Keep them coming.

btw, about the reallyusefulcash. some of you maybe didnt even know that they are on ccbill, but every of their site is on ccbill first, then it is on nats few days later. me, as i am pushing new sites as early as possible, it was always about using those ccbill links, and most of my traffic is coming from serps with those ccbill links ... so, waiting for explanation, but if it is like it looks like, shaving on payment cascade, or how to call this, can you imagine how much sales and rebills i have lost? really waiting for answer from them ... but i doubt it will be any satisfying one ... :2 cents:

I didn't. I pushed them a little but not enough to make a real judgement.

every of their site have page like this

http://fakehospital.com/tour/webmasters.html

so you can choose ccb or nats, if you choose ccb, it is likely you will never make a sale ... what a thievery ... :2 cents:

Isn't RUC those same russian spammers from wtf? - I am asking, not accusing.

No. It's JT who set up youporn. Nothing to do with the spamming russian fucks.

Oops, sorry then.

Keep it up, teencat ...

I'm not really surprised at all. Of course they will claim ignorance. They always do. Then they never offer a reasonable automatic compensation to all webmasters. Instead they pretend it never happened and that they didn't benefit from it. At most they will ask each individual webmaster to "hit them up" for compensation when they know damn well it affected all CCBILL webmasters.

The thing is these are million dollar operations and you're telling me they didn't bother to do a test join to make sure affiliates get credit or that no one on the staff has the brains to realize that affiliates aren't getting credit with other processors? Yeah right. Of course this shit is waaaaay more common than most affiliates realize.

Anyway thanks for your work, Lucas!

Well... on the positive side, looks like he setup his merchant account. I wouldn't be surprised, at all, if he cans the entire ccbill program and forces all affiliates to use nats. I am assuming vendo is his setup... i have never heard of them and no third party would set their page up like that.

WebsiteSecure.org does random test joins regularly on the sites that we monitor. We do it without any affiliate codes because our primary goal is to verify that the sites are treating consumers in an ethical manner. We also read through the terms pages, privacy policy, test for spam mailers and so on to provide consumers with a an easy way to identify sites they can trust... and improve ratios for ethical site owners in the process.

While I can not 'guarantee' affiliate payouts from programs because it is not something we specifically test for, I believe you'll find every WebsiteSecure.org certified site is safe to join, and safe to send traffic. If ever you discover a site with a seal behaving improperly in any way please be sure to report it to us immediately: http://www.websitesecure.org/contact...re=Enforcement. We will independently verify claims and take further action when necessary.

You can easily see which sites are WebsiteSecure.org certified by looking for our trademarked certification seal on their site pages or by finding their reviews on major review sites which report certified paysites to their clientele. Several affiliates have mentioned using our certification seals as another way to identify affiliate programs worth working with and we appreciate their trust.

If I can be of any service, contact me any time via Email, Skype or ICQ at your convenience.

You can Always Be Sure With WebsiteSecure.org

Lucas, while I understand the point of your thread, would it not be more productive to speak to any program owners directly to inform and resolve any possible issues versus public accusations?

I'm just not seeing where the outcome of these results can be productive for you as it may very well sour any business relationship you may otherwise have with a program you accuse of shady behaviour.

I monitor my own links and if I find something I question, I deal with a program owner directly, and in private. I just can't see anything beneficial from public accusations.

I'm happy with it this way.

I know that glitches are possible but I am educated enough to be able to take what he posts as one piece of 'data' only.

If I happen to promote a program and get amazing results with it and so do many others in this thread then we'd be more open to a discussion with the affiliate owner/manager here.

The data in that case would be:

1- My own stats
2- What others have to say in this thread (affiliates)
3- How the program owner handles it
4- Past GFY searches on the program
5- Lucas' test.

I would look at it as one piece of the overall picture and so I am happy he is doing this publicly.

So instead of warning other webmasters you better go directly to program and get your money straight leaving all the other webmasters in the dark?
Do you think sponsor will compensate all the others when you report them shaving? No, they will compensate only you and continue to shave others.
"keeping it quiet" is caring only about yourself and screwing the rest.

mineistaken: No, I am saying that my first inclination if I see a problem is to deal with people I work with directly, and discreetly rather than running to a public board and making accusations.

Incidentally, I was just speaking to some other webmasters and wondered how long it take for someone to spin my thoughts on professionalism / professional courtesy to something negative. Only 21 minutes, thanks :thumbsup

I owe you a drink Robert. I expected on GFY that people would mistakenly claim you were 'in favor of shaving' since you posted that people should be professionals - just because that's what the mob always does... but I never expected it would take less than 30 minutes. :1orglaugh

RUC is a fucking joke. anyone who still promotes them deserves to get assfucked

Of course others benefit from public information. My question was what benefit will Lucas get from it? One would assume it damages his image with other programs, and certainly it is conceivable he gets terminated from the ones he accuses of wrong doing.

So yes, others benefit from his testing, but what does he get out of it? He's the one spending money. Are all of the people waiting with anticipation of the results going to line up and send him money to at least recover the cost of the test joins he is making for their benefit? Somehow I seriously doubt it.

nevermind.... I was on my phone (phone page looked good). Vendo looks to be another European 3rd party :(

Now I have nothing positive to say. :Oh crap

Some of us are interested in the integrity of the community, and don't see any point in being a "professional" in a profession filled with scammers.

An affiliate program has a responsibility to accurately track and pay for referrals. They should be ready to have that tested at any time, and if they fail the test, intentionally or otherwise then they don't deserve any level of public confidence than what their theft or negligence has caused the result of that test to be.

Lucas is not damaging anyone's business by pointing out flaws. The business is damaging itself and Lucas is just pointing it out. They should have tested on their own.

Sharing a personal experience is not an accusation.

It benefits the affiliates that use this forum...reallyusefulcash is now on my "do not promote" list and I'm sure other affiliates will see this and be thankful teencat did this.

+ 1 :thumbsup

Flower kid, Rastan, Barry-xlovecam, Roald, pompousjohn, Danny Deepwood

All program owners in this thread who were confident enough to say, "Go ahead"

As for the cost of the test joins, I'd be willing to be part of a pool.

Programs won't dare shave him :2 cents:

They won't shave him anyway. They are competing with all other programs to get his traffic. If they pay him less, he sends his traffic to someone who pays him more.
The rest is nonsense really. :2 cents:

Yes I read this.

If a company shaves but gives me the best ROI out of all the programs I push I will likely still push to them but I DO CARE if they shave.

That shaved money is my money and when times are good (2006) I put it away for when times are bad (2014).

That assumption is based on the fact that there are many other similar sponsors who can convert.

Very difficult to find these days.

No it is not. If there is only ONE sponsor like that who converts... they are the highest paying sponsor available. Whether they shave or not. Whether they are pretty or not. They are the only $/click so they are the highest $/click. You either promote them, or make a site to compete with them. :2 cents:

If you tell me you would send more traffic to a site that pays you much less because you think the site paying you more shaved you (and still paid you more) I will note your decision and simply stop talking to you. :1orglaugh

$ per click. It's the most basic math there is, and it's the only math that matters.

The *only* exceptions are:

1 - If the site is damaging your brand (i.e. shady hidden xsells, card banging etc etc)

2 - If the cost of creating the clicks they convert is much higher than the cost of creating clicks that will convert elsewhere.

I believe he approached JT a few times on multiple boards about his mysterious decline in sales. JT responded as though he was being ambushed and told him to address his concerns through proper channels. I can only assume TC did and wasn't satisfied with the theoretical explanations he received IE your traffic turned to shit overnight, etc.

Maybe they will throw in 'Bonus Sales' to keep him sweet :2 cents:

Wrong, I am not saying he is for shaving.
I am saying that IF program is shaving talking in privately would be bad karma when keeping in mind that other webmasters would continue to be shaved.
And IF program is not shaving and there is legit reasons there is no big deal for those reasons made public.

This is what I was talking about - you care only about yourself (or him in this case). While we are talking about the bigger picture and doing good research for everybody.
He is not doing this to "profit" himself, that is the main thing you should understand. He is doing this for the forum community as well.

How is he doing anything for the community? He knows his $/click from each program. That does very little to help you determine what your $/click will be... unless he shares his traffic sources and marketing campaign methods (and assuming you can duplicate them).

Let's say TC earns .23 cents per click. That means you will earn X per click.

What is X?

X is the ONLY number that matters.... and TC's stats do little to solve it for you.

Threads like these just push sponsors and professional affiliates apart (Robwod's point). They do absolutely zero to educate anyone because you already have the only two numbers you need. How many clicks did you send to a program, and how much did they pay you?

It's either true or it's not. No one has damaged RUC yet. They have a chance to come in here and explain and show how it is a misunderstanding or how they will make it right. If they handle it right they could turn this into something positive. At least in my eyes.

This is part of what is wrong with this industry. No people should not have to shut up and take it when they are cheated. No someone should not have to get permission to post things like this. No someone does not owe it to the sponsor to ask for an explanation first. It's the sponsor's duty to check these things themselves first and others have a right to know about it. If a sponsor gets all bent out of shape over a legitimate occurrence like this then they aren't a good business in the first place. It's just like all the businesses bitching about Yelp reviews. Usually the ones bitching are the biggest scumbags. Good businesses get people to defend them and everyone knows they are good. In the same way good sponsors do not fear scrutiny.

I appreciate the info. I know others do. You don't. Well okay. But everyone doesn't think like you. We run our businesses differently. It's our choice. Personally it means a lot to me whether or not someone is cheating me. My business model is usually long term to where current $/click values isn't my only concern.

For fucks sake, most of you cunts have only ever seen a test join in your stats

you're more than welcome to test any of our sites :)

Wrong. People making accusations need to have proof first. That's why nobody is allowed to go around posting 'I'm pretty sure you are a rapist'

As for Yelp, I've been hired several times to answer bad reviews for companies. They aren't answering bad reviews because they are hard working business owners who care deeply about what yelp readers think. They are hiring me to answer Yelp reviews because paying me costs less than the amount they earn by combating negative reviews. It's simple cost/benefit analysis.

Money divided by clicks = value

The rest is just another GFY dog and pony show to smear brands that idiots will 'hate' without any factual reason to do so :2 cents: