Quote:
Originally Posted by TMM_John
There is a major difference between "cookie life, how type-ins are handled, and etc." and "'backend features' in NATS that they don't want affiliates to know about. I call it 'The Gillette Protocol'". Comparing the two isn't even close to a reasonable argument.
Are you agreeing with his statement that there is some hidden shaving feature in NATS?
You can easily check cookie life, how type-ins are handled, etc. These are extremely transparent things. A shave feature is something intended to secretly remove sales and not credit them to affiliates. That is quite a bold accusation to make.
PIBcash had nothing to do with NATS. I'd get into the story behind PIBcash, but a certain individual who already tried to hijack this thread with his offering would go into a fit.
I know you're on the "CCBill is our savior" bandwagon, but it's an extremely short sighted way to run a business. Even my buddy up there with his full page ad can see that. Nothing is forever, companies go out of business. Losing a bit of your income here & there when someone goes out of business is inevitable if you want to be in business for yourself. Making your entire business dependent upon one company because you mistakenly believe they're bullet-proof is utterly foolish. If you need an example of where that mentality leads read up on iBill. I have no reason to doubt CCBill is a well run stable company. However, that is no reason to make your entire livelihood dependent upon them. You should not solely rely on CCBill, NATS, a particular sponsor program, etc. You need to spread your risk around.
That said the CCBill paid option in NATS severely limits functionality within NATS. It's an option that is there, but not the best way to go. If you want to run a CCBill program also you're best off running a CCBill based program next to your NATS program.
|
Damn.... my reply was actually intended to be a lot more positive than you appeared to take it. I was in no way implying that you purposely have a shave feature built in. Merely that it is possible that certain settings might make a difference in determining how an affiliate gets credit. Such as cookie settings, how cookies are applied to type-ins, and that sort of thing.
I know PIBcash wasn't your software. I was only letting you know why affiliates might be paranoid about such things in general. It's a valid concern. That's completely different than you being guilty of such a thing but it only makes sense for affiliates to not be naive as to the the possibility. We'd be fools not to be.
Out of curiosity how does the CCBILL Paid function limit things? I've only recently became familiar with it but I thought you could run a regular NATS program (paid by sponsor) as well as a CCBill paid program all in one. It seemed to allow the options for different link codes so someone could use both at the same time if they wanted. Or am I mistaken?