a question for webmasters
 

In a recent thread regarding CCBill, I noticed some discussion about people who promote ccbill only. But I am aware that there are some who don't want to promote ccbill sites at all.

I am working on a new affiliate program. Currently there are two websites in our portfolio, with plans for a third very soon. Well, I say two, but one will not actually be online until next week. Those are both solo girl sites. The first one is here, and the one coming online next week is here.

My question to those who are potential affilaites for this (or any) program is this: Do you prefer a site that is processed using CCBill or do you prefer to avoid CCBill?

The follow up to that question is: If you like to promote CCBill sites/programs, do you prefer a site to use software like NATS/MPA3 or do you prefer to only have CCBill in the mix?

I am currently trying to decide on if I should use an affilaite backend or just use the CCBill alone. I certainly see the benefits of using a program like NATS because of the features, but I don't need them at the expense of affiliates.

I'm sure that there are folks on both sides, so really I am looking for the answer to "which side has more affiliates". Of course, that only matters if they have more/better traffic!

I meant to say "would you hit it?"

ccbill with nats and back up processors.

anyone else? aslo I am frightened by the giant cock over this post entry. YIKES!

i have never had any problems with CCBill, and as an affiliate find that programs running programs like NATS are a little more detailed in the statistics and tools they can offer to help me run a better show. :2 cents:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=613012

'nuff said...

CCbill/paycom cascading processing with a nats/mpa3 backend

Why not add paycom in the formula ?

there is no money in porn :1orglaugh

We are considering using NATS and CCBill plus other processors in our cascade. I was just trying for a pulse on the issue. I know that everyone can't be satisfied, but I thought this was a good opportunity for webmasters to voice their opinion on what they would want in a program.

I hear people complaining here all the time that X program is shaving, Y program is cheating and Z program sucks balls. I don't want to be X, Y or Z. I am an honest business guy. If I can't make a buck without screwing someone, I don't want to be involved. I'd rather figure out a way to improve what I'm doing, rather than cheat someone out of something...whatever that may be; sales, traffic, whatever.

and the products you use can sometimes lend people to think you are going to cheat them.

I know, I know. I don't understand why they get in the way. Visa, I assume, has a stranglehold on everyone who's a merchant, because Visa is everywhre you want to be, and apparantly that includes up my ass trying to tell me what I can and cant put into my website with regard to content.

But it's even more shit when dealing with banks for merchant accts. At least it is in the US. They have more rules than a game of 3 card mexican-guerilla-sweat poker.

So, in an effort to save time in getting the sites online, we moved to CCBill for now.

I just don't understand why people use CCbill, IMO it sucks totally..

I havent had any problems with CC Bill yet. But if there is another processor out there that isnt so expensive I would consider it.

I personally don't have a preference, but it did take me a while to learn how to use CCBill stats to tweak my efforts. It's just hard to know what is and isn't working well when you don't know how to use the stats interface, and it just seemed like other programs with their own backend made it easier. It's not HARD to learn, exactly, but it takes more time to figure out then other programs.

That said, I have a CCBill program right now, but since my partner and I are discussing cascading processing and just expanding our options, we will likely have to come up with an alternative to keep up with the Jones', so to speak.

That's not all that sucks.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=614141

:(