Why JasonandAlex.com is leaving NATS. - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

devilspost · 03-29-2005, 12:38 PM

Looks like there is money to be made in porn, just not as a affiliate code monkey.

shuki · 03-29-2005, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

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.

Is this a custom solution?

Yo Adrian · 03-29-2005, 12:39 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.

I seriously doubt Chris / J&A would just impulsively post this information. There is a reason for it, these guys are solid.

baddog · 03-29-2005, 12:40 PM

Well, to be honest I have just recently started promoting programs that use NATS, and I love the system (especially the campaign tracking), but I never understood how it could be "shave proof"

shuki · 03-29-2005, 12:40 PM

Well I am going out to the pool to do some work.

I will be back to check on the threads progress. Some very informative stuff in here.

Shap · 03-29-2005, 12:40 PM

I may be wrong but Nats has been around roughly the same amount of time that MPA2 was when problems starting going public with them. Right? I'm no expert but that makes perfect sense. MPA2 was the ultimate program. Everybody loved it. Then after 6 to 10 months bugs start happening and everybody goes fuckin nuts. Now nats has been around for about that time and I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing more and more Nats problems pop up.

Here are a few of the problems.
#1 if you want to shave you are going to shave. Anybody who thinks otherwise is a complete noob. If a program wants to shave they'll dish out the bucks and make damn sure they are shaving. You can blame MPA2 all you want for including that feature. Yes I agree it was wrong to make it SO easy to shave. But think about this, if they included it is because there was a DEMAND for it. They made a bad business decision to include it however webmasters are making an even worse business decision by DEMANDING and USING shave functions.

#2 The more features an affiliate software program has the more problems you are looking at. I'm a stats freak. In an ideal world I'd be able to get every stat I could possibly imagine. Unfortunately that doesn't work well in our industry. Sure it's nice to know all your stats and log and track every single thing. However that puts a huge load on your server and greatly increases your chances for disaster. The majority of issues that have come up with other affiliate software programs have been server issues, database issues, mysql issues, corrupt data issues. All the issues seemed to have one thing in common the program was trying to do too much. That is why we decided to use a program that basically tracks only what i need. Hits and Sales and I keep my password management 100% seperate from our affiliate program.

#3 If a program like Nats and Mpa2 is popular and sells well then the company gets bogged down on orders and can't dedicate enough time to you and your problems. I spoke with Oystein about this. They didn't expect the growth they had and as a result they quickly wound up understaffed. That is a tough position to be in. That is why it isn't always best to go with the most popular affiliate software. It's important to go with a company that:
- provides a solid software that will do the job.
- has the man power to do custom work for you and take care of your custom needs in a timely manner.
- has the man power to take care of all your problems in a timely manner.

You have to remember these programs are built to be sold to the masses. Personally I always have custom requests for my programs. Any company that can't respond to that won't get my business.

SmokeyTheBear · 03-29-2005, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex From San Diego

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.

I dont think anyone is insinuating NATS is doing anything intentionally or that they would help anyone do anything like this.

The problem is if your affiliates arent getting paid , they will move on to more lucrative sponsors.

Unless a sponsor is on the ball they arent going to notice , because glitches like this mean the sponsor gets MORE money and the affiliates LESS, so everything appears better until your affiliate base starts leaving for better ratio's.

If the problem isn't addressed what else can you do really but switch software.

flashfreak · 03-29-2005, 12:41 PM

interresting..

Major (Tom) · 03-29-2005, 12:43 PM

I had a similar problem too, but it was with wts bank. Actually nats wasnt reporting that they were cancelled or bounced checks so I paid out on about 270 checks. This seems like something as simple as a post back error. Shaving? no.. Its just a miscomunication of the back ends. That can actually be retro imported pretty easially. im almost certain of that. In all honesty, this is something that you should have caught sooner and mentioned it to nathan. I caught my postback problem within a few days and it was fixed in a few minutes.
Duke

SmokeyTheBear · 03-29-2005, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shap

I may be wrong but Nats has been around roughly the same amount of time that MPA2 was when problems starting going public with them. Right? I'm no expert but that makes perfect sense. MPA2 was the ultimate program. Everybody loved it. Then after 6 to 10 months bugs start happening and everybody goes fuckin nuts. Now nats has been around for about that time and I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing more and more Nats problems pop up.

Here are a few of the problems.
#1 if you want to shave you are going to shave. Anybody who thinks otherwise is a complete noob. If a program wants to shave they'll dish out the bucks and make damn sure they are shaving. You can blame MPA2 all you want for including that feature. Yes I agree it was wrong to make it SO easy to shave. But think about this, if they included it is because there was a DEMAND for it. They made a bad business decision to include it however webmasters are making an even worse business decision by DEMANDING and USING shave functions.

#2 The more features an affiliate software program has the more problems you are looking at. I'm a stats freak. In an ideal world I'd be able to get every stat I could possibly imagine. Unfortunately that doesn't work well in our industry. Sure it's nice to know all your stats and log and track every single thing. However that puts a huge load on your server and greatly increases your chances for disaster. The majority of issues that have come up with other affiliate software programs have been server issues, database issues, mysql issues, corrupt data issues. All the issues seemed to have one thing in common the program was trying to do too much. That is why we decided to use a program that basically tracks only what i need. Hits and Sales and I keep my password management 100% seperate from our affiliate program.

#3 If a program like Nats and Mpa2 is popular and sells well then the company gets bogged down on orders and can't dedicate enough time to you and your problems. I spoke with Oystein about this. They didn't expect the growth they had and as a result they quickly wound up understaffed. That is a tough position to be in. That is why it isn't always best to go with the most popular affiliate software. It's important to go with a company that:
- provides a solid software that will do the job.
- has the man power to do custom work for you and take care of your custom needs in a timely manner.
- has the man power to take care of all your problems in a timely manner.

You have to remember these programs are built to be sold to the masses. Personally I always have custom requests for my programs. Any company that can't respond to that won't get my business.

I hate to quote such a long speil , but i couldnt pick any one part to comment on , it was all good

great post

shuki · 03-29-2005, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

I dont think anyone is insinuating NATS is doing anything intentionally or that they would help anyone do anything like this.

The problem is if your affiliates arent getting paid , they will move on to more lucrative sponsors.

Unless a sponsor is on the ball they arent going to notice , because glitches like this mean the sponsor gets MORE money and the affiliates LESS, so everything appears better until your affiliate base starts leaving for better ratio's.

If the problem isn't addressed what else can you do really but switch software.

Very good point

iBanker · 03-29-2005, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker

I had a similar problem too, but it was with wts bank. Actually nats wasnt reporting that they were cancelled or bounced checks so I paid out on about 270 checks. This seems like something as simple as a post back error. Shaving? no.. Its just a miscomunication of the back ends. That can actually be retro imported pretty easially. im almost certain of that. In all honesty, this is something that you should have caught sooner and mentioned it to nathan. I caught my postback problem within a few days and it was fixed in a few minutes.
Duke

It was mentioned MONTHS ago and still wasn't fixed. Did someone from NATS have you say that?

Kimmykim · 03-29-2005, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBanker

It is perfect. Prove me wrong. You can't.

Chris, I can do many things, and nothing is ever perfect.

Jon2 · 03-29-2005, 12:46 PM

I need my sig space in this thread...

I need 2 cents

Jon

Trax · 03-29-2005, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

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.

yes... i kwno
to me it seems as if programs can choose how to display the numbers...
I would prefer them being forced to show first page hits and 2nd page.
They can display the conversion rates how they want to (even based on 2nd page hits).
I just wanna see first page raw and unique for myself...
thats what I meant

Triple 6 · 03-29-2005, 12:48 PM

drama drama drama

Alex From San Diego · 03-29-2005, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker

I had a similar problem too, but it was with wts bank. Actually nats wasnt reporting that they were cancelled or bounced checks so I paid out on about 270 checks. This seems like something as simple as a post back error. Shaving? no.. Its just a miscomunication of the back ends. That can actually be retro imported pretty easially. im almost certain of that. In all honesty, this is something that you should have caught sooner and mentioned it to nathan. I caught my postback problem within a few days and it was fixed in a few minutes.
Duke

What makes you think we didn't point it out? We would be ignorant to have not pointed it out.

Theo · 03-29-2005, 12:53 PM

Not having to do with nats, but just ask yourself how many program owners besides Alex and Jason would spend the time to manually credit these sales. I can tell you very few.

wdsguy · 03-29-2005, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

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.

It was a pure Rsync problem. Wasn't done on purpose.

xlogger · 03-29-2005, 12:55 PM

100 errors..

03-29-2005, 12:17 PM	#51
Strife Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 4,534	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. __________________ Buy & Sell Ads on The Most Sexy Advertising Network on the Planet

03-29-2005, 12:21 PM	#56
shuki Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Boston Posts: 3,070	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. __________________ Looking to buy established paysites contact me [email protected]

03-29-2005, 12:24 PM	#66
kmanrox aka K-Man Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: The Gutter Posts: 29,292	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. __________________ Crypto HODLr Crypto mining Angel investor

03-29-2005, 12:31 PM	#73
SKULL Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: The Moon Posts: 1,953	This aways sucks... for us the the sponsored ones __________________ www.traffic-trades.com

03-29-2005, 12:33 PM	#76
Michael O More Cowbell Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Nakhom Nowhere Posts: 10,607	Any program can shave if they want to just like smokey said there are tons of ways to do it. __________________ Truth Teller

03-29-2005, 12:17 PM	#52
Nader Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Los Angeles, Ca Posts: 5,086	Where all your data dumps added properly?

03-29-2005, 12:20 PM	#54
Drake Hello world! Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 12,508	Hope both parties can resolve this

03-29-2005, 12:21 PM	#58
bigdog Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 6,964	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.

03-29-2005, 12:21 PM	#59
axelcat Adult Locals Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: West Coast Posts: 25,450	Lots of people here getting sig spots

03-29-2005, 12:27 PM	#67
Trax [----------------------] Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 14,486	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

03-29-2005, 12:30 PM	#70
whatif_3 Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 459	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

03-29-2005, 12:33 PM	#75
Kimmykim bitchslapping zebras!!!!! Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: In a shack by the beach Posts: 16,015	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.

03-29-2005, 12:34 PM	#77
Alex From San Diego Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Location: San Diego Posts: 1,642	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. __________________ We are what we repeatedly do.-Aristotle

03-29-2005, 12:35 PM	#78
shuki Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Boston Posts: 3,070	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? __________________ Looking to buy established paysites contact me [email protected]

03-29-2005, 12:36 PM	#80
SmokeyTheBear ►SouthOfHeaven Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer Posts: 28,609	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. __________________ hatisblack at yahoo.com

03-29-2005, 12:38 PM	#81
devilspost Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Tampa yomebe -at- hotmail Posts: 3,980	Looks like there is money to be made in porn, just not as a affiliate code monkey. __________________ Brothels and Escorts Worldwide.

03-29-2005, 12:40 PM	#84
baddog So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: the beach, SoCal Posts: 107,089	Well, to be honest I have just recently started promoting programs that use NATS, and I love the system (especially the campaign tracking), but I never understood how it could be "shave proof"

03-29-2005, 12:40 PM	#86
Shap Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 8,313	I may be wrong but Nats has been around roughly the same amount of time that MPA2 was when problems starting going public with them. Right? I'm no expert but that makes perfect sense. MPA2 was the ultimate program. Everybody loved it. Then after 6 to 10 months bugs start happening and everybody goes fuckin nuts. Now nats has been around for about that time and I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing more and more Nats problems pop up. Here are a few of the problems. #1 if you want to shave you are going to shave. Anybody who thinks otherwise is a complete noob. If a program wants to shave they'll dish out the bucks and make damn sure they are shaving. You can blame MPA2 all you want for including that feature. Yes I agree it was wrong to make it SO easy to shave. But think about this, if they included it is because there was a DEMAND for it. They made a bad business decision to include it however webmasters are making an even worse business decision by DEMANDING and USING shave functions. #2 The more features an affiliate software program has the more problems you are looking at. I'm a stats freak. In an ideal world I'd be able to get every stat I could possibly imagine. Unfortunately that doesn't work well in our industry. Sure it's nice to know all your stats and log and track every single thing. However that puts a huge load on your server and greatly increases your chances for disaster. The majority of issues that have come up with other affiliate software programs have been server issues, database issues, mysql issues, corrupt data issues. All the issues seemed to have one thing in common the program was trying to do too much. That is why we decided to use a program that basically tracks only what i need. Hits and Sales and I keep my password management 100% seperate from our affiliate program. #3 If a program like Nats and Mpa2 is popular and sells well then the company gets bogged down on orders and can't dedicate enough time to you and your problems. I spoke with Oystein about this. They didn't expect the growth they had and as a result they quickly wound up understaffed. That is a tough position to be in. That is why it isn't always best to go with the most popular affiliate software. It's important to go with a company that: - provides a solid software that will do the job. - has the man power to do custom work for you and take care of your custom needs in a timely manner. - has the man power to take care of all your problems in a timely manner. You have to remember these programs are built to be sold to the masses. Personally I always have custom requests for my programs. Any company that can't respond to that won't get my business.

03-29-2005, 12:41 PM	#88
flashfreak Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: cloud number 9 Posts: 4,396	interresting.. __________________ SEO Mogul \| ICQ: 163671223

03-29-2005, 12:43 PM	#89
Major (Tom) Boomer Woffen Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Null Posts: 30,590	I had a similar problem too, but it was with wts bank. Actually nats wasnt reporting that they were cancelled or bounced checks so I paid out on about 270 checks. This seems like something as simple as a post back error. Shaving? no.. Its just a miscomunication of the back ends. That can actually be retro imported pretty easially. im almost certain of that. In all honesty, this is something that you should have caught sooner and mentioned it to nathan. I caught my postback problem within a few days and it was fixed in a few minutes. Duke __________________ My mother said, to get things done You'd better not mess with Major Tom

03-29-2005, 12:46 PM	#94
Jon2 So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,875	I need my sig space in this thread... I need 2 cents Jon

03-29-2005, 12:48 PM	#96
Triple 6 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: isN'T everything Posts: 5,394	drama drama drama __________________ SIG TOO SMALL! Maximum 1200x600 button and no more than 30 text lines of ALL SIZES and COLORS. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 6240x4800 instead of a 1024x800.

03-29-2005, 12:53 PM	#98
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	Not having to do with nats, but just ask yourself how many program owners besides Alex and Jason would spend the time to manually credit these sales. I can tell you very few.

03-29-2005, 12:55 PM	#100
xlogger Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: NY Posts: 9,507	100 errors.. __________________ ---------- XLOGGER [REFLECTED] [OH]