GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum
Page 2 of 9 < 1 2 3456789 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Why JasonandAlex.com is leaving NATS. (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=449707)

Doctor Dre 03-29-2005 12:12 PM
Now that's what I call some DRAMA ... outch

fuzebox 03-29-2005 12:12 PM
Are the majority of those untracked rebills from signups that were generated before you initially switched to NATS?

Yo Adrian 03-29-2005 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBanker
No, I wanted to talk to you about Arizona, thats all. :)
Right on..

Makingcoin 03-29-2005 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzebox
Are the majority of those untracked rebills from signups that were generated before you initially switched to NATS?
Good question.

shuki 03-29-2005 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddiePulp
hmm very shady I must say. I Know of alot of programs that left MPA because of how dodgy MPA2 was ... but now NATS... hmm who can you trust... I'm very interested to hear NATS response to this.
I don't think this comes down to a trust issue for Nats at all. They have built a good reputation. What it looks like ( I am no expert) is that they are having a problem integrating all the different biller solutions effectivley.

I am looking at all 3 big solutions and will be watching closely

Michael O 03-29-2005 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBanker
I will say it one more time here and now. This was not out to harm anyone, but when another man (John Albright, owner of NATS to my knowledge) calls our Company or any of its employees liars, I am forced to defend all. I speak the truth. We run a solid business built on firm ground, and I will have words (or initiate immediate legal action) with anyone the makes such defamatory claims saying otherwise.

If anyone thinks NATS is UNSHAVEABLE then you need to see this. Here is a screencap of what NATS reports I should pay my affiliates for all rebills (recurring charges) for ELECTRACASH (one of our check processors)

5 total rebills.

http://www.jasonandalex.com/images/nats/nats01.jpg

Here is what ELECTRACASH says I should pay.

275 total rebills.

http://www.jasonandalex.com/images/nats/nats02.jpg

270 missing rebills because of NATS. FACT.

Do you know how long it takes to even find that problem, and THEN cut separate checks for the affiliates to make sure you do the right thing and they get paid for their hard work? This is one of the many problems we had with NATS and one of the many reasons we moved far away from it.

Now, you can expect John or one of his tech guys to jump on this board and give you all a line (or explanation depending on how you decide to view it) about how this is some security loophole, and it has to do with it being ELECTRACASH's fault, and so on. It always seemed to be someone else's fault when it came to the blame being pointed at NATS (and I have further proof of this as well). The only reason we went with Nats was because of the NO SHAVE feature.

This is just the beginning?
Some people always see the glass as half empty look at the bright side it counted 2% of the signups correctly.

JSA Matt 03-29-2005 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear
the problem is affliates aren't getting their cut.
Exactly. :thumbsup

iBanker 03-29-2005 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzebox
Are the majority of those untracked rebills from signups that were generated before you initially switched to NATS?
Nope...same date range from the launch....I invite ElectraCash to come on here and confirm this. We opened the Electracash account the same time we launched NATS.

EvilFubAr 03-29-2005 12:16 PM
Well, if you cant come up with your own stats program this is what you get.

It amazes me to see affiliates using a sponsor program that cant manage their own system internally with their own software.

Id stick with a program that is trusted and already knows how to pay their webmasters... having problems paying your webmasters whatever the excuse (NATS) may be is pathetic.

shuki 03-29-2005 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBanker
Nope...same date range from the launch....I invite ElectraCash to come on here and confirm this. We opened the Electracash account the same time we launched NATS.
50 sig spot &

Well that is good to know. One variable taken out of the picture

Strife 03-29-2005 12:17 PM
Wow..now I'm starting to wonder if that's the same reason why rebills have been shitty with some of my sponsors using NATS. :( :helpme

Nader 03-29-2005 12:17 PM
Where all your data dumps added properly?

undermyspell 03-29-2005 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keyser Soze
Some people always see the glass as half empty look at the bright side it counted 2% of the signups correctly.
I knew I was missing the silver lining

Drake 03-29-2005 12:20 PM
Hope both parties can resolve this :(

ssp 03-29-2005 12:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keyser Soze
Some people always see the glass as half empty look at the bright side it counted 2% of the signups correctly.
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

shuki 03-29-2005 12:21 PM
So does either team have an idea of what is causing the problem?

Correct me if I am wrong but it doesn't sound like J&A are saying that Nats is doing this intentionally. It looks like they wanted this corrected and have been having a hard time getting what they want done.

Time will tell.

iBanker 03-29-2005 12:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NichePay_Nader
Where all your data dumps added properly?
This major problem was presented to them. Never fixed, although they claimed full intergration with EC.

bigdog 03-29-2005 12:21 PM
Nats was the best on market at a certain time. but executivestats looks pretty good considering you can get the full source and add what you want when needed.

axelcat 03-29-2005 12:21 PM
Lots of people here getting sig spots

shuki 03-29-2005 12:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBanker
This major problem was presented to them. Never fixed, although they claimed full intergration with EC.
This is what I thought.....did they ignore the request or just have problems getting it done?

Yo Adrian 03-29-2005 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keyser Soze
Some people always see the glass as half empty look at the bright side it counted 2% of the signups correctly.
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Dude that's just wrong

AaronM 03-29-2005 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilFubAr
Id stick with a program that is trusted and already knows how to pay their webmasters... having problems paying your webmasters whatever the excuse (NATS) may be is pathetic.

Pathetic is whee somebody interjects their 2 cents without paying attention to all the facts which have been posted.

SmokeyTheBear 03-29-2005 12:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shuki
So does either team have an idea of what is causing the problem?

Correct me if I am wrong but it doesn't sound like J&A are saying that Nats is doing this intentionally. It looks like they wanted this corrected and have been having a hard time getting what they want done.

Time will tell.

Your not wrong.

But you cant let affiliates use software you know is stealing their money. Not only is it unethical but as he already pointed out , it creates TWICE the work having to hand verify each affiliates rebills.

undermyspell 03-29-2005 12:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilFubAr
Well, if you cant come up with your own stats program this is what you get.

It amazes me to see affiliates using a sponsor program that cant manage their own system internally with their own software.
why spend thousands of dollars creating your own program when there is supposed to be a superior product on the market already? That's like building your own car from the ground up when you can go buy a Lamborghini.

iBanker 03-29-2005 12:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shuki
This is what I thought.....did they ignore the request or just have problems getting it done?
Legally speaking, I can only speak fact, and that I cannot answer without talking to our attorney.

kmanrox 03-29-2005 12:24 PM
If you think that any program is shaveproof, you have absolutely no grasp of how programming works. NATS doesn't even have to have control over it, you can implement a shaving feature on your server before nats even gets involved I'm told.

Trax 03-29-2005 12:27 PM
John is a nice guy and so far I've only heard good things about NATS
The only feature I would add for sure is a FORCE to show first page uniques and raws with all programs, including realitycash.
Just being shown 2nd page uniques doesn't give it for me. That's the only critic i can give to the nats crew... and this is a positive meant one :D

shuki 03-29-2005 12:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear
Your not wrong.

But you cant let affiliates use software you know is stealing their money. Not only is it unethical but as he already pointed out , it creates TWICE the work having to hand verify each affiliates rebills.
I agree.

I am looking for a solution for the exact point you make...to automate and take away hand work.

It looks like they were finally made aware of the problem and looked for it to be fixed. That is what I don't understand. Why won't nats fix the problem if it hurts affils?

SmokeyTheBear 03-29-2005 12:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hedonistic
If you think that any program is shaveproof, you have absolutely no grasp of how programming works. NATS doesn't even have to have control over it, you can implement a shaving feature on your server before nats even gets involved I'm told.

yes this is true. Without being on the sponsors servers theres no way to tell.

RealityCash for example was "missing" data on one of its servers for FHG's , as a result when surfers clicked the fhg's they were sent to adult.com's 10dollarcash program and the hits werent tracked at all with NATS. Zero ZIp NADA . you never made a cent nor a click. Isolated small example , but this could be done on purpose in a rotational method so as not to be caught, and nobody would ever know.

whatif_3 03-29-2005 12:30 PM
amazing that this all could have been avoided if NATS had used a little tact in the previous JSA thread and avoided trying to save face by suggesting that NATS kicked JSA out...you put your big balls on the table, your going to risk them gettting cut off

SmokeyTheBear 03-29-2005 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trax
John is a nice guy and so far I've only heard good things about NATS
The only feature I would add for sure is a FORCE to show first page uniques and raws with all programs, including realitycash.
Just being shown 2nd page uniques doesn't give it for me. That's the only critic i can give to the nats crew... and this is a positive meant one :D
im pretty sure OCCASH is using NATS and showing RAW first page hits. Or at least UNIQUE first page hits.

Infact when realitycash first started they were showing First page hits , then they changed it.

shuki 03-29-2005 12:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trax
John is a nice guy and so far I've only heard good things about NATS
The only feature I would add for sure is a FORCE to show first page uniques and raws with all programs, including realitycash.
Just being shown 2nd page uniques doesn't give it for me. That's the only critic i can give to the nats crew... and this is a positive meant one :D
Are you able to custom add features like this as a Nats client? Will they code this at your expense? Sounds like a small faeture that would help and I want to make my future affils happy.

SKULL 03-29-2005 12:31 PM
This aways sucks... for us the the sponsored ones :Oh crap

shuki 03-29-2005 12:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBanker
Legally speaking, I can only speak fact, and that I cannot answer without talking to our attorney.
I understand

Kimmykim 03-29-2005 12:33 PM
As always, there are many sides to every story.

It's nice to see Chris laying out his side here, and I certainly hope he has given considerable thought to his posts before posting, and is absolutely positive that his information is correct.

Michael O 03-29-2005 12:33 PM
Any program can shave if they want to just like smokey said there are tons of ways to do it.

Alex From San Diego 03-29-2005 12:34 PM
We are not accusing NATS of intentionally shaving so lets get that clear.
We are simply stating back to original statement that tracking issues were an issue for us among a few other things. There was not a fix for this so we had to switch to another check processor. I have nothing bad either to say about the other check processor, we just wanted to use EC as our primary for check processing.

If a company says they support a specific biller then they should honor that and not just have it up on their site and when you are live find out they really don't. It sucks to have to make a business decision based on software restrictions.

shuki 03-29-2005 12:35 PM
Again from my point of view it sounds like neither firm was or is interested in hurting affiliates. What it looks like is that there is a glitch in the software that needs to be worked out. The question is why is it happening?

iBanker 03-29-2005 12:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
As always, there are many sides to every story.

It's nice to see Chris laying out his side here, and I certainly hope he has given considerable thought to his posts before posting, and is absolutely positive that his information is correct.
It is perfect. Prove me wrong. You can't.

SmokeyTheBear 03-29-2005 12:36 PM
SPACASH has a quite nice setup for stats, very detailed..

Broken down country by country , by raw first page , second page , join page etc evrything you need.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:04 AM.
Page 2 of 9 < 1 2 3456789 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123