Quote Originally Posted by CorbinFisher_BD View Post
I'm curious as to what people think about the ethics involved in offering different options to surfers based on where they were referred from.

For example, is it entirely ethical for a surfer to not be given any idea that:

- Others are able to join at a non-recurring option
- Others are able to not see exit consoles/upsells/popups
- Others are being given cheaper join options

I think this question certainly falls within the scope of this discussion. It's just that... all too often I think many of the demands of certain affiliates can result in surfers being treated unfairly.
Corbin,

You bring up a VERY good point. Is it ethical to the surfer? Bottom line - no.

I use Pimproll extensively for one main reason - I can control the price. I know what price plan I can toss an AEN member into, which is different than what I can toss a tgp surfer into, which is different than what my very first banner on my link list will go into, which is different than what .... you get the idea. It's about maximizing revenue in my case.

But then ethics works both ways. You have to ask yourself is it ethical to an affilaite who can send you 100 signups a month to send X% of them into a program that he gets nothing but 1/2 the first month minus processing fees.

I am NOT saying this against you at all. Just that you brought up ethics.

IMHO IF a program insists on offering a join page that offers a non recur option than that progra should be either offering a way that the webmaster can elect not to send to a join page with a non recur (webmasters should know their traffic enough to know if it will convert w/o it) or IF the program insists on a non recur, then they should offer PPS.

There are a couple sites out there that I would love to market and could send a 100 or so signups a month to, but can't justify it because of low per cost members on other sites that used this model. it just doesn't work for me.