Becky is it really that much to ask? A few fhgs, some banners of different sizes? Most serious programs are providing this anyway. Why does asking for it make me a bad webmaster or a "lazy overpaid" webmaster?
Ive asked programs for content before now, most just give me access to the site. They give me content and i make sales with that content. Its a good partnership. Whats wrong with that?
Marc,Originally Posted by marcjacob
Becky isnt talking about you, and neither am i, specifically we are talking about the 95% of affiliates who do expect above and beyond what everyone else needs which unfortunately, is almost every affiliate these days because we have (for want of a better word) 'bred' that mentality in to them over the past 5+ years.
The ones who expect program owners to update their FHG collection with 1000's of FHGs every day, the ones who expect program owners to update their free content with 100 additional sets every day, the ones who expect program owners to build and submit their sites for them, the ones who expect program owners to pay them $100 instantly by Epassporte for a free trial membership, these are the affiliates that make up 95% of all programs affiliate base and these are the affiliates that are lazy and frankly, not of any worth to a program.
You (and those like you) on the other hand, who only wants a few FHGs, updated banners, and fair payouts based on the amount of sales you can send, make up the remaining 5% of affiliate in every program and these are the ones that should be building up a loyalty with as Becky mentioned in her post.
Regards,
Lee
I know! It was an example :shitpoke:
I never suggested that you were overpaid or lazy. I am merely commenting on the fact that most affiliates that demand the most work out of a sponsor by providing all of these tools are the least productive of the group. I am saying that there has to be a line drawn, a balance found between what a sponsor will do for an affiliate and what the affiliates must do for themselves.
I provide free content when I can (keep in mind that if you don't produce your own, the cost of providing to webmasters is higher than if I was only adding it to my member's areas). I provide FHGs, FHSs, I participate with free hosting programs like revshare hosting, etc. And, I pay per signup. I take on the costs of all this along with the high commission that then takes me approximately 3-4 months to earn back by the customer. But, when I do all of this and then see the same webmasters jumping back and forth between programs, it's discouraging to say the least. After doing all of this, what more does it take to keep webmasters loyal to your program?
Not much, that would keep most webmasters who can sell loyal i think. BTW the Lazy and Overpaid was from Lee, not aimed at me i know but he was saying that 50% is overpaid and that all affiliates are lazy these days. I think asking for the tools you offer isnt lazy, its productive. Asking for 50% minimum isnt over paid, we work hard to get the sales.
Remember also that webmasters dont earn a bean unless the make sales. So an unproductive webmaster cant possible be over paid if their making nothing.
Lees point is that you should pay webmasters who make less sales as little as 25% and mine is most webmasters wouldnt pee on that, and i dont think thats unreasonable.
Wow, this thread is a clusterfuck. Maybe my comprehensions skills are shot to hell but I'm more confused now. Lol.
Because?
Regards,
Lee
It's not about causing conflict.
It's simply a business decision.
Is an affiliate that sends us 1 sale a month sending us a sale we could not otherwise get ourselves? I don't think so. And so, we close off our affiliate program to the 100 (out of 1400) affiliates that send 95% of all affiliate signups because we feel that distributing that remaining 5% amongst ourselves and our top 100 affiliates is better for us and them.
Some people seem to think higher and higher and higher payout commissions is the only good way to appeal to affiliates.
I decided here that what was best for us and our top-producing affiliates was a more streamlined affiliate program in which those that produce the best get access to the entire pie, so to speak. A top affiliate is now one of the only affiliates, the only places that can promote our site, the only places displaying any free content we provide, the only places sending folk through their referral codes, so on.
It's about investing more in those quality affiliates, rather than distributing evenly through all affiliates, potentially at the expense of those that are doing the most for you.
CorbinFisher's Amateur College Men
OUCH! Kick out 1300 of your affiliates? The backlash would be enormous! How about just closing the program to new affiliates and just actively recruiting new big-traffic guys instead?
Plus, that additional 1 signup is going to cost a program owner a LOT less than 50% of the sale value that the affiliate would have been paid
Regards,
Lee
Another thing I think is fascinating is the idea that a sponsor program that makes itself exclusive-access is "elitist". I think that reflects upon a warped sense of entitlement that exists all over the affiliate world.
I view CorbinFisher.com as a corporation, and our affiliates as our franchises. We invest in them, they invest in us. We do have a mutual partnership, which is precisely why I decided to close off our affiliate program and make it invite-only.
That enables us to have customized, individualized, unique and original campaigns with every single remaining affiliate and work more and more with them, as opposed to possibly spending too much effort on an affiliate whose returns wouldn't be worth it.
Affiliates can represent sponsors - they can be the source of a surfers first impression of a sponsor. So controlling how you're being presented to surfers by affiliates is key.
How can a sponsor program with 1400 affiliates possibly track things to make sure people are being honest, ethical, and legal in how they promote you? You can't.
Too many franchises alse produce self-cannibalization, where franchises are no longer generating new business but just fighting amongst one another for business. Limiting franchises helps prevent that.
There is no divine right to promote a sponsor. That sponsor is perfectly entitled to pick and choose whatever affiliates they want or not have an affiliate program at all. The notion that when you luanch a paysite, you're now obliged to have an affilaite program almost as some sort of public service or bound duty is ludicrous.
As is the notion that every affiliate is worth 50%, I think. And I think that sponsor programs that exist to cater to the webmaster instead of to the surfer end up costing the industry in the long run by creating cynical, skeptical surfers that have likely been burned in the past and made distrustful of paysites, all because someone earned a huge commission off of them.
CorbinFisher's Amateur College Men
Jim,
Why? Its easier to work with the top performers you already have in a program than to go out and recruit top performers from another program.
After all, if your current top performers are happy making 50% of each sale and rebill, why try getting a top performer from a PPS program thats going to cost you more than what you are currently paying out? It just doesnt make sense from a profit standpoint.
Regards,
Lee
I actually think the backlash is acceptable. You'd be amazed how many people have come up to actually express how impressed they were with the decision and how they wish they were in the position to do the same.
You have to understand, of those 1300 that will be leaving probably 800 haven't even sent a sale in a year. The cost of losing the remaining ones that do sent the occasional sale, along with any backlash, is far-outweighed by the benefits of doing it all.
Mind you, I'd not suggest every sponsor program try the same thing. Obviously people should look at their numbers and situation and it's up to them. But I think it will benefit us in the long run - the long run not being too far off in the future, even.
CorbinFisher's Amateur College Men
I guess UKnakedmen.com is an unique position. Our affiliate program was "invite only" until recently. The original invitees are extremely productive and send high-quality traffic that converts very well. The affiliates that joined after we opened up the affiliate program don't send nearly as much traffic but it converts well.
And opening up the program hasn't added any additional labor or cost on our end. So what's the big deal? No one has demanded anything unreasonable. And if an affiliate did ask for something unreasonable, we just wouldn't comply. Simple.
Geez, I'm not talking about blowing someone just so they'll join your program. Lol. I'm just merely suggesting that you drop someone an email and ask them if they are interested in becoming an affiliate. It worked for us.
If you offer a quality product, people will want a piece of the action AND you won't have to bend over backwards to make them happy
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks