Should payout thresholds change with the economy being so down? Why does NATS discourage payouts?

[AmeliaG]

Should payout thresholds change with the economy being so down?

I understand that cutting checks or sending electronic payments takes work and organization, so it has always made sense to me that some folks would institute minimum payouts. I appreciate programs like PimpRoll who just pay you whenever you've got money at the end of the pay period, no matter how little. And it is always easy to add a CCBill program, when you have enough traffic sites, because, even if you only send one join, you know you will get paid for it, once that one join is conglomerated with all your other promoted programs.

Only a lot of programs have been migrating to NATS and being standalone. Some of these are programs I would never have signed up to promote as freestanding programs, programs I would only ever have promoted as CCBill or Epoch. Either because the owners are unknown quantities or because I don't expect them to be major sponsors for my niche traffic.

I am told that, with NATS, the only way to get a payout, before reaching threshold, is to completely close the account. On the one hand, if I have legacy links up, I don't really want to disable them, but, if I haven't gotten a site to convert in over a year, am I really supposed to just leave my $$ sitting in an account which may never make break? Am I supposed to promote extra hard on stuff which has stopped selling, in the hopes of getting what I am already owed? If a site is one I only ever expected to make a few sales on, should a program get to keep my money, just because they decided to rent NATS?

I understand not wanting to have to cut a zillion teeny checks every week. I actually most prefer Kink's monthly payouts, where the amount gets to a reasonable level and I can always tell if I got paid. But I don't really think it is reasonable for someone else to hold my money for years at a time.

When economic conditions were such that one could regularly expect to hit $100 or $250 or whatever the break was in a timely fashion, that was fine. But, if it now takes two years for a program to hit that dollar amount, then the break threshold should, in my opinion, be lower in a down economy. Especially with so many programs closing and keeping whatever affiliate payouts are in their piggy bank.

[Agent 488]

can't they just send you money? what does that have to do wit nats?

who told you that? sounds like bs.

[Brujah]

They should at least reconcile their accounts I would think, and pay out by end of their financial year.

[Brujah]

can't they just send you money? what does that have to do wit nats?

"I am told that, with NATS, the only way to get a payout, before reaching threshold, is to completely close the account."

[Agent 488]

They should at least reconcile their accounts I would think, and pay out by end of their financial year.

i have had a few nats programs do that.

[AmeliaG]

can't they just send you money? what does that have to do wit nats?

who told you that? sounds like bs.

What Brujah said.

I don't use NATS myself on the program side, so perhaps it is BS. But I've been told that the only way for a NATS sponsor to pay out an account which is below break, even if it has been at $99.99 for three years, is to either close the account or to change every single affiliate in their system to a lower payout threshold.

If there is a workaround programs should be using, the hopefully someone from NATS will post it here and tell their customers to do this in such a way where, as an affiliate, I don't cringe at the mere mention of NATS at this point.

[Agent 488]

why wouldn't the sponsor just lower the payout on your account then pay you? i don't know the nats backend but i think someone is pulling your leg.

[alias]

Lowered minimum payouts, I have never heard of such a thing. Sounds cool, good luck.

Everyone hates seeing $ but never actually SEEING $.

[Sly]

With NATS v.4 you can set your minimum payments to whatever you want basically. For example, I know one with a minimum of $10.

[IllTestYourGirls]

I would assume anything under a $50 payout wouldnt be too profitable for a sponsor.

[alias]

I would assume anything under a $50 payout wouldnt be too profitable for a sponsor.

Yeah, seems like a waste of time. Would be nice, but.. .

[fuzebox]

i think someone is pulling your leg.

[Agent 488]

with flashcash min is 20 and can request it anytime.

[Overload]

"I am told that, with NATS, the only way to get a payout, before reaching threshold, is to completely close the account."

thats absolutely rubbish i have gone thru hard times due to my health issues and needed some green asap (for med co-pays) and cud name at least THREE sponsors using NATS who made premature payments that didnt break the minimum ... only ONE told me that its impossible or only available if the account was deleted ... so, the GOOD guys and girls DO it - the others are ?=6)(/&%$§"!!!

[alias]

with flashcash min is 20 and can request it anytime.

Back in the day you could promote FC in the morning, get paid in the afternoon. Good times.

[The Ghost]

NATS has nothing to do with it. You can pay an affiliate any amount, at anytime. Doesn't matter if it is below the minimum. And do so without closing an account.

The only ones that wouldn't do that when requested are companies that strictly adhere to their TOS for payments thresholds.

[Screwed Up]

Well said.

I think about 70% of all NATS program owners that I contacted paid me out before hitting minimum payout treshold. Only occash told me that they had to close my account to do so.

It sucks, but I do understand the hassle that comes with manual payouts.

Nats should have a possibility to change the minimum payout per affiliate, so that programs don't have to mess with manual payouts.

If a program doesn't have weekly payouts and a low minimum, I don't bother signing up anymore.
I have over $2000 spread out over different programs just sitting there.

[Mr. Cool Ice]

With all the non-pay companies out there I've backed away from many of those who write their own checks. If I don't personally know you, I will no longer promote you if you write your own checks.

[Sly]

With all the non-pay companies out there I've backed away from many of those who write their own checks. If I don't personally know you, I will no longer promote you if you write your own checks.

Do you only promote CCBill then? Otherwise if you still use companies that use checkwriting services, they could just as easily screw you.

[AmeliaG]

With NATS v.4 you can set your minimum payments to whatever you want basically. For example, I know one with a minimum of $10.

Interesting. I could see a $10 minimum being kind of a pain for a sponsor, unless they set the pay periods longer than some do. As an affiliate, I think I'd like a sponsor with a $10 minimum and monthly payouts. I think, even if some of the checks are teensy, writing 12 checks a year to keep links up shouldn't be too much to ask.

I feel this is particularly a factor when there are sponsors which used to convert 1:100 to 1:2,000 and now they are 0:4,000 to 0:70,000 because they have static sites which never update. I know, the tubes, etc., but my audience does buy, only they are a committed loyal audience and they aren't going to buy the same thing twice, when they have already seen it.

[IllTestYourGirls]

I have over $2000 spread out over different programs just sitting there.

I know that feeling. Sometimes I think I am spread to thin. But then again if one sponsor goes under Im not out big.

[Officer]

NATS has nothing to do with it. You can pay an affiliate any amount, at anytime. Doesn't matter if it is below the minimum. And do so without closing an account.

The only ones that wouldn't do that when requested are companies that strictly adhere to their TOS for payments thresholds.

Thought maybe I should chime in here...

NATS has everything to do with it if you use NATS as your accounting software to track affiliate payments. Sure, a program could send checks out early to anyone that requests it, however there is no way to track it in nats (at least in v3 and I do not see anything about it in v4 either) since there is no way to set an individual affiliate to a lower payout minimum than the lowest one set in the nats defaults. There is also no way to set an individual affiliate as "paid" on an individual basis using the standard nats admin. Its all done in batches.

I have a ticket in with TMM to investigate this further. I trust that they will come up with a solution.

[DirtyDanza]

setting a higher min payout is what programs do for small time affilites like yourself... if you can't send the sales to reach the 100 bucks then after time you stop promoting and they made a free 80 bucks or whatever your account was at..... it's very simple and all business do it weather adult or mainstream.... nothing wrong with it at all.... it forces people to promote to reach payout....

[Officer]

good news!
I just got a reply from TMM on the subject and it can be done, they sent me the instructions for future occasions where we might have to do this.

[AmeliaG]

setting a higher min payout is what programs do for small time affilites like yourself... if you can't send the sales to reach the 100 bucks then after time you stop promoting and they made a free 80 bucks or whatever your account was at..... it's very simple and all business do it weather adult or mainstream.... nothing wrong with it at all.... it forces people to promote to reach payout....

I find it really tiresome when people start throwing around the whole you-must-be-small-time if you want to get paid what you are owed. No offense and I might have you confused with someone else, but, as I recall, you used to run a program where you kept changing the setup to jack affiliates on all existing links and you eventually went out of business because people got tired of putting new links up for you. I apologize if I have you confused with someone else.

My points were:

(1) A lot of standalone programs depend upon NATS to be able to do their accounting. Maybe you think that makes them small time, but enough programs use NATS that I think NATS should make it more feasible for those sponsors to make payouts in a way where they can keep track of them.

(2) The payout thresholds were set at a time when sales were more robust and it was reasonable to expect that affiliates would reach those payout levels in a timely fashion. Now that those amounts are less realistic for affiliates to reach in a timely fashion, perhaps the break levels should change to keep up with the times.

[GrouchyAdmin]

This thread is a good example of why content should be seen and not heard.

[garce]

I would assume anything under a $50 payout wouldnt be too profitable for a sponsor.

Sure, but having dozens or hundreds of affiliates who never reach the $100-$200 threshold can be quite profitable - particularly to a smaller program.

[TMM_John]

I don't think you quite understand how NATS works.

You can set your minimum payouts to be $0 if you want. You can set them to be $100,000 if you want. It is up to the program owner/operator and it is settable on a per affiliate level if you'd like to.

If you need to request a payout from a program they can set your minimum to $0 and choose to store your payments. They'll then go right into the next dump.

You make a lot assumptions and accusations based off those assumptions. I'd become more educated before you run around placing blame where it doesn't belong.

[Qbert]

I don't think you quite understand how NATS works.

You can set your minimum payouts to be $0 if you want. You can set them to be $100,000 if you want. It is up to the program owner/operator and it is settable on a per affiliate level if you'd like to.

If you need to request a payout from a program they can set your minimum to $0 and choose to store your payments. They'll then go right into the next dump...

That being the case, then I will have to assume the problem lies with program owners/managers not understanding how to utilize the software.

Just a personal observation, but that seems to be a recurring theme with many NATS based programs with both version 3 and 4. A very powerful too, but damn few seem to be proficient enough to be it's master rather than vice versa.

[DirtyDanza]

I find it really tiresome when people start throwing around the whole you-must-be-small-time if you want to get paid what you are owed. No offense and I might have you confused with someone else, but, as I recall, you used to run a program where you kept changing the setup to jack affiliates on all existing links and you eventually went out of business because people got tired of putting new links up for you. I apologize if I have you confused with someone else.

My points were:

(1) A lot of standalone programs depend upon NATS to be able to do their accounting. Maybe you think that makes them small time, but enough programs use NATS that I think NATS should make it more feasible for those sponsors to make payouts in a way where they can keep track of them.

(2) The payout thresholds were set at a time when sales were more robust and it was reasonable to expect that affiliates would reach those payout levels in a timely fashion. Now that those amounts are less realistic for affiliates to reach in a timely fashion, perhaps the break levels should change to keep up with the times.

NATS is very good program .. it has nothing to do with nats... like john said you can set your min payout to 1 cent if you want to.... nats is very trusted and very good backend ...

that being said... your saying that payout min are to high right and that they should be lower so that say if it's 10 bucks then you'd get paid on your 1 sale every payperiod right?

look at google adsense ... if im not mistaken the min payout you can get is 100 bucks right? if anyone keeps up with the times it's google right?

like I said it's program owner discretion as to the min payout they will pay... 100 bucks is common cause i'd say 60% of affiliates won't reach the min payout.. then the program owner does not pay... he profits all the way around... very common in adult.. mainstream, anything really... you can't just cry cause you can;t collect your earnings until you reach min payout.. I know it sucks.. we have all been there .... but it's in place to keep the profit up for the business...

[Tickler]

I was looking at a new program using NATs last week that had a $250 min. on $10 sales.

Interesting, but with the way programs keep disappearing, I'll take a PASS.

[garce]

I don't think you quite understand how NATS works.

You can set your minimum payouts to be $0 if you want. You can set them to be $100,000 if you want. It is up to the program owner/operator and it is settable on a per affiliate level if you'd like to.

If you need to request a payout from a program they can set your minimum to $0 and choose to store your payments. They'll then go right into the next dump.

You make a lot assumptions and accusations based off those assumptions. I'd become more educated before you run around placing blame where it doesn't belong.

I have absolutely no problem signing up for a NATS program. My problem lies with CCBill programs that migrate to NATS. I'll sign up for a NATS-based program no problem - I love the range of information and options that I'm offered.

But when I promote a CCBill program that migrates to NATS - Cash Titans comes to mind (can I have my $4K? didn't think so...) - I pretty well drop them like they're fucking hot.

I have no problem with NATS - I can sign up for a NATS program, see that they haven't updated their promo tools in two years, and walk away.

What I DO have a problem with is companies switching to NATS, not telling me, and not giving credit to my CCBill account. It fucking happens.

[AmeliaG]

NATS is very good program .. it has nothing to do with nats... like john said you can set your min payout to 1 cent if you want to.... nats is very trusted and very good backend ...

that being said... your saying that payout min are to high right and that they should be lower so that say if it's 10 bucks then you'd get paid on your 1 sale every payperiod right?

look at google adsense ... if im not mistaken the min payout you can get is 100 bucks right? if anyone keeps up with the times it's google right?

like I said it's program owner discretion as to the min payout they will pay... 100 bucks is common cause i'd say 60% of affiliates won't reach the min payout.. then the program owner does not pay... he profits all the way around... very common in adult.. mainstream, anything really... you can't just cry cause you can;t collect your earnings until you reach min payout.. I know it sucks.. we have all been there .... but it's in place to keep the profit up for the business...

I thought I was clear, but let me try again: I like the Google model because it is current. They pay out monthly, which minimizes their paperwork and accounting and means I'm always going to hit the minimum payout for Google AdSense because it is a realistic threshold for their product. If there are programs where 60% of their affiliates will never ever get paid, then clearly the threshold is not set realistically. The idea is to get everyone paid without having to do an excessive amount of paperwork or accounting, not to jack 60% of affiliates. I find there are many programs where it used to be no big deal to make break, but, in the current economy, it takes much longer to make break, so their thresholds are clearly not realistic for their products in the current times.

[AmeliaG]

This thread is a good example of why content should be seen and not heard.

What are you talking about? I just looked through this thread and unless you count Danza possibly stunt-cocking, which most people wouldn't count, then I'm pretty sure nobody in this thread is content.

[Agent 488]

I thought I was clear, but let me try again: I like the Google model because it is current. They pay out monthly, which minimizes their paperwork and accounting and means I'm always going to hit the minimum payout for Google AdSense because it is a realistic threshold for their product. If there are programs where 60% of their affiliates will never ever get paid, then clearly the threshold is not set realistically. The idea is to get everyone paid without having to do an excessive amount of paperwork or accounting, not to jack 60% of affiliates. I find there are many programs where it used to be no big deal to make break, but, in the current economy, it takes much longer to make break, so their thresholds are clearly not realistic for their products in the current times.

google is a bad example. they must have a giant number of affiliates that have never hit the minimum. i would guess a large percentage of their affiliates will never hit min payout.

[Nasty]

Ill give just about any program with a 50.00 min payout a try, Ill slap some content on my network and see what happens, at 100.00 min I will look closely at the content and the tours before I promote you, if your min is 200.00 you get a big from me

I have 5-6 programs that I am a few dollars below min and have been for years, aka fucking crooks imho

[AmeliaG]

google is a bad example. they must have a giant number of affiliates that have never hit the minimum. i would guess a large percentage of their affiliates will never hit min payout.

It was not my example; it was Danza's. If his theoretical majority of affiliates never ever make break with Google either, then I would characterize that break level as somewhere between unrealistic and dishonest, even though their levels work for me.

[woj]

it can be rough for smaller affiliates, but no one wants to bother sending $20 checks...

[AmeliaG]

it can be rough for smaller affiliates, but no one wants to bother sending $20 checks...

I don't accept the idea that the person who can't afford to send $20 is just really baller. Taken all together, I've got thousands of dollars sitting in accounts which have not met break and, from the posts in this thread, I am clearly not alone.

CCBill and Epoch both offer cascades now. Someone can buy the Woj suite of tools and have most of the functionality offered by a NATS or MPA3.

[AmeliaG]

I don't think you quite understand how NATS works.

You can set your minimum payouts to be $0 if you want. You can set them to be $100,000 if you want. It is up to the program owner/operator and it is settable on a per affiliate level if you'd like to.

If you need to request a payout from a program they can set your minimum to $0 and choose to store your payments. They'll then go right into the next dump.

You make a lot assumptions and accusations based off those assumptions. I'd become more educated before you run around placing blame where it doesn't belong.

I make no assumptions. I get my information from what program owners using your software tell me directly and from what the sales pitches were from the various companies when I was shopping for a cascade. Perhaps not perfect sources, but nothing pulled out of thin air either.

I would rather get the info from you than from a third party. So here is a question: Is it true that the default setup for NATS does not include payments.php in the navigation?

[gleem]

Reminds me I have to open a ticket to do the same thing for my affiliate. It's possible to pay any minimum via nats for any affiliate, but there's a couple extra steps you gotta do which I forgot.

[TMM_John]

I make no assumptions. I get my information from what program owners using your software tell me directly and from what the sales pitches were from the various companies when I was shopping for a cascade. Perhaps not perfect sources, but nothing pulled out of thin air either.

I would rather get the info from you than from a third party. So here is a question: Is it true that the default setup for NATS does not include payments.php in the navigation?

When you put things like "Why does NATS discourage payouts?" in your thread title you instantly lose credibility.

I'm happy to see you spamming your affiliate link codes on our back tho.

And, no, links to payment information have been in the default skin on NATS installs for years.

You always come across as a bit uppity with your "Don't assume I'm stupid because I'm a woman" rants, but I never pictured you as one of the drama idiots here.

Keep on creating the fake drama on our back to spam your affiliate ref codes for PimpRoll & Kink. I guess desperate times call for desperate measures.

[RazorSharpe]

When you put things like "Why does NATS discourage payouts?" in your thread title you instantly lose credibility.

I'm happy to see you spamming your affiliate link codes on our back tho.

And, no, links to payment information have been in the default skin on NATS installs for years.

You always come across as a bit uppity with your "Don't assume I'm stupid because I'm a woman" rants, but I never pictured you as one of the drama idiots here.

Keep on creating the fake drama on our back to spam your affiliate ref codes for PimpRoll & Kink. I guess desperate times call for desperate measures.

Sorry but no, i think YOU lose credibility for not responding to her in a more professional manner. I know you get a lot of crap said on GFY and other boards but show SOME responsibility as a businessman. Her original post CLEARLY stated that she was told these things by NATS clients ... so all of a sudden all of your NATS clients are liars and shouldn't be trusted? Or perhaps they're all stupid and do not understand NATS themselves? Come on John, you're better than this. Even Officer initially claimed that it was a NATS problem right in this very thread and he USES the system ....

[TMM_John]

Sorry but no, i think YOU lose credibility for not responding to her in a more professional manner. I know you get a lot of crap said on GFY and other boards but show SOME responsibility as a businessman. Her original post CLEARLY stated that she was told these things by NATS clients ... so all of a sudden all of your NATS clients are liars and shouldn't be trusted? Or perhaps they're all stupid and do not understand NATS themselves? Come on John, you're better than this. Even Officer initially claimed that it was a NATS problem right in this very thread and he USES the system ....

It's not the question, it's the manner in which it's posed.

This board breeds nothing but hate & drama these days. Unfortunately, it's pretty much done IMO as an actual business oriented board.

[GrouchyAdmin]

What are you talking about? I just looked through this thread and unless you count Danza possibly stunt-cocking, which most people wouldn't count, then I'm pretty sure nobody in this thread is content.

I was saying, in a rather rude way, that you have clue as to what you were insinuating, and how inflammatory it could be taken. I was suggesting that you reassess posting such things.

I would rather get the info from you than from a third party. So here is a question: Is it true that the default setup for NATS does not include payments.php in the navigation?

The default NATS v3 skin doesn't even have a fucking logo in it, little alone links to anything you are required to configure yourself. v4 isn't a hell of a lot better for a 'default design', if you want my personal opinion.

I don't know where you're trying to go with this. It's not some magical thing that was designed to confuse people. The program managers mark things paid/unpaid manually anyhow, so the lack/link to this is hardly something definitive or 'fortelling' of some intentional malice.

I continue to suggest that you do some research before making fairly baseless claims about a product you really don't understand.

[AmeliaG]

When you put things like "Why does NATS discourage payouts?" in your thread title you instantly lose credibility.

I'm happy to see you spamming your affiliate link codes on our back tho.

And, no, links to payment information have been in the default skin on NATS installs for years.

You always come across as a bit uppity with your "Don't assume I'm stupid because I'm a woman" rants, but I never pictured you as one of the drama idiots here.

Keep on creating the fake drama on our back to spam your affiliate ref codes for PimpRoll & Kink. I guess desperate times call for desperate measures.

So you are saying that links to payments.php -- the page which lists payouts which have been made and which are pending -- is part of the navigation, in the default NATS install, and a lot of your customers just strip it out and claim it is not in the default setup?

Multiple NATS users have posted in this very thread that NATS makes exactly what I posted about difficult. So how is what I posted off-base at all, much less lacking in credibility?

Last time I checked, I wasn't troubled by my vagina or my gray matter, so please go ahead and post proof of my "uppity" threads I am "always" posting.

[AmeliaG]

I was saying, in a rather rude way, that you have clue as to what you were insinuating, and how inflammatory it could be taken. I was suggesting that you reassess posting such things.



The default NATS v3 skin doesn't even have a fucking logo in it, little alone links to anything you are required to configure yourself. v4 isn't a hell of a lot better for a 'default design', if you want my personal opinion.

I don't know where you're trying to go with this. It's not some magical thing that was designed to confuse people. The program managers mark things paid/unpaid manually anyhow, so the lack/link to this is hardly something definitive or 'fortelling' of some intentional malice.

I continue to suggest that you do some research before making fairly baseless claims about a product you really don't understand.

I'm willing to learn. It seemed from the TMM post that the company is saying there is navigation in the default install, and program people who use NATS have told me their impression of what that default navigation is.

What is in the default install of NATS?

I'm not generally shy about expressing my opinion and, if I meant there was intentional malice -- as opposed to a discouraging structure -- I would have said that. But I didn't say that.

[TMM_John]

So you are saying that links to payments.php -- the page which lists payouts which have been made and which are pending -- is part of the navigation, in the default NATS install, and a lot of your customers just strip it out and claim it is not in the default setup?

Multiple NATS users have posted in this very thread that NATS makes exactly what I posted about difficult. So how is what I posted off-base at all, much less lacking in credibility?

Last time I checked, I wasn't troubled by my vagina or my gray matter, so please go ahead and post proof of my "uppity" threads I am "always" posting.

Your question was answered above.

No, "a lot of our customers" do not just strip out a page (which is purely informational).

I'm done replying to you. And more or less with GFY these days.

You clearly believe what ever it is you believe and you're bent on attempting to create some imaginary problem.

[AmeliaG]

Your question was answered above.

No, "a lot of our customers" do not just strip out a page (which is purely informational).

I'm done replying to you. And more or less with GFY these days.

You clearly believe what ever it is you believe and you're bent on attempting to create some imaginary problem.

I'm pretty sure all stats pages are "purely informational". Isn't that the whole function of the affiliate side of your software, to give affiliates information about their traffic and earnings with the sponsor?

Either your default setup has payments.php in the navigation and many programs remove it and blame you, or it doesn't because it is "purely informational" and unimportant in TMM's view. The fact that the question on whether it does makes you angry is disappointing. The fact that your answer to a simple yes/no question is slippery is even more disappointing.

If multiple NATS users have posted in this very thread that NATS makes exactly what I posted about difficult, how can you claim what I posted is off-base at all, much less lacking in credibility, and not post a single reason why? I'm not closed to hearing your side. I was hoping you would have some answers. But, if you have absolutely not one single point to make -- other than waaah-GFY-is-not-all-unicorns-and-hugs -- then it is hard to change one's perspective.

Lastly, you accused me of "always" making "uppity" threads, but you can't find a single one with the subject matter you accused me of, can you?

[GrouchyAdmin]

I'm willing to learn. It seemed from the TMM post that the company is saying there is navigation in the default install, and program people who use NATS have told me their impression of what that default navigation is.

What is in the default install of NATS?

I'm not generally shy about expressing my opinion and, if I meant there was intentional malice -- as opposed to a discouraging structure -- I would have said that. But I didn't say that.

Your above statement is so oblique, it makes me wonder why you chose to make a thread if it wasn't for the purposes of malice, honestly.

The default install is basically a shell with a very, very basic design, and it's up to the program implementers to setup what they want it to do, and whoever makes their skins to support whatever functionality they want.. and back to whoever actually manages it to ensure it works.

Blaming TMM for a misconfiguration in a program, or (a lack of) functionality is like blaming a paint company for graffiti on the wall.