Quote Originally Posted by Xstr8guy View Post
I've been holding my tongue because I think there is at least a little merit in this discussion. But comparing every affiliate to JUB is absolutely INSANE! They are the exception... not the rule. Instead of pooping on the little guy, why not pay JUB 90% commission? It's the same logic.
JUB is definitely the exception, I agree. But there are a number of affiliates out there just like them when it comes to the nature of traffic they refer (with regards to both quantity and quality) and the extent to which their own sites are developed. Certainly not everyone can be expected to be a JUB, or BananaGuide or Queerclick or the like.

You mentioned "Why not pay JUB 90% commission?" but that's kind of exactly what I'm getting at. Why should 50% be the base starting point, and then it all goes up from there?

Why not something like what Lee mentioned - start at 30% and slide up to 50% depending on performance? Why is 50% the base amount?

I think there are many affiliates worthy of more than 50%, just as I think there are money deserving of far less. But commissions only slide upwards due to sponsors competing with one another for the webmaster vote, as opposed to it being a reflection of real value delivered.