 or any other
affiliate program that is up for sale.

DynaMite :2 cents:

Of course it's not similar, it wouldn't be very interesting :) And what features we haven't?

All you say is true! But... We have a team, which works with our software for years... We have now a lot of customers and we make plug'ins for our partners if they need it! Of course we haven't such relations with some billings, as MPA2 has, but we work with any billing, so our program is more universal.

Yes, it would be very interesting to make this test...

So if the site is using 3 processors and the payouts are done seperate from the IPSP then where are the statistics stored for the affiliate to view?

In the data base on your server. You can see this scheme here: How does it work?

There seems to be a lot of features, but cascading billing wasn't mentioned that I saw...

Also without some data the demo isn't very informative.

Is there a demo login for the affiliate area (Partner Interface?)

so this is a shave-ready system?

You can shave with any system :) It depends only on your wishes and not on software, I think...

It is said about cascading here: http://www.wmcgi.com/overview.html There you can read about all features.

First go to Advert registration page for any type of program, register there and then go to Partner Interface and login.

so the answer is yes?

No, if you use automatic mode to add transaction to the system your adverts will see sign-ups, when they'll appear in the system...

DynaMite - Thank you so much for all the love! I would love to do a test against any program out there.

I think you are right on the money. Actually, I was in a meeting yesterday with a company that I know very very well and that are big sponsors, also on this board and very respected in the industry who actually said no thanks to buy MPA2 a year ago because they were building their own proprietary system.

Yesterday they said to me that they wished that they had bought MPA2 a year ago because now, a year later, they still have not lauched their version and they keep on having serious issues in the implementation. Trouble after trouble. So as I have said before, and I will say it again - please keep on trying to make a similar product to MPA2, and I am sure there will be similar programs coming out, but be very confident that you will manage to see it through and that you have enough money in the till to cover all the development costs. It is very expensive...

Then when you get tired of spending hours upon hours with headaches and money drizzling down the drain - Give me a call or send me an email and we will lift the burden off your shoulders and sell you a perfectly good program that will make you money from day one.

Period.

:winkwink:

I like, that everyone tries to say, that we are a dilettantes in this business. We work with different partnership programs for years. Yes, we had not such a great advertising as mpa2, but it doesn't mean, that we didn't work all this time. And we had a lot of tests, and a lot of partnership programs work with us now. I think, if we had a bad working software, there wouldn't be any customers of our soft :) So, may be somebody cann't write something as good as mpa2, but we'll just try!

Why don't you name a few of your clients and post URL's to their
partnership program so that we can see it running live.

DynaMite :thumbsup

Here is the list:
Our customers

Hmmm... Now I dont know what to say. I have spent all this time back and forth with you Sigurd thinking that you actually had something going here. I just checked out your clients programs and sites and this is what I get out of it:

1. You do not have a cascading billing solution.

2. You do have an automated signup process for the webmaster.

3. Of all the clients you list there are only about 5 real ones since all the sites you listed goes back to either one of the 5 affiliate programs.

So in easy to unerstand terms, what you have is what our MPA1 was about 4 years ago. Not a bad program at all, dont get me wrong, but it cannot compare or even come close to compare itself with MPA2.

This is not meant to be a mean post, just a realitycheck...

:2 cents:

What do you mean in a cascading billing solution? We have a solution to use any number of different billings in a cascade, when first billing redirects to the next, if cc was declined, and our system check sign-up from any billing from this cascade. Isn't it a cascading billing solution?

What do you mean?

9 :)
And we have about 4 new customers, I still haven't list them and there are some partnership programs, which don't want us to list them :)

I don't think so :) Tell me about features of mpa2, which WebAdmin doesn't have and I'll try to tell you something about it.

That is all she wrote ;-)

Ok, you don't want to answer, it's your choise. :)

Too much time spent on something I thought was real...

:sleep