Quote:
Originally Posted by signupdamnit
Then again what if the charge backs really only happened because of the default cross sales? It's not like the affiliate gets paid for them in the first place and they will often increase charge backs and refunds (despite what the sponsors claim)because it seems like a scam to most people not familiar with the way they work. The reason programs keep them is because often they still make more money by having them. But again the affiliate gets nothing for them so why should the affiliate pay for the higher charge backs?
Speaking of which how much more would the average rev share affiliate be getting if they got a 50% cut of the sponsor's share of the profit from these cross sales? 10 - 15% more per month? That just goes to show you that it is as I said. Affiliates are sending revenue. They just aren't getting their cut. An extra 10% would help many an affiliate these days and on rev share it really is their money because they sent the customer. That's how rev share used to be. These days what is called rev share often is nothing close.
|
But as you implied/stated; the affiliates don't pay for charge backs.
So you went in a circle on that argument.
But affiliates only sign up to get half the sales they send to the site.
50/50 for the initial sale does not imply 50/50 for upsales/cross sales/etc...
If you have "mad" traffic then you can approach a sponsor with these options.
I mean, basically people have to read the sponsor's offer.
Some sponsors only pay $25 per sign up and no rebills.
That is worse that 50/50 revshare with split fees in my experience.
It's the sponsor's product, they have the right to set their own policies.
It's our right to choose a different sponsor if we don't like the terms of another
sponsor.
Finally, if I found a sponsor that converted 3 times better than what I have
now, I wouldn't give a shit what fee structure they had because I'd be making
way more money than now.