webmaster who don't use nats prorgrams
 

How many webmasters acutally won't use a program because they use nats?

I push traffic on a program to program basis and it really depends on other things besides nats or mpa3 usage for me such as payout, niches, quality of content...

I dont, but will use MPA3 at a push, still prefere ccbill handeling my cheques, especially from smaller programs.

I only push 1 nats program, I'm not really a fan of getting a whole load of checks each week. I find it a pain in the ass trying to keep track of them all.

I need to push NATS

With the exception of reality cash, I have not had any luck with programs using nats, I have had several programs go from ccbill to nats and have watched my conversions go from 1/500-600 to 1/5000-6000. I had one of them go from 1/500 to 1/8000, I had so many free sites for that particular program that I just switched back to ccbill code and its now averaging around 1/1000.

I dont push a program based on what software they use but I no longer push many nats sponsors. if a program switches to nats and leaves the ccbill links active, I just continue promoting via ccbill, if a program switches to nats and asks me to swtich my links, I just delete their free sites and galleries and move on.

Not all sponsors using CCBill get it right, but because they have to design their own affiliate interfaces, many of their sites are usable. NATS provides an interface, and most of its users go with it as is, but while the default NATS interface is fine for simple link collection, especially with multi-site sponsors, it is a real pain in the *ss when it comes to grabbing banners, galleries or content.

I'm not against NATS sponsors in principle, but unless they have something special to offer or I only need plain links, I often skip over them.

I avoid them.

Haven't had the time or patience to look into how it works. The ones I looked at didn't allow linking together which means many small checks. And that's no good.

I only had bad experience with programs using nats. Dont ask me why, but there are so many reasons for this.. But the main one is they never seem to help me make any $$

For most of the programs using mpa3 I can only say the oposite.

I guess ccbill is ok as well.. but to many crappy programs using them and I have found their processor to be unstable from time to time.

We do NOT use nats. I find that some people insist on Nats and others are greatly against it.

not meny of them

Quite interesting indeed. I've seen this as well.

So what are your main complaints about it?
I see most want it too be simplified for ease of use

I personally love nats programs makes things a lot easier.

Not many. But a single human being has yet to explain how it works. Actually making sense seems overrated.

Why can't they be linked? Because it's just a front to payment systems like ccbill? Or can they be linked? Tell us. I'll gladly use it if it makes sense.

By "linked" I mean hook a new site as a subaccount onto an existing one. Got a ccbill account with around 70 sites on it. Promoting single sites doesn't work when you're a review sites with 1800 sites reviewed. Few clicks here, few clicks there.

Id LOVE to hear your reasons for this

duke

i prefer nats, much easier to keep track of my stats.

From a personal standpoint as of right now whenever i see a sponsor I like using nats i cringe. I've promoted pretty much all types of programs. Only Nats sites have not been able to move into my top 10 earners.

HOWEVER I have 3 new nats programs i turned up the heat on this month. In the next 30 days we'll see if these programs (one of which has always been in my top 10) will work their way up. :thumbsup

btw the one thing that really seems to prevent my nats stats from going up is low rebills. All other programs show good rebills and to date i haven't been happy with the rebills with nats programs.

We prefer using the 'processors' themselves.

Epoch or CCBill.

No matter what 3rd party software you pick, they have
flaws and loss of sales will result for anyone using them.
That is a proven fact.

Since we stopped using 3rd party software, our webmasters
are making more $$ and no late checks due to problems with
stats importing.

Not sure how using NATS would change your sign ups to go down. If anything it should go UP if say ccbill declines the surfer and NATS bumps them to say PAYCOM. But to lose sales over it... I dont understand why.

just read what Shap writes and try to understand it.

Yep..... :2 cents:

Seems if you only have a ccbill program and swtich to nats, your dammned if you do and dammned if you don't

Yeah, I'm keeping my eye on score-cash too. Let us know your results. I know you have a lot of experience with them, so you'll easily be able to tell how conversions/rebills differ now that they're with NATS.

***Bump for more input.

I won't use a program with nats or mpa
or epoch for that matter.
don't trust a damn one of them.
plus it has never been proven (by an affiliate webmaster)
that cascading makes more money.

give me ccbill payouts and recurring.

what is the logic behind this?

i'm not a fan of any of the solutions that are out there.. but how can cascading NOT make more?

if they decline at processor A, and there's no cascading, it's a lost sale.

if they decline at processor A, and there's cascading, it attempts processor B, C, and so on.. if even 10% of the time one of the latter processors catches it, isn't it worth it?

what i'd like to hear a program owner put in their 2 cents on, is the effects of the decline-fees on from the different processors on cascading billing.

processors typically charge a ~$0.50 fee when you send a decline to them.

I love NATS programs ;)

I'm not being a dick or anything but you are completely clueless. I'm hoping you are a newb or you've been wasting your time. Start up a paysite, study the numbers and you'll look back on your post and think "GOD DAMN that was stupid!"

We've all been in your shoes, don't take it personal.

:1orglaugh OWNED by shap no you're not being a dick.
While i was reading that dude's post I was actually
thinking about the clueless part as well ...

NATS has a built-in shave feature doesn't it?

I'm sure that the NATS guys could make their script work with merging CCBill accounts and keeping 3rd party payouts. (for revshare)

We did with our custom script.

When an affiliate signs up with us he can either merge or create a new CCBill acct. At the same time we generate him a Paycom account.

The affiliate then has the option to choose whichever one he wants as primary/ secondary biller inside his admin at BVCash.

If he feels CCBill is slacking he can switch it to Paycom or visa versa instantly any time he wants.

3rd party payouts and all the bells and whistles that allow you to do things that CCBills affiliate software won't let you. ie: cascade billing, campaign tracking, gallery stats, etc etc..