SPONSORS THAT USE NATS: Will you pay up ??
 

Electracash reports that out of 275 rebills 270 are missing, where I come from that's approx 95% shave on rebills. jasonandalex says it's NATS fault, so what will sponsors that use NATS do?

... pay up, or stay invisible ??

Nats is unshavable NOOB go home.


But in all seriousness. Shaving is when the sponsor purposely doesnt count joins/rebills.

This was a NAtS issue

I bet most wont.

Should this not be sponsors who were using Nats + ACH through electracash?

Not all sponsors that have NATS use the same processors

good question.

From what I read, it was the Billing company changing the postback codes..

That sounds about right GotGauge. This all seems to weird.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

HORSE SHIT!

And that's all that I have to publicly say about that.....BUT.....You can bet your ass that I just bookmarked this thread so I can point back to it at a later time to remind you of what you just said.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Wait you thought i was serious?

I thought we all knew if anyone wants to shave they will.

I sensed a little sarcasm in his post, Aaron :)

I could be wrong though... and there are tons of ways to shave with NATS or any software for that matter

me too :)

We don't use Electracash, but yes we would pay.

Its the billing company problem and NATS was still working on it when J&A moved off NATS. Most NATS programs don't use electracash either cause there support and database is freaking terrible. One of the main reasons NATS was having issues I bet was cause Electracash has such terrbile support. I can't even email my sales people there or get any reply on tech support issues

i just farted

See sig And Alex just showed a ratio of 2:2 Shave + 3/^2 -1 + 5 = Shave

And a few signups popped out?

Never have used Electracash (and won't after reading these threads, since everyone has reported problems with every back end), but of course we'd pay.

I never bought into that whole "non-shavable" crap either. That's like me saying I'm not gonna get laid this year.... Chances are pretty damn good I won't, but I'd never say it couldn't happen.

If we used ElectraCash for our check processing, you can damn sure bet we'd be stepping up to the plate and doing the right thing by our affiliates, those who wouldn't deserve to be shut down...

Unless I'm mistaken, the first NATS clients to get an Electracash integration were JSA. When the issue was found, NATS asked JSA to use a different ACH processor while working to resolve the problem with Electracash. New clients coming on board who had Electracash accounts were also asked not to use them as their ACH processor until the situation was suitably resolved.

So I don't think there are more than a couple at best, and it may be that JSA is the only case of this occurrence.

Accusing other sponsors of stealing from their affiliates is a completely ridiculous thing to do.

Attack if you like for my comments, I'm finally off to the airport, about 5 hours later than my flight.

I'll see those of you in Phoenix who are coming, and if you'd like to speak to John or Charlie personally about the issue, let me know. If you don't see them around the show, I'll be happy to set up time for you to talk with them.

ya - I was just thinking the same - nothing is totally safe from shaving - no matter how bullet proof they claim to be

RealityCash does not use Electracash for checks, I'd glad to say.

But I wonder about Aaron's statement, how can you deliberately and secretly shave with Nats? I don't know how, all I can think of is to change the join page to go thru other software, but affiliates can figure than one out in about one minute! I'll be the first one to say that Nats is not perfect, but it's not shavable and the code is not editable (too bad too, but there are some features we've been asking for that I would rather just have our guys add, but we can't).

I think if people say that a certain package can deliberately and secretly shave, they should say how.

The Electracash problem has been FIXED. Most sponsors don't use Electracash that use NATS.. you are trying to make a big issue out of a niche problem...

You are a drama Queen and I do say that makes you a faggot.

... you just drop the reseller ID or override it with you house ID before passing that data on to NATS, talk to my good old buddy greg lasrado and his american , ex IBILL, friend bob cox, they know all the dirty tricks.

I wonder how much money information like this might be worth privately?

Nah....Not my style.


Besides.....I was probably just talking out my ass again as usual. Pay no attention.

I agree we have some things we want to add as well but it makes it really hard when the code is tottally hidden... but none the less were really happy with nats

Affliates can see that. View source on the join page: <input type="hidden" name="nats" value="MTE3OjU6NQ">. Besides, an affiliate can simply pull out his own credit card and see if he gets credit for the join. Check joins may be delayed because of normal time-based fraud delays, but credit cards never are. So there are two ways affiliates can detect that in one minute.

Nevermind

... agreed, but then again that's what sponsors would call "a glitch".
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

There's a much easier way than described above..

OK, so we agree there is no way to secretly and deliberatly shave Nats.

What are they paying Kimmy? I want the same!

Simply changing the first letter in a NATS code to lowercase will result in a sale to the default NATS account

Example: MTE3OjU6NQ to mTE3OjU6NQ (Or another example: MTE3OjU6NQ to MtE3OjU6NQ)

Of course it's not fool proof, but it's one of many possibilities :winkwink:

So I'm sitting here in Raven's living room....She is sitting in front of me telling me.....in not so many words.....To STFU.

So, that's exactly what I am gonna do. :glugglug

Gee....Who knew?

Matt, let it go.

Same thing

yes - they can pull out their own cc and test it - but probably only 5% actually would do that

Well I see a lot of truth in Lensman's post...

"I think if people say that a certain package can deliberately and secretly shave, they should say how."

It should be public knowledge and affiliates should be watching for stuff like this..

I will not give any more example on the board though :winkwink:

and that is?

I wish I was there!

:winkwink: