Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24

Thread: Should The 3rd Party Processors Do This...

  1. #16
    Xstr8guy
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Dzinerbear View Post
    Tomaaaaaaaaaaato ... Tomahhhhhhto
    Who are you responding to?


  2. #17
    How long have you been gay?
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    90
    It seems to me that this is just something you have to live with if you process with CCbill and use their affiliate program software. If you want all the money, you have to change processors/affiliate software.


  3. #18
    You do realize by 'gay' I mean a man who has sex with other men?
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana.
    Posts
    21,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Becky View Post
    It seems to me that this is just something you have to live with if you process with CCbill and use their affiliate program software. If you want all the money, you have to change processors/affiliate software.
    Agreed, like if i switched to NATs CCBill/Epoch would send me all the payments and i would have to cut checks to my affiliates.

    In essence, even though it looks like people dont want the sponsor programs to get all the money, with a simple script install it can happen anyway, so why doesnt the processor just send the program funds from those affiliates who havent met the minimum payout and let the program handle paying affiliates those funds when they are requested or, let the processor take the affiliate funds once they have hit min payout/requested them from the clients next payment from the processor?

    Im not really seeing why people dont like this idea myself when it happens all the time anyway in the industry $0.02

    Regards,

    Lee


  4. #19
    Words paint the real picture gaystoryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    western canada
    Posts
    2,151
    Just because it happens all the time, doesn't make it right...

    If the 3rd party processor is keeping the money, never returning it to the reseller, they are wrong. After x amount of time a cheque should be cut and sent, account closed, just like banks do with inactive accounts. It isn't their money, and they send out a notice, because people forget. It's the law, least up here, and if they don't respond, then it goes into some reserve of some kind, that they don't get access to, but I think defaults to the Government.

    No response, then perhaps to the sponsor, but the 3rd party should after x amount of time, contact and then close the account.

    my two cents
    Webmasters: Add Custom Stories To Your Sites Custom Gay Stories

    My Blogs Gay Talk, Free Gay Fiction, Erotic Fiction Online


  5. #20
    Baghdad Bob
    Guest
    as long as i get my money i dont care it would be good for the program owner though to make more sites i think


  6. #21
    Xstr8guy
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by gaystoryman View Post
    Just because it happens all the time, doesn't make it right...

    If the 3rd party processor is keeping the money, never returning it to the reseller, they are wrong. After x amount of time a cheque should be cut and sent, account closed, just like banks do with inactive accounts. It isn't their money, and they send out a notice, because people forget. It's the law, least up here, and if they don't respond, then it goes into some reserve of some kind, that they don't get access to, but I think defaults to the Government.

    No response, then perhaps to the sponsor, but the 3rd party should after x amount of time, contact and then close the account.

    my two cents
    Does anyone know for sure that CCbill doesn't already do this? It seems to me that we are assuming quite a bit. It would be nice if someone from CCbill could come by and clear this up.


  7. #22
    Dzinerbear
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Xstr8guy View Post
    Who are you responding to?
    I was replying to Lee's: "Why shouldnt those funds be dispersed to the program owner and taken out of the next payout the program owner gets from the processor if and when the affiliates who are owed $20 asks for it?"

    Michael


  8. #23
    You do realize by 'gay' I mean a man who has sex with other men?
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana.
    Posts
    21,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Dzinerbear View Post
    I was replying to Lee's: "Why shouldnt those funds be dispersed to the program owner and taken out of the next payout the program owner gets from the processor if and when the affiliates who are owed $20 asks for it?"

    Michael
    So how do we stop sponsors using NATs from getting all the money?

    This is obviously something that affiliates feel strongly about, when are they going to start dropping NATs sponsors who cut their own checks and start using CCBill and Epoch only affiliate programs again?

    Regards,

    Lee


  9. #24
    You do realize by 'gay' I mean a man who has sex with other men?
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana.
    Posts
    21,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Xstr8guy View Post
    Does anyone know for sure that CCbill doesn't already do this? It seems to me that we are assuming quite a bit. It would be nice if someone from CCbill could come by and clear this up.
    No they dont, i have asked.

    The only time the funds would be released is if the affiliate asks for them or, the affiliate hits the min payout on their account, otherwise the funds just sit there indefinately.

    Regards,

    Lee


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •