I hope the free-hosted gay galleries I made for you are converting great :winkwink:

That is because you want to be known as Mr. Smooth.. ;)

I'm not saying you should go to court with the information you posted here, but you could atleast, and anyone else with this experience, tell us what sponsor is not worth promoting because of serious shaving.
Atleast that way we can keep us, adult webmasters, updated about the good and the bad sponsors.

Maybe someone, maybe you choker, can put up a professional website where with some kind of script you can track down if people (maybe people that use your CTTS) give bad comments or good comments on a certain sponsor.
So just a list with all the sponsors out there (with your ref in it so you can even make some bucks) and maybe even a search option so people can search into the sponsor database and look up if there are good or bad comments, and make the best sponsors 'green', the neutral sponsors 'gray' and the bad sponsors 'red'.

You could set something like this up choker, with your CTTS, it might get a very populair place to check out for some good sponsors or see the bad ones.

Just one of my ideas, think about it...

All you've proven there is that after a while, the viewers of each site get sick of a given sponsor, or have already signed up. No proof of time-delayed shaving.

Unless the dented marbles fell differently, the wind changed, you lost some marbles after the first test, or any number of other things changed...

ok. then use my second model.

two windows. two buckets. color coded marbles (so you cant say marbles from window 1 fell into bucket 2). drop them at the same time. let the chips (or in this case marbles) fall where they may.

like i said, choker should run a test that alternates the affiliate code with every other sufrer.

count up the hits sent out from afiiliate code A and B, compare. then compare them to what the sponsor reports.

you take 100,000 hits, divide it evenly, over time, run it 10 times and then post the results. that would be undeniable. anyone who says it isn't is a certified moron.

This has been a long thread for sure (this Q is from page 1).

I'd pay for that script!

Cause they are fucking idiots.

There we go!
:thumbsup

Choker,

first of all, to answer your question. No, it is not proof of shaving. Why? Because you have the simple problem that a test this short does not tell you anything worthwhile. Run it for 2 months, then it might be a good test.

You also did not give a lot of details on how you tested this. The way which would make the data somewhat reliable would be to send for example 20000 surfers randomly to the one and to the other affiliate code. Sending 10k to the first and then 10k to the next has WAY too many changes you do not account in, the 2 most important being:

a) Time of day of where the surfer is.
b) Network usage/congestion at the time

Your way of tracking if they count well is also very dangerous. Obviously, they will never count as many hits as you did. They will always have around 5% less simply because of network congestion and people closing browsers while all these damn Location headers make the browser hop all over the place.
Then, taking b) this can cause for quite significant changes in the tracking on the sponsors side because you might just happen to hit hickhups on the net.

a) is very important simply because people tend to signup more or less depending on the time of day. And a) of course also changes the basic mix of what countries the surfers are from.

Oh, and btw, [spam on] SexTracker do by far not have the best stats ;) They are buggy, slow, inaccurate and still have the same features as in 1998[spam off]

Give me some more details on how you did that test exactly to maybe workout a more exact setup to really get some good info from this kind of stuff.

What about using steel balls rather than marbles? Or maybe frozen peas! What if you caught the marbles in a hat rather than a bucket?

Choker:

I'm relatively new to this business but I've accepted the fact that many sleazy sponsors shave and based on my own stats, I believe that there are a smaller number of sponsors who are honest and don't. What is even more disturbing, is the shave % is different depending on who you are.

Would you be willing to tell us about sponsors who don't shave or at least are consistent across multiple accounts. I don't think you can sued for a recommendation....... The omissions will probably be obvious.
:Oh crap

In 9 years I have seen only 3 actual proof's of shaving complete with screen caps. Only 3 and yeah those were bomb mad page views and the webmasters that proved it ended up out of business or just built there own program for there traffic channels.

When definitive proof comes to light then I think we got something but otherwise... It is truly Rhetoric and posturing.

These days I personnally do not even trust hardly any Traffic Brokers to send traffic correctly and if they so wish they themsleves can shave the traffic and blame it on the sponsor to the purchasing client.

Some brokers are good, some are bad, and just because a broker comes out saying and screaming shave does not mean he is on the 100% up and up. Its dirty hands everywhere trying to grab something pure and when its not achieved a scapegoat will always be made.

This whole thread is really nothing more than the same ol "Sponsors Shave " rhetoric without definitive proof.

Even dropping marbles into a bucket will have various results and someone will always have theories why there were less or more on the various instances.

You can shave other ways will CCBill, they have the option to shave all rebills right in the admin.

maybe 3 years ago...

the best sources of traffic cant feed them all now

Thanks, but the tests I ran are enough to convince me of shaving on some affiliates and none on others. You make some really great points, but to be honest, if nobody wants to consider my results, it's no skin off my back. I just posted them as "heads up" to everyone. A lot of people touch on the fact that sponsors are starting to not rely so much on affiliates and get their own traffic. I am seeing this more and more every week. And in totally honesty, this is better for my model anyway. Of course I would rather deal with 1 sponsor buying a million hits a week, than 20 affiliates buying the same traffic. Big sponsors are coming to me and other brokers more and more to buy traffic directly. I have said it for over a year now that the days of affiliates are numbered, and I stand by that statement. If every sponsor I send traffic to decides to shutdown tomorrow, I will still survive as the model I created does not depend on anyone type of income stream. HOWEVER..........most guys are not like this, they are TOTALLY dependent on their sponsors. If I were in thier shoes, I would start my own paysite TODAY. Depending on one source of income in this business is not a smart thing to do. How many guys went out of business when these processors recently went bye bye?? I know most of you will flame me for this, but what if those same sponsors had big TGPs when thier processors went to the beach with thier money? Well at least they would have had a backup to get thierselves back on their feet.

:Graucho

Other than the occasional newbie who actually thinks that 3rd party counters are accurate, nobody has ever doubted my stats. When my stats say I sent 1000 hits, I sent 1000 hits.

Well guess when this all changed???
When I started to sell paysite traffic to affilate accounts.

So this puts me in a position that I have to be accountable to not just the buyer, but to the buyers sponsors stats versus my scripts accuracy??

So this is what brought on the need for this test. And as a result I will no longer sell traffic to affiliate accounts. Paysites directly yes I will continue to. If anyone ever thinks my stats are wrong, they are welcome to use a script that counts and displays the stats in, versus what my script says.

Christ man. Have you ever tried to catch a steel ball in a hat?!?!? It's fucking almost impossible.

So in otherwards you are saying your not willing to take the bullet when the ratio's go bad and ya needed the buffer.

Your position is not an easy one, thats a given.

At least now you have made a decision on how your going to keep going:)

I know sponsors who are building their own TGP's. Not to mention the fact that stopping affiliate programs will greatly reduce the amount of free porn and make free loaders to join a pay-site.

But of course they can. Traffic is traffic, it's not going to change with or without affiliates.

Want to put some money where your mouth is?

I'll make a friendly wager with you... that within 12 months ALL referral programs as we know them are not at all the same. You can make a list of 'features' and we'll come back next Labor Day weekend and see if there aren't more differences than similarities.

Correct. I am accountable to the buyer, not the buyers sponsor. I don't want or need a buffer. That is why at first I had the rule of not selling traffic to affilate accounts. But so many guys wanted me too, I caved in and did it. And since then all I am hearing is that "Choker my sponsor stats do not match up yours, what is going on here? Well if I tell them their sponosr is shaving them, I put myself in a bad situation. So it's a no-win situation for me. Best thing to do is avoid it entirely. If a paysite owner buys traffic from me and his stats do not match up to mine, then we have a problem I can actually solve without making someone look bad.

By changes do you think Sponsors will continue to put less emphasis on affiliates and generate/acquire thier own traffic?

So many things factor into the whole scenario Choker, I don't know that there's one specific point you can say shaving for sure.

We've had people buy our galleries traffic and completely suck with it, when we've sent it ourselves to the same sponsors and done well -- and we don't always announce that it's our reseller codes to our sponsors, just so we can get a gauge for what is really going on.

With the galleries traffic specifically, a different page can mean the difference between a .5 and 5% CTR, and can also influence sales, since we are pre-selling a surfer if we are doing our job right, before they even get to a tour.

At the end of the day, it's all about the money tho, stats don't mean diddly if your checks not a good one and in the mail relatively soon.

or.. dont do direct link to sponsors.. make a redirect.php that ALL clients that do paysite traffic must host themselves that will track clicks.. alot of clicks dont register from aol's ip's because they have thousands of users on the same ip

Or you can send it to PD and get an accurate count at the front door. :) and convert better than everyone.. :2 cents:

I think that with the changes required by Visa and Mastercard regarding cb ratios and what is and is not acceptable from both the site owner and the resellers (and this part is independent of whether or not you use your own merch acct or an IPSP) there is no way that it cannot change.

The sites with the most chargeback, credit and fraud issues are obviously the sites with resellers.

If I were Visa and I looked at different models, and came to the conclusion that resellers were bad news, I could force a change...

Just some food for thought.

i dont need to bet, things changes all the time
i know that , i have been in this bizz since -96
all i say is that paysites roll isnt so huge today as 3 years ago
more and more free site people start their own paysites
and feed it with their own traffic.

Yeah, but this is a lot of hassle. There are enough paysite owners themselves buying this traffic anyway. And any hits that go to a category that does not have a active buyer in it, is sent to a active tgp order in that niche. And if no active TGP order in that niche, it is sent out as general traffic which is a little cheaper. So the hit is not wasted. In fact I sell the same hit to a tgp or paysite for the same price. Yes I love the word "redundant" LOL

150 razors

Can somebody please start a new thread with the conclusions from this one?

I can't read through all of this.:)

well, have you ever tried to promote a site without affiliates? Im doing it now... You start by being lised everywhere you can (TGPs)... (paid, free, etc..) You can do it another time at the same places.. and after the 3rd time.. you really see your sales dropping (saturation)

Then there's some banner placement on some big sites, exit traffic... You are then good for another month or 2... and thats it... Your site is then nearly dead... (saturation) Im guessing that saturation with Affiliates will come MUCH later... since they'll have tireless gallery submitters, aff. with free site with sometime SE traffic... and you even sometime even have people with mainstream sites promoting you..

I dont know how quiet is doing it, what is his other sources of traffic but if hes selling an ebook about it...im a buyer! :1orglaugh

mmm, shouldn't be to hard for a sponsor that uses CCBILL to cheat/shave, but on the other hand it would be easier to detect.

I guess an i-f-r-a-m-e on the tour with another ccbill affil code url would do the trick?

On the other hand its possible that CCBILL protects against this? (by not overwriting a cookie very recently set)

Anyone tested this?

And if its really detected, it would be black on white proof that this sponsor really shaves since the sponsor somehow needs to get another (read: his own) affilcode into that CCbill cookie before the surfer hits the CCBILL signup page.

the final concusion is this.. which ever sponsor makes you the most sales is best to stay with, dont listen to other ppl 1:15 ratios causes im sure sponsors can bullshit them stats on you as well, ive seen it done, if you feel your working too hard and not making enough than move on, if an sponsor is smart enough they wont shave much to keep you but than again if they got webmasters coming and going Im sure they cant give a fuck if you leave and shave the shit outta you.

only thing that ever bugged me is how this one person would mess my stats up large never a balance for me to work with so i never knew what to do to make my conversions better. but in the end i made mad sales with them and couldnt care less how much they shaved.

I'm quite aware of how to do it right :)

lets just say i made an affiliate program that converted 1:5 and i paid out 30 bucks a sale, but i would shave you guys and you would only make 1:30, means i would shave you 5 sales and you make 1, would you care?

would you not be happy making 1:30?

point is im sure if a sponsor is converting very well they will take advantage to themselves, and payout what webmasters EXPECT to make.

He sure isn't going to expose any of his sponsors cause they won't pay him so stop asking :)

still not the point.. say you worked at a job for 30$ an hour.. you got there at 8 am and worked until 5 pm.. you went to get your paycheck and you only were paid from 8am till 2 pm.. would you still be happy with the 30$ an hour?

I go to a job and the boss makes 50-100 bucks an hour to have me doing some labour contrustion job and i make 12 bucks an hour, yeah ive been there done that.

12 bucks is all i expect to make.