Any time someone starts pointing any sort of blame then they better be ready for someone else to say "he who smelt it dealt it".

And one last useless opinion dished up by me before heading out...

If you have a great product then just focus on selling that and not selling someone else's problems. The success from it will ultimately be much sweeter without all the bitterness.

Oystein is a good friend and I can say he's a real person who tries his best and is a real stand up guy.

Once upon a time, they created a feature that most people didn't have the balls to admit was happening, they at least came out with it as a feature, open about it.

The industry wanted it and the industry had it as an option, beware buyer, or in this case, affiliate. Some people might actually be able to make higher payouts because they can simply convert traffic to the max, while others use short cuts and shave. But not everyone using the MPA2 program shaved, that's not a fair assumption. Some people shave because their conversion ratios are that much better then the rest of the industry, so you'd never really notice the shave and the payouts are still great. Shaving still exists even if you are making more money then with a different program.

Today's webmaster needs to compete and sell to others that they don't shave. And it's the right way to do business. Always has been.

I don't fault the programmers as much as the demand to have that feaure dictated by the webmasters asking for it. MPA2 is not the fall guy for a feature that an industry asked for, though the majority never knew or wanted this to happen. The people using the program are the minority doing the majority of the revenues being made.

I respect when someone says we've listened to your requests and you're right, we'll take that feature out. The industry spoke up and things changed because the majority can speak on boards and at shows.

This isn't an issue about taking sides, at this point is a charactor issue about some old school credible veterans of this industry and industry leaders that paved the way for others.

I love Mansion Productions, Garry is also a very cool too. And I love NATS, they also have a great service. NATS has always lived up to their word with me and I enjoy working with them too. They have an incredible program just like the MPA3 is an incredible program.

I enjoy eating at McDonalds or Burger King. Both are good. Though I'm on a diet and both are bad at the moment, bad comparision.

I hope that the dust settles real soon and people don't get caught up in the bullshit.

They can both be good. Epoch and CCBill are both good, it's been done.

Can we call this war officially over now?

All in favor say I.

I know where you are coming from, and fully understand your points. The only thing we keep saying regarding shaving is that if anyone figures out a way to shave while using NATS and actually does it, we will do everything in our power to prevent it from continueing. That means revoking their license and sueing them.

There are WAAAY more reasons to go with NATS than this one though. We have many features that help our clients make more money easily. And we are adding more and more features every day.

what a fucked up post
fuck mpa3 and its company.

D.

I like you. I like your dog. I like your freaky egyptian thing you have in your house but I think you're dead wrong here. I have dealt with these people as a developer, as a client and as a friend trying to refer his friends to a good company with a good product. on all three counts they failed miserably. I gave up on them months ago. You can only be lied to, delayed and dissed for so long.

What kind of a BS thing is this to say ? At least try to keep this real and dont lie ! :feels-hot

How about we get on the phone tomorrow and I'll remind you who I am. Then you can come on here and apologize for calling me a liar. Better yet, how about right now? You ready for a call?

Christmas hold music for a porn company? its kinda funny.

:1orglaugh

I have nothing against your company or new script and believe nobody would be stupid enough to do that again so am happy enough to trust MPA3 but...

What a huge load of manky bollocks the above statement is. As was proven by those 'caught' we're NOT talking about $100 payouts here - we're talking about revshare too at reasonable payout amounts.

Webmasters haven't created shaving by wanting the highest payouts. Of course they want the highest possible. The fault lies solely at those companies that feel it's OK to steal and cheat to attract more custom. To say otherwise shows a total lack of undertsanding of even basic market economics, a complete lack of logic and very limited intelligence.

:2 cents: :2 cents:

Garry -

Just got off the phone with you. I feel as I always have that you're a reasonable business man. I still feel that oystein is a liability to the company and I still (at this point) would not have any business relationship with you nor recommend a business relationship with you to a client based on my previous expreiance with oystein and your company. I appreciate your rebuttals once you realized who I am and I know that you will address this as you see fit, I simply dont believe it will fix the problem at this point.

always remember the customer service rule. a satisfied customer will tell 3 people about his good experiance. a DISsatisfied customer will tell 10 about his bad experiance. (j.d. power 1993 study of customer satisfaction factors and related experiance based factors)

from an affiliates point of view
NATS stats and interface are MUCH better
i prefer programs that use NATS over any others
:2 cents:

I can't belive this thread is still going.

I also REALLY can't believe how it seems a few of you are assuming we "attack" Mansion just becuase Garry claims we do.

We don't.

We have a fantasitc product and do not need to attack another company to attract new clients.

I only bring up MPA when it is brought up to me. I do not attack them. I only state 100% true things about MPA when I am asked about it. If I am asked about it and I state the facts that is not attacking someone. I don't know why some people can't see the difference. I also ALWAYS say things like "they have said they removed the shave feature in mpa3" or "the database structure in mpa3 is much better than mpa2" etc. Again, I state facts and only after I have been asked about the product.

This is not attacking someone. So please don't take Garry's words as gospel. Just becuase he gets his panties in a wad and comes here complaining does not mean it's true. In contrary they are the ones who have admitted giving "wrong" information about us to potential sales. Quite the opposite as what is claimed here.

He even posted this post in three threads. These are threads which were either about my product and I was asked about his or they were about his product and mine came up. If my product comes up I have to step in and defend it. I can't let others discuss it without my view point.

Cutting around all the bullshit here I think this is also only about one thing. My stating that MPA2 had a shave feature. Juding by this post they seem to have a real problem with me pointing this out. Well, face it guys, it's the truth. And it is a difference between both our companies and our products. And I WILL continue to bring it up as a difference when I am asked about your product or someone drags my product into a discussion of your product.

To those who assume base our marketing on "attacking" MPA becuase Garry came by and said so; Please, learn the facts before you form your assumptions becuase in this case you're dead wrong.

that feature should have NEVER been put into the sofware.... I don't care what the customer asked for.

:thumbsup :thumbsup

why do you think lens is one of the few who pay high prices pps through nats

There is not one thing wrong with a company soliciting another companies customer's... I think it's called business, at least the last time I checked

First, Lensman has no ownership or interest in NATS. He is not paid to say things good about it. He is a client like any other and treated the same. No better, no worse.

I have seen both Lens' business model and his numbers. He is able to pay $35 per signup becuase he has a vast knowledge of the business and he knows how to get the most money per join possible.

His tours convert and his content retains. I've seen his trial retension %s and I'm jealous on a personal level. He does not shave or fuck with the numbers. It is an honest program. We maintain access to the servers for support of the software and we know he is not fucking with things.

He is a stand up guy who is simply good at what he does.

Exactly. This is another thing he came here crying about. I think this issue mostly spawns from him being scared we offer a better product. He can feel free to call our customers. They are all happy and I'm confident they will not move.

He stated that I "called his customers". I haven't, they come to us and of course we try to sell them on our product.

I asked him which customers of his I "called". He never answered.

And even if I did do that I would see no problem with it becuase you're exactly right, it is business.

hahaha, sorry, had to lighten the mood

A really good program just went in the shitter for me after switching to NATS. I hope it is a temp issue or I might be gun shy in the future.

Anyone have alist fo their clients so I can get data of more then one?

Slapass, shoot me an icq, 5596373 with what program it is please.

I only know of one program that moved very recently from MPA to NATS and overall ratios have been better not worse. Could be a few bad days in coincidence.

Shoot me the program name please.

Post a list of every program using mpa so those webmasters that want to can avoid them.. cant shave without traffic.. thanks.

Hey it's business.

I had a mainstream business for over 20 years... You think just because it's my customer that a competitor won't call on them. :1orglaugh or I wouldn't call on there's. I took great delight when I took one of there customers.

what I don't understand is why someone hasn't sued MPA for this? It's a relatively simple thing to do. Especially since they've admitted (publically) to incorporating a shave module into their software. Regardless of whether or not you feel "its impossible to offer 35$ per join" or whatever bullshit excuse you use to justify the fact you're a fucking fraudster or at very least an accessory to fraud.

Hand someone a gun, that someone shoots somebody with that gun, you're just as guilty.

Hand someone a shave module, that someone shaves their affiliates, you're STILL just as guilty.

Doesn't matter how you look at it, attempt to justify it, or attempt to blame others for it. MPA is ultimately responsible for frauding thousands of webmasters and should be held accountable :2 cents:

the only way I can see Mansion redeeming themselves as doing the right thing in addition to removing the shave feature is once and for all outing all the programs that were implementing it. I know that they will come back and say that they don't know who used it or not but I can almost guarantee you 100% that they do know.. A little birdie told me (i'll let you fill in the blank because I won't be responsible for badmouthing anyone's business)

BUT.. Mansion should cut anyone off that used the shave feature willingly and maliciously and report them to the affiliates and the authorities. After all, shaving is fraud and fraud is a crime.

you read his post, if not, it will never happen. After all they ask for it... the shave and he thinks that made it all right. :Graucho

We use the click truth enabled MPA3 software that has no shave feature and we are satisfied with it at this time.

WOW, Gary you need to hire Doctor Dre to make your posts man, I would take what he has said to heart :)

Belive you me, I am listening to what everyone have to say and I let it sink in deep.

I am here because I want to listen and also try to learn from miss takes.

If I didnt care I wouldnt be here :)

one fiddy. See sig :Graucho :winkwink:

I've never heard or seen you guys attack Mansion. And after reading a few posts in this thread and another one, I see where you are just stating the facts about the features. It's the other webmasters out there who start the attacks.


If someone wants to target an enemy, how about those fucking fake Rolex watch spams I get everyday. Or the generic drug spams. This is a major issue and problem for both webmasters and surfers. I'm losing important emails because I have so fuckin' many bullshit spams in my business email folder.


My only point I was making in my post is I like both companies and wish people would settle down and pick their fights wisely. There are much bigger battles to fight then placing blame on a shaving feature.

Final thought. Isn't a program with a shaving feature like a bong sold in a store? You're allowed to sell it and buy it, everyone knows what it's intended for. But the user is the one who gets in trouble if caught using it. So if there are enemies out there, go after the user of the program that shaved you. If you got busted smoking out of a bong in the middle of a convention floor, they would arrest you, not the bong maker.

Have you ever sued anyone? Even if you have a valid complaint and all the proof in the world suing someone is a very expensive proposition.

D$: I admire your attempts at diplomacy but the simple fact still remains. If an unethical feature was built into the system at the request of unethical webmasters then that does not make the company any less culpable just because only unethical companies used the feature...

I think a more accurate analogy would be if a person asks a CPA to help them cheat on their taxes and the CPA agrees then that CPA is still just as guilty of being a cheat as the guy trying to slide on paying taxes.

Ethics are not transient.

So even if a company is successfully hiding their shaving and webmasters are happy with the payouts regardless that simply does not excuse the fact that those webmasters are still getting burned.

And I know this is starting to sound like a broken record but whatever stats program people use there are still ways to cheat.

Examples that comes vividly to mind are issuing false credits and/or cancels. That is a form of shaving that does not show up in logs of uniques, conversions from trials, etc.

If any webmaster is concerned about shaving then I recommend asking for an audit of the program. Then you will really get a dose of reality of who is running a legit operation vs. those that claim to be but are not.

Looks like no ones winning shit on this one. (Go figure)

I think it is pretty simple, do like we do in the mainstream software business. Have a 3rd party independent tester, test and certify the programs are shave free. Im sure if a independent group finds both to be clean and free of these modules there will be no more questions about these shave modules. Also they should make these reports availible to the webmaster community so everyone can see for themselves. Business is business and both have a great product and deserve kudos for all the hard work put into them, but affliates need to know someone else (besides the owner of the software or webmaster program) is looking out for their best interest. Personally if there was a indepdendent auditor picked by all parties involved that certified both systems are shave free that would be enough for me. just my :2 cents:

Here is a pretty simple way:
1: you add webmasters ref codes to the join page (so they can see them with view source), and give them access to third party billers (ccbill, ibill , epoch etc), very easy to do, add them set payout 0% and the program owner still process payments.
2: You show country stats, first page impressions, second page impressions, join page, approvals and declines. Also very simple and easy to do.
3: Realtime stats, no 1 second delay or anything. Also pretty simple, make a MySQL HEAP table and have a seperate stats table for last 5 minutes or whatever, every 5 minutes process stats like usual and truncate the heap table.
4: Keep the webmaster ID in the URL through the entire "surfing process" through the site. The webmaster will always be able to see their ID and if it change.
5: Keep the third party click through tracker that is included now and make a way so the webmasters can compare stats.
Offcourse shaving would still be possible, it is possible with all programs including NATS.
It would'nt take a good programmer more than a few hours to fiure out how to beat a anti shave alogrithm no matter what program you use.
Most used excuse is perhaps "glitch with server clustering"
5 servers in total, 4 acting normal, 1 is not plugged into the database. Wuups there goes 20% of the signups, and offcourse it is always a hardware error

No updates on the "anti shave prize" ?
Guess it isn't that important to have a "no shave script" then :Graucho