Comments on: New AzoogleAds Referral Terms Screw Affiliates

By: Anthony

Anthony — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 15:01:20 +0000

I think I understand their point of viewing. Based upon reasoning from observed facts it is a big problem for providers to pay all of their customers (> 10000) to manage them and give them their revenue. So, they want to make their work lesser with using this item.

By: Chris Bloczynski

Chris Bloczynski — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 18:11:28 +0000

The requirement for the $1000 monthly minimum revenue is really just a barrier to entry for newer affiliates. From a corporate standpoint, it’s easier to manage and make payments to your top 10% of affiliates for referrals than it is to manage making thousands of smaller payments. I remember when I was brand new to affiliate marketing… I would see networks that wouldn’t pay out until you had made $100 in sales, and I’d be thinking to myself, “Oh, great.” The barrier to entry seemed so high, even then.

I think that this corporate feeling new policy makes sense for Azoogle, in a corporate kind of way. I understand what they think they’re trying to do. I don’t agree with it, though…. I enjoy working with networks that take a more “high-touch” approach and embrace their affiliates no matter what. Setting such a high barrier to entry will definitely discourage newer affiliates from working to build referrals, and the reduction from lifetime payments to the new 6 month payment structure will certainly discourage some people from deciding to promote Azoogle offers. It’s sort of like spraying weed killer and chemicals around the roots of a tree… I think that limiting their relationship to their top-level affiliates and disregarding smaller afiliates will kill off lots of potential profits for Azoogle and inhibit it’s growth.

By: Chris Bloczynski

Chris Bloczynski — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:45:41 +0000

I was totally thinking the same thing. How funny!

By: Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:36:26 +0000

I have my “Network Reviews” section, and a review on AzoogleAds was never done. I don’t just hand out 5/5 rating, but I prefer to write reviews on networks that are better ranked.

By: Clint Lenard

Clint Lenard — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:07:44 +0000

I find a lot of irony in that corporate style “statement”. If the company were to screw the Affiliates out of Referral fees, who is going to trust them in the future?

Let’s get something straight here: their BUSINESS is run from AFFILIATES…

If Affiliates such as Zac is letting others know about this “change”, then guess what? More Affiliates will begin to wonder what’s next. It’s AFFILIATES who make Azoogle, NOT Publishers or consumers…

I find your reply very odd, to say the least.

I’ve seen a lot of companies fail to realize who is making them money… Publishers can’t make money if Affiliates do not trust the Network and cease to take action, right?

We, Affiliates, get paid commission for each sale, each referral. Who do Azoogle think they are to do something as ignorant as this?

It’s not just Zac speaking out about this… it’s MANY, MANY people and the company will have to see what happens next. This isn’t your offline “word of mouth” type atmosphere, guy. This is THE WEB… THE WEB is run by BLOGGERS.

When you make changes without notifying people and try to sneak it in, you’re running a shady practice, to say the least. No, if they DID send out notice, maybe they should have made it a little more CLEAR?

Good luck, Azoogle? Hope you change this back?

By: Freddy

Freddy — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:03:54 +0000

Zac: perhaps you might consider more flexibility in your ratings of products and services. It seems to me you always give things 5 full stars out of 5. Perhaps Azoogle would be an example of a company you would want to give 3 or 4 stars to as a result of this change you do not like.

By: Alex Z

Alex Z — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 17:17:52 +0000

I think a lot of people are missing something, probably because they don’t run an affiliate network The biggest problem with the referral program is not the 2%, nor is it the lifetime referral, it’s the fact that there are many “smart” people out there that have figured out how to take advantage of the program. How you may ask? Simple. Sign up for an account using your sister’s name and info. Then, use the referral link from your sister’s account, and refer yourself. Voila, you’re now earning an extra 2% on all of the revenue that you generate. No harm, no foul, right? The unfortunate reality is, there are many publishers that do this all the time. The $1000 threshhold is in place so that when someone refers a publisher, they are not doing it just to earn another 2% on their earnings, it’s not there to steal money from anyone. Just like we give publishers higher CPAs when they work closely with us, there are plenty of bloggers out there who refer publishers to us, and their lifetime referrals are not going anywhere, and might in fact increase.

I wonder how long after this post it’ll take for other networks to start reviewing their referral commissions to see how much extra $ they’ve paid out for no reason

By: abhishek arora

abhishek arora — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 17:04:13 +0000

old news Zac ! Ruck at cashtactics beat you to it!

By: Kristy

Kristy — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:07:18 +0000

Thanks for the warning Zac! You’re not the only fish in the sea now…

By: nickycakes

nickycakes — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:23:15 +0000

I’m averaging over $40 per verified signup on neverblue, dunno what you’re doin.