(potentially?) controversial topic - Sponsors vs Affiliates

[deanb]

Hmmm, I wonder if this isn't just a ploy to force under-performing affiliates to step up their promotion efforts to avoid being booted?

Well, based on his comments here, and others, i would guess otherwise. Maybe he hoped for that, but what I think that what Brian achieved, was to get his affiliates promoting other sponsers..

Maybe your thought was the origional goal, but I know for a fact, that affiliates have pulled the plug on Corbin Fisher because of his remarks...

[deanb]

affiliates have pulled the plug on Corbin Fisher because of his remarks...

then again, as remarked above, he doesn't care about 'their traffic' and might very well be the undeserved sales he is referring to.

[basschick]

personally i wouldn't pull a sponsor for remarks a rep makes on a board unless it's way out of line. me feeling someone is arrogant isn't even close to a reason to make less money - after all, i don't have to talk with the rep on a personal level.

[Carrie]

Some great posts made by both sides here.
Brian, I thought you were blatantly honest and to the point; that's refreshing. I also thought you explained everything very well and professionally. (Okay the one little dig at Squirt, not so professional, but I understand there's a history there.) I also like that you are not simply drawing a line and cutting off anyone below that line; you're putting more thought and review into it.

We've been discussing this extensively on another board and I do have a question - what of the affiliates who sign up, never send a sale, but who send a number of referred affiliates and make referral $$ each month? Will they be cut because of their own lack of traffic, or will they be kept because they have sent you productive webmasters and are promoting you in that sense?

Folks, try to step back and look at this objectively. It might be that you're too close to the situation to pull the emotional aspect out of it. Sponsors doing this will make their programs better for all involved. Less competition, less saturation and watering-down... hell, less free porn dragging down signups.
More sponsors should do this. It would be better for the industry as a whole. (Actually they should be "closed" from the get-go and develop their own traffic sources, but that's another thread. Becky's post on the future of ARS and her focus on developing internal traffic was quite eye-opening. Could be we'll see ARS making a move like this sometime in the next year or two?)

[tigermom]

Hey, Carrie, nice to see you here!

I've just posted something on another board, which is relevant to this thread as well, so I thought I'd repost here. The other thread was started over the fact that 20 new sponsors have opened their gates over the past weekend. It's addressing the phenomenon that so many people seem to think that a viable business model is buying tons of content, setting up a group of paysites (non-exclusive content on all), and launching an affiliate program with those, hoping to eventually make a buck with having lots of affiliates to promote them.

This is what I posted -
I think that when you rely on affiliates to promote your site, and you are working within a finite pool of affiliates, then this business model becomes real problematic over time. It's getting too saturated for program owners. And what happens next? they start competing over affilaites tooth and nail. They don't compete over customers, because they don't really have anything unique to offer as a paysite, just the same non-exclusive content others have. So, they compete over affiliates, assuming that the more, the better. And they start spoiling their affiliates. Free hosting? you got it! Free domains? you got it! Need us to write your blog posts for you and syndicate for you? Sure thing! Need more FHG's? more banners? how about we make banners specially for you? everything and anything is being given away to just any affiliate.

Then it gets to the point where some program owners get pissed off at having to spoil affiliates like that. Well, I think there's an easy enough solution. Just don't overpamper affiliates. Set your own limits, as a program owner, as to what you will or won't do for an affiliate. By all means, relate that to the amount of sales they drive, if you want to. Define some affiliates as Gold Affiliates, or whatever, and be in constant touch with these, offering the big players more help. With the others, let them bitch and moan about it if they can't promote your site without being provided 10,000 tools for it. I would say the single one thing a program needs to give affiliates is promo content. Even that is just if they have exclusive content that they can't buy anywhere and which truly reflect the product. Sort of like samples of the actual thing that we can show prospective clients. They don't need to be huge images and they don't need to be movies.

My advice to program owners would be this. Get real good paysites, something unique, something exclusive, something that actually converts well. Get good ratios. Promote your sites with no affiliates to begin with, polish your tours and get good convertions and good retention. Then, when you know you have a good product, and only then, start bringing in affilaites, slowly and gradually. Don't spoon feed them anything. Take serious affiliates, ones that know how to build their own sites, write their own blogs, create their own galleries, and lo and behold, maybe even create their own banners! The point should be to get affiliates joining you because -
1. Your site retains and converts.
2. You're honest and don't shave.

Thats it! No need for crazy payouts, Hummers as prizes or nakes girls at shows. Just get a good product that makes both of us money and be honest. Is all I would ask for.

[Lee]

I've just posted something on another board, which is relevant to this thread as well, so I thought I'd repost here. The other thread was started over the fact that 20 new sponsors have opened their gates over the past weekend. It's addressing the phenomenon that so many people seem to think that a viable business model is buying tons of content, setting up a group of paysites (non-exclusive content on all), and launching an affiliate program with those, hoping to eventually make a buck with having lots of affiliates to promote them.

Ive been following that thread over on NetPond (until Paul chimed in) also and i have to say, in my opinion, the fact that people are opening up affiliate programs hand over fist isnt the problem in any way, shape, or form.

The problem is that these programs are never going to be heard of again, and ultimately, they will fail.

The reason? Because a lot of these revshare program owners think they can open a program, make a post or two on the boards, offer FHGs, free sites, banners, blogs, etc etc and affiliates will promote them, thus contributing to what we're discussing here. It has become a staple of programs to do whatever their affiliates ask of them, to the point where now, if you launch a program without FHGs, nobody is going to promote you.

The other problem these programs are going to start seeing in the next few days is that if they dont have their own stable base of webmaster traffic, even if they offer affiliates the moon on a stick, they are still going to fail, because they are competing with the other 1000 affiliate programs offering the moon on a stick, in the same pool of affiliates.

There is a reason it took me 6 years to start my own affiliate program, i was more interested in laying the foundation of having a 'base' of potential affiliates, in a closed envirment to market the program to, something that almost every program that launches doesnt have.

In all honesty, if i had launched Condom Cash and not owned the largest gay marketing resource, it would have closed down within a month or two of launch because i wouldnt have been able to get affiliates other than the ones wanting PPS, free hosted promo out the wazoo, etc etc.

Regards,

Lee

[tigermom]

The reason? Because a lot of these revshare program owners think they can open a program, make a post or two on the boards, offer FHGs, free sites, banners, blogs, etc etc and affiliates will promote them, thus contributing to what we're discussing here. It has become a staple of programs to do whatever their affiliates ask of them, to the point where now, if you launch a program without FHGs, nobody is going to promote you.

The other problem these programs are going to start seeing in the next few days is that if they dont have their own stable base of webmaster traffic, even if they offer affiliates the moon on a stick, they are still going to fail, because they are competing with the other 1000 affiliate programs offering the moon on a stick, in the same pool of affiliates.

Well, we agree then And it's the sheer availablility of too many programs at this point that makes for such a hard competition between program owners. It makes them offer the moon on a stick, like you said, including increasinly high payouts too. And it's the wrong way to go, IMHO, because it attracts the wrong kind of affiliates to your program to begin with.

I have sponsors that offer little in terms of FHG's and banners, yes they offer kick-ass sites that convert and retain. Guess what? I'm promoting them more and more.

[pocoloco78]

- Carrie : Nice to see you in here. You are correct about the positive effects this will have. Good questions... hope someone is going to answer these. I am curious myself.

- Tigermom : You are so right. Affiliates asking for free hosting, custom made banners, hosted freesites, RSS Feeds, unlimited access to memberareas, etc... are probably the ones that can't depend on their own skills, which I think is bad for an affiliate.

Sponsors giving away all those things just to please the affiliates, are helping to ruin this market. Most affiliates I know just want a temp login to see what they will be selling, a few promopics and that is about it.

- That other post just made me smile.

[markwolff]

Hey, Carrie, nice to see you here!

I've just posted something on another board, which is relevant to this thread as well, so I thought I'd repost here. The other thread was started over the fact that 20 new sponsors have opened their gates over the past weekend. It's addressing the phenomenon that so many people seem to think that a viable business model is buying tons of content, setting up a group of paysites (non-exclusive content on all), and launching an affiliate program with those, hoping to eventually make a buck with having lots of affiliates to promote them.

This is what I posted -
I think that when you rely on affiliates to promote your site, and you are working within a finite pool of affiliates, then this business model becomes real problematic over time. It's getting too saturated for program owners. And what happens next? they start competing over affilaites tooth and nail. They don't compete over customers, because they don't really have anything unique to offer as a paysite, just the same non-exclusive content others have. So, they compete over affiliates, assuming that the more, the better. And they start spoiling their affiliates. Free hosting? you got it! Free domains? you got it! Need us to write your blog posts for you and syndicate for you? Sure thing! Need more FHG's? more banners? how about we make banners specially for you? everything and anything is being given away to just any affiliate.

Then it gets to the point where some program owners get pissed off at having to spoil affiliates like that. Well, I think there's an easy enough solution. Just don't overpamper affiliates. Set your own limits, as a program owner, as to what you will or won't do for an affiliate. By all means, relate that to the amount of sales they drive, if you want to. Define some affiliates as Gold Affiliates, or whatever, and be in constant touch with these, offering the big players more help. With the others, let them bitch and moan about it if they can't promote your site without being provided 10,000 tools for it. I would say the single one thing a program needs to give affiliates is promo content. Even that is just if they have exclusive content that they can't buy anywhere and which truly reflect the product. Sort of like samples of the actual thing that we can show prospective clients. They don't need to be huge images and they don't need to be movies.

My advice to program owners would be this. Get real good paysites, something unique, something exclusive, something that actually converts well. Get good ratios. Promote your sites with no affiliates to begin with, polish your tours and get good convertions and good retention. Then, when you know you have a good product, and only then, start bringing in affilaites, slowly and gradually. Don't spoon feed them anything. Take serious affiliates, ones that know how to build their own sites, write their own blogs, create their own galleries, and lo and behold, maybe even create their own banners! The point should be to get affiliates joining you because -
1. Your site retains and converts.
2. You're honest and don't shave.

Thats it! No need for crazy payouts, Hummers as prizes or nakes girls at shows. Just get a good product that makes both of us money and be honest. Is all I would ask for.

Nice post, Tigermom i totaly agree with what you are saying, I just launched my affiliate program last month, to new webmasters after 6 years of building my sites, fine tuning my designs and tours, and building lot's of quality and unique content. I have decided not to offer FHG's and special prizes etc, but have lot's of webmaster content, banners, and TGP templates. Hey if you are not going to be promoting CF anymore, i would love to have more webmasters like you in my program, i welcome you with open arms.

[CorbinFisher_BD]

We've been discussing this extensively on another board and I do have a question - what of the affiliates who sign up, never send a sale, but who send a number of referred affiliates and make referral $$ each month? Will they be cut because of their own lack of traffic, or will they be kept because they have sent you productive webmasters and are promoting you in that sense?

Hey Carrie,

Volume/sales #'s will only dictate a certain portion of which affiliates are retained. Others retentions will be determined by a multitude of other factors, including something abstract (or at least immeasurable as far as stats and straight up numbers go) such as branding value, our relationship with that webmaster, the type of site they have and the kind of traffic they cater to (even when it's not a huge amount) and other things.

This is about developing strategic partnerships, rather than indiscriminately and without discretion accepting affiliates. A webmaster that refers other webmasters could be an extremely valuable strategic partner.

[Becky]

(Actually they should be "closed" from the get-go and develop their own traffic sources, but that's another thread. Becky's post on the future of ARS and her focus on developing internal traffic was quite eye-opening. Could be we'll see ARS making a move like this sometime in the next year or two?)

ARS won't be going to private only, kicking out thousands of affiliates ever. That isn't the business model for that product at all. After all, ARS has led the way in offering more and more to affiliates over the years, first with $35 payouts, first with tons of niche sites, first with bonus payout days, first with rewards, first with BYOT, etc, etc. I do provide all of these still, and more, because I have to stay competitive in the affiliate market. As I said before, ARS is nearly 100% reliant on webmaster traffic and always has been. But, it's getting to the point where offering all of these tools required to get the attention of new affiliates is not working to attract new affiliates, or even retain current affiliates. That is why I have to consider my own internal promotions of my sites to balance this out. That definitely does not mean that I will be getting rid of affiliates. Just adding my own layer of traffic so that affiliate traffic/signup waves of activity don't adversely affect my bottom line.

My advice to program owners would be this. Get real good paysites, something unique, something exclusive, something that actually converts well. Get good ratios. Promote your sites with no affiliates to begin with, polish your tours and get good convertions and good retention. Then, when you know you have a good product, and only then, start bringing in affilaites, slowly and gradually. Don't spoon feed them anything. Take serious affiliates, ones that know how to build their own sites, write their own blogs, create their own galleries, and lo and behold, maybe even create their own banners! The point should be to get affiliates joining you because -
1. Your site retains and converts.
2. You're honest and don't shave.

It seems as if you are reading my business plans with this post I do plan on opening up a program, and it will be open only to those that can pass strict acceptance criteria. I'm doing this because I plan on investing a lot of time and money on development of the sites. I don't want to offer all the tools that are required to get the attention of affiliates. I don't want to lower the value of my content, which in turn will lower the overall income of my content to both me and my affiliates. The sites are going to be tested extensively with my own traffic before I ever let an affiliate send traffic to it. That way I know they are going to retain and convert and are worth the affiliates time and efforts to promote. And with strict acceptance criteria, I know that the affiliates that are sending traffic will do so because they believe in the product, because they understand it and will know how to promote it. It's definitely a win-win situation for us both.