CCBill programs changing to MPA3/NATS

[StarkReality]

Enough is enough, time for a thread. In the last two days another 3 of my CCBill sponsors changed from CCBill only to MPA3/NATS...giving me a good reason to drop them. Well, I probably won't, but I'm really close to doing a big cleanup.

Why ? Shouldn't I be happy about possibly more income ?

NO ! Nubiles and FTV stayed with CCBill, so it's not a necessary step to change to your own interface, even if a program grows. It's annoying to replace linkcodes and I rarely saw any big improvements after a change like this. 20-30% more signups ? In your dreams maybe !

I often pick CCBill for a reason: I trust them, it's convenient to merge accounts, I don't get even more checks and I can check my stats in one place.

Lately, the trend to change from CCBill to cascading billing seems to increase again and I'm so fucking tired of this game. Yes, I know my old linkcodes still work, but I'll have to enter my data again, check even more stats, etc.

I know some people will start praising MPA3/NATS, it's fine for me when I signup for a program running it's own interface from the beginning....but especially in niches I don't have loads of traffic for, I prefer CCBill. Ever had the idea that someone may prefer your program to others for this reason only ?

Enough whining, but for me the extra sales I may make this way don't don't make up for the inconvenience caused.

[PornDiscounts-R]

you should give me a try then. only ccbill and all the nice tools to go with it made with some custom changes to make them even better.

still adding most of the promo content and will add ca 500 new fhg`s in the next few weeks, new very different tour option to name a few.

If i can get you anyting you need that is not on the site, please hit me up and let`s talk.

[DutchTeenCash]

changing to nats is not just nats, its the whole deal of epass, payoneer, paying checks, outsourcing that, keeping track of everything

there are way too many issues with smaller programs changing to nats then getting behind with payments, ccbill pays period.

[tdfcash3]

changing to nats is not just nats, its the whole deal of epass, payoneer, paying checks, outsourcing that, keeping track of everything

there are way too many issues with smaller programs changing to nats then getting behind with payments, ccbill pays period.

we are currently on nats but our new sites that are coming early 2008 will be back under ccbill, Im bucking the trend and moving back, Im not so sure about my older sites as it will be a total nightmare, but with the new ccbill changes its a lot more appealing even without a cascade.

[femdomdestiny]

me to

Yes, I am also dropping them. Don't have nerves or time to wait money to be collected on dozens different accounts.

[NinjaSteve]

I agree that it's annoying when people change the way you have to promote them. It forces you to do a ton of work and changing link codes on galleries can get you delisted from some big TGPs.

In my opinion I think Radical Cash has their shit down. They offer links through CCBill and Nats so you get to choose. No leaks on the tours, two different webmaster areas, good stuff

Here's my Radical Cash referral link
Or here's a direct link because I like them that much!

A runner up is Melissa Money. They changed from CCBill to Nats but all of my ccbill links redirect to my own nats link.

[Iron Fist]

I'll agree as well... hate it when I need to change links...

[After Shock Media]

I hate trusting small or even some large programs to do their own self accounting and managing of funds. Hell I have seen some of them post around here and honestly the thought that they are in charge of payrolls makes me want to cry myself to sleep.

Yes CCbill could technically go under but typically there would be some warning signs or even if it did most mpa3/nats programs would still be at least half fucked anyways if not more than half.

[SCORE Ralph]

On a side note: Placing all your eggs in the ccbill basket doesnt sound like a sound business strategy.

[smutnut]

On a side note: Placing all your eggs in the ccbill basket doesnt sound like a sound business strategy.

I like cc bill too, but I agree. It's not a good idea to place all your eggs anywhere. No matter how much you like someone in the present. The future changes fast and either non intentionally (or maybe not) shit happens.

I've learned that the hard way over the last few months

[tdfcash3]

I was having the same discussion a few weeks ago with the owner of a ccbill program he asked why we originally moved onto nats from ccbill, my answer was exactly that, all your eggs in one processor basket is asking or trouble, but how likely is it that ccbill will go under, not very IMO.

[PPjohn]

Changing links? not good man

[webmasterchecks]

I like cc bill too, but I agree. It's not a good idea to place all your eggs anywhere. No matter how much you like someone in the present. The future changes fast and either non intentionally (or maybe not) shit happens.

I've learned that the hard way over the last few months

if its not clear by now, its obvious that visa is comfortable with 2 major processors. its a commonly used strategy, regulation by managing the numbers. Visas problem was they needed to manage the public relations issues with porn and the scummy billing practices, and this solved it, its working and they are happy, as there have not been any major processing changes in years. ccbill and epoch have a history with visa and will be given chances if something happens. The problem with the smaller processors is that they take all the junk business (shady content/billing) that the big ones wont take and don?t have a long history or good reputation and they get sacked.

[Paul Markham]

Let's be honest here. For 90% of the programs there is no reason to move to NATS/MPA3. It's a marketing gimmick aimed at affiliates. The benefits are out weighed by the downsides.

CCBILL or Epoch are both solid companies, well as solid as anything in porn, CCBILLs support is second to none. They administer and pay out to affiliates, once you get used to their back end it's a delight.

The only benefit as I see it is the cascading billing system. We don't lose that many and what we do lose it not worth spending time and money on to implement NATS or MPA3. I'm sure some affiliates will take umbrage at this but think of it like this. Every cost has to be met somewhere unless it produces a profit. Cost and on affiliate programs are met by content or other tools.

I'm sure for big programs MPA3/NATS are a bonus. Just not got the majority.

I did hear CCBILL were going to come out with a cascading billing program and pay affiliates for all sign ups. Now that would be awesome.

Let the flaming commence.

[tdfcash3]

if its not clear by now, its obvious that visa is comfortable with 2 major processors. its a commonly used strategy, regulation by managing the numbers. Visas problem was they needed to manage the public relations issues with porn and the scummy billing practices, and this solved it, its working and they are happy, as there have not been any major processing changes in years. ccbill and epoch have a history with visa and will be given chances if something happens. The problem with the smaller processors is that they take all the junk business (shady content/billing) that the big ones wont take and don?t have a long history or good reputation and they get sacked.

good point!

[DWB]

You guys should never have to change links. It's a snap for programs to allow you to keep using your ccbill link codes. Ask them why they wont let you.

[PornDiscounts-R]

Let's be honest here. For 90% of the programs there is no reason to move to NATS/MPA3. It's a marketing gimmick aimed at affiliates.

Welcome John A LOL

That little joke aside, i agree on most of that Paul. Many sites has gotten pretty big without using nats/mpa3 or some other option.

The cacade is bar far the biggest problem with only having ccbill. So will be nice to see there new version in the new year.

[corvette]

I did hear CCBILL were going to come out with a cascading billing program and pay affiliates for all sign ups. Now that would be awesome.

paul, ill post since this was brought up...we have been beta-testing a cascading module for our system. expect to hear more about this in the very-near future

[Dirty D]

If the sponsor did the conversion properly....
there is no need to change your link codes.

We have thousands of hosted galleries out there using ccbill urls...
They are logged through NATS so everything is credited properly.

[Gambit]

With ccbill you get your cheques/wires on time every week. Half the time when small programs move the cheques get delayed or they have problems with epassporte, and you have to run around chasing people up. For the vast majority of them its not worth my hastle.

[cybermike]

hell the owner of nats sends out his checks months late

[crockett]

paul, ill post since this was brought up...we have been beta-testing a cascading module for our system. expect to hear more about this in the very-near future

Sounds great. Are you guys still working on the new back end that you talked about some time back?

I like CCbill programs the most overall. My converrions always seem to be much better when using CCbill vs a Nats or MPA3 program. However I have been getting a little concerned about the recent check delays. Seems like I can't trust that my check will show up on time anymore.

I hope that issue gets resloved because I know it's not just me having it.

[corvette]

actually, this would be a good opportunity to expand on our release, our cascading system to be released shortly:

Will not require CCBill to be the Primary biller, unlike other billing systems.

Will pay affiliates for all referred transactions, no just CCBill transactions.

Will initially work with Epoch and Segpay, with Netbilling and others to soon follow.

An affiliate can now use just 1 link for life in our system and be direct to whatever processor as primary or secondary.

Cascading works for all forms of payment; ACH, 900, EU Debit, etc ie if they fail CC they can be pushed to ACH and we allow an infinite number of cascades, not just a primary and secondary biller.

[corvette]

Sounds great. Are you guys still working on the new back end that you talked about some time back?

absolutely, i dont want to talk about it too much, but its something we are very excited about and expect it to have a big impact.

[Doctor Feelgood]

Enough is enough, time for a thread. In the last two days another 3 of my CCBill sponsors changed from CCBill only to MPA3/NATS...giving me a good reason to drop them.

was one of those spookycash?

[NETbilling]

actually, this would be a good opportunity to expand on our release, our cascading system to be released shortly:

Will not require CCBill to be the Primary biller, unlike other billing systems.

Will pay affiliates for all referred transactions, no just CCBill transactions.

Will initially work with Epoch and Segpay, with Netbilling and others to soon follow.

An affiliate can now use just 1 link for life in our system and be direct to whatever processor as primary or secondary.

Cascading works for all forms of payment; ACH, 900, EU Debit, etc ie if they fail CC they can be pushed to ACH and we allow an infinite number of cascades, not just a primary and secondary biller.

Hi Mark,

Congrats on the new system. Let us know if you need any help with the NETbilling integeration. It should be simple for you guys to plug in.

Mitch

[smutnut]

hell the owner of nats sends out his checks months late

Is that how that works? So the sponsors using NATS have no control? That explains a lot.

[TMM_John]

Is that how that works? So the sponsors using NATS have no control? That explains a lot.

No, TMM has nothing to do with NATS clients sending their checks. Mike, please be more clear in your comments.

He is referring to my program Teen Dolls, which does not receive the attention it deserves as I have been unbelievably tied up with other things. No excuse, and no one's fault but my own. Just wanted to explain what he meant.

[StarkReality]

was one of those spookycash?

Well, it's not my intention to point to any program, spookycash has great quality content, but yes, they are one of them and since I don't have much traffic in their niche, it's barely worth the hassles for me.

I'm signed up to like 180+ CCBill programs at the moment, and while I send some alot of traffic, many just receive a little and get a signup a week or so. It sums up nicely, but if each of my "complimentary sponsors" would have it's own system, keeping an overview of what's going on would be a real nightmare...keeping track of the payouts, check arrival dates, updating my books, scanning checks, archiving stubs, the whole paperwork stuff.

I don't put all my eggs in one basket, using a few dozen non-ccbill programs as well, but if I, for example, get a good listing for a keyword I have no corresponding sponsor site for, I love checking for ccbill programs first, simply because it's easy to signup, I can grab content/galleries/linkingcodes in a few minutes, that's it.

I see a big advantage for CCBill only programs on the owner side as well. Almost all webmaster already have an account, so even if they are not sure if a program may work for them, I could imagine many just signup for a quick and easy testdrive...and some will start pushing alot more traffic if they see the program performs well. When it comes to programs using their own system/interface, most affiliates are probably alot more picky.

Both have advantages and disadvantages, but sometimes convenience and the trust in a big name like CCBill are worth more to affiliates than a signup more or less, at least for me...and it's not like conversion ratios are magically cut in half with 2 or more billers. CCBill sometimes scrubs a little hard, but other do so as well and scrubbing means less chargebacks, less problems.

[SGS]

We have been CCBill since 1999 and it was the best thing we ever did.

[V_RocKs]

This is why I keep telling everyone about the horse and buggy!

[brandonstills]

I heard CCBill was coming out with some new affiliate stuff too. Any idea on the features and when it is going to be coming out?

[just a punk]

Why don't keep the CCBill-only option when you switch to NATS/MPA? For example, Real-Bucks.com did it this so no affiliates were hurt. Both old-style and "new" NATS liking codes work well - there is no need to change anything

[AmeliaG]

You guys should never have to change links. It's a snap for programs to allow you to keep using your ccbill link codes. Ask them why they wont let you.

When Globill went under, SpookyCash paid all affiliates out of pocket, but it meant the link codes no longer worked and we took measures to make sure that could not be an issue in the future.

We have our link codes set up such that, in the unlikely apocalyptic event that both CCBill and Epoch went under, we should still be able to transition all affiliates to a system where their link codes would continue to work and continue to credit for joins.

Yes, SpookyCash just went over to Epoch's MPA3 system and we may upgrade to the full MPA3 system. We've been talking to Oystein about doing so, while keeping our affiliates' link codes the same. SpookyCash affiliates do not need to change a single link and they will get credit for all joins, including those in the cascade to CCBill.

[AmeliaG]

Well, it's not my intention to point to any program, spookycash has great quality content, but yes, they are one of them and since I don't have much traffic in their niche, it's barely worth the hassles for me.

I'm signed up to like 180+ CCBill programs at the moment, and while I send some alot of traffic, many just receive a little and get a signup a week or so. It sums up nicely, but if each of my "complimentary sponsors" would have it's own system, keeping an overview of what's going on would be a real nightmare...keeping track of the payouts, check arrival dates, updating my books, scanning checks, archiving stubs, the whole paperwork stuff.

I don't put all my eggs in one basket, using a few dozen non-ccbill programs as well, but if I, for example, get a good listing for a keyword I have no corresponding sponsor site for, I love checking for ccbill programs first, simply because it's easy to signup, I can grab content/galleries/linkingcodes in a few minutes, that's it.

I see a big advantage for CCBill only programs on the owner side as well. Almost all webmaster already have an account, so even if they are not sure if a program may work for them, I could imagine many just signup for a quick and easy testdrive...and some will start pushing alot more traffic if they see the program performs well. When it comes to programs using their own system/interface, most affiliates are probably alot more picky.

Both have advantages and disadvantages, but sometimes convenience and the trust in a big name like CCBill are worth more to affiliates than a signup more or less, at least for me...and it's not like conversion ratios are magically cut in half with 2 or more billers. CCBill sometimes scrubs a little hard, but other do so as well and scrubbing means less chargebacks, less problems.

SpookyCash is still billing through both Epoch and CCBill, but payments to affiliates will be sent from Epoch, instead of CCBill, in the near future. The MPA3 system via Epoch shows affiliates a lot more about which of their links and traffic sources are actually sending joins and making them money.

And, of course, for SpookyCash specifically, we email affiliates with new links with some regularity, so that part is hopefully easy.

I do understand what you are saying in terms of liking being able to combine payouts from sponsors who are not the primary niches you promote, as that was certainly one of the features which attracted me to CCBill, when I first set it up. If you already have any Epoch sponsors, you can combine your payouts with Epoch, the same as you can with CCBill, although if the sponsors you promote only a bit are all CCBill, I guess that doesn't make a huge difference.

[notoldschool]

Ccbill is great and all for beginers but they have major conectivity issues. I actually prefer nats with epoch tops in the cascade. Try hitting ccbill join page or even logging into the stats area behind a lynksys router. Time out fo sho.

[zigx]

as an affiliate i have many accounts @ diff places... i dont like the idea of my info being saved across different cash sites.. not to mention i forget half the places i sign up.

from the CCBill admin everything is there nice and easy... and pretty ugly ill admit.



My paysite is 100% ccbill and will stay that way in order to cause the least pain in affiliate ass and to make sure people feel secure.

[smutnut]

No, TMM has nothing to do with NATS clients sending their checks. Mike, please be more clear in your comments.

He is referring to my program Teen Dolls, which does not receive the attention it deserves as I have been unbelievably tied up with other things. No excuse, and no one's fault but my own. Just wanted to explain what he meant.

No prob. Thanks. I was actually dealing with some people lately due to my own problems so thanks for clearing that up

[12clicks]

Ccbill is great and all for beginers but they have major conectivity issues. I actually prefer nats with epoch tops in the cascade. Try hitting ccbill join page or even logging into the stats area behind a lynksys router. Time out fo sho.

I use Lynksys. I can't duplicate your problem.


Ever

[faze]

hahahha oh my god

[spacedog]

SpookyCash is still billing through both Epoch and CCBill, but payments to affiliates will be sent from Epoch, instead of CCBill, in the near future. The MPA3 system via Epoch shows affiliates a lot more about which of their links and traffic sources are actually sending joins and making them money.

And, of course, for SpookyCash specifically, we email affiliates with new links with some regularity, so that part is hopefully easy.

I do understand what you are saying in terms of liking being able to combine payouts from sponsors who are not the primary niches you promote, as that was certainly one of the features which attracted me to CCBill, when I first set it up. If you already have any Epoch sponsors, you can combine your payouts with Epoch, the same as you can with CCBill, although if the sponsors you promote only a bit are all CCBill, I guess that doesn't make a huge difference.

Thanks for answering that.. all spookycash links are coming down

[AmeliaG]

Thanks for answering that.. all spookycash links are coming down

What troubles you about Epoch and CCBill as a billing solution? They are kind of the industry standards.

I sort of thought that you were not promoting SpookyCash. Were you? Feel free to hit me up at 337070007 if you'd like.

[12clicks]

I sort of thought that you were not promoting SpookyCash.

with some of these guy's traffic, its hard to tell when they are or are not

[spacedog]

What troubles you about Epoch and CCBill as a billing solution? They are kind of the industry standards.

I sort of thought that you were not promoting SpookyCash. Were you? Feel free to hit me up at 337070007 if you'd like.

Nothing at all wrong with it, except payments coming from Epoch.

If the Epoch sale is declined & it cascades down to CCBill and gets approved, then how would I get paid from Epoch?

Sorry, but that right there is what confused me. All the other programs using cascading billing with MPA/Nats whatever issue payment from inhouse

[GrouchyAdmin]

They're going to MPA3/NATS so they can afford to pay you whiners the $50+ PPS you so crave. You don't want more money? Fine, stick to the CCBilll hosted mode. 1998 is calling you back.

[Paul Markham]

paul, ill post since this was brought up...we have been beta-testing a cascading module for our system. expect to hear more about this in the very-near future

Great news, I spoke to Doug at the Amsterdam show about some other things in the pipeline. Any news would be good. Tell him ti ICQ me please.

[AmeliaG]

Nothing at all wrong with it, except payments coming from Epoch.

If the Epoch sale is declined & it cascades down to CCBill and gets approved, then how would I get paid from Epoch?

Sorry, but that right there is what confused me. All the other programs using cascading billing with MPA/Nats whatever issue payment from inhouse

Odds are that someone from Epoch or Mansion could explain the technical aspect of this better than I could, but I'll take a stab at it. I can't speak for all programs, but I can tell you what SpookyCash is doing.

We set up a subaccount in CCBill and each corresponding product code in Epoch, for each of the sites in SpookyCash, such that each subaccount in CCBill posts back join data to the associated Epoch product code. This means that CCBill will continue paying affiliates for CCBill rebills under the old SpookyCash system, but Epoch will pay affiliates for new Epoch joins and rebills and new CCBill joins and rebills on the new system. This means that, if CCBill were not to pay me for a join you sent, Epoch would send you your share regardless. This doesn't trouble me because SpookyCash has always paid affiliates, regardless of what billers did in the past.

Epoch is using the same tried and trusted MPA3 technology to track your CCBill secondary processor joins that a program using MPA3 directly would use. So Epoch knows what to pay affiliates and then the SpookyCash program just has to collect from secondary billers, whether they are CCBill or Netbilling or Jettis etc. I might prefer to eventually bring the whole thing in-house, but, for now, it works exactly like any MPA3 program, except that Epoch cuts the checks or sends the wires or, starting in January, makes the card payments. Make sense?

[AmeliaG]

I should probably add that SpookyCash is set up so that all CCBill IDs and Epoch IDs are mapped to one another -- even in SpookyCash's more complex tools like the RSS feed, hosted blog, or hosted TGP -- so that the old links continue to work and track joins in the Epoch system if you never change a single one.

[spacedog]

Odds are that someone from Epoch or Mansion could explain the technical aspect of this better than I could, but I'll take a stab at it. I can't speak for all programs, but I can tell you what SpookyCash is doing.

We set up a subaccount in CCBill and each corresponding product code in Epoch, for each of the sites in SpookyCash, such that each subaccount in CCBill posts back join data to the associated Epoch product code. This means that CCBill will continue paying affiliates for CCBill rebills under the old SpookyCash system, but Epoch will pay affiliates for new Epoch joins and rebills and new CCBill joins and rebills on the new system. This means that, if CCBill were not to pay me for a join you sent, Epoch would send you your share regardless. This doesn't trouble me because SpookyCash has always paid affiliates, regardless of what billers did in the past.

Epoch is using the same tried and trusted MPA3 technology to track your CCBill secondary processor joins that a program using MPA3 directly would use. So Epoch knows what to pay affiliates and then the SpookyCash program just has to collect from secondary billers, whether they are CCBill or Netbilling or Jettis etc. I might prefer to eventually bring the whole thing in-house, but, for now, it works exactly like any MPA3 program, except that Epoch cuts the checks or sends the wires or, starting in January, makes the card payments. Make sense?

Gotcha. thanks for clearing that up for me.. cool that the old rebills stay in ccbill since some of them have been retaining for over a year and several of them always rebill

[slavdogg]

sounds like u need a stats remote to check your stats