Clarification required for merchants who blanket ban voucher code sites

[Leeky]

Tweet

This is getting a very boring argument so im not arguing just require some clarification from merchants who blanket ban "voucher code sites" or refuse to pay out because the sale has come from a "voucher code site" even though that sale has not come from a voucher code.

Can you please state on your email (the ones you send out to all affiliates) whether you will not pay out or don't want promoting on either..

Sites which contain even a few voucher codes.
Sites which contain more than a certain amount of voucher codes.
Sites which mainly contain voucher codes
Sites which only contain voucher codes (is there any?)

We have a number of sites which you may refer to as "voucher code sites", but not a single one contains mainly voucher codes, they mainly contain offers.. 1/3 voucher codes 2/3 offers.

If you don't make this clear, then reject scommission, this is classed as non payment and merchants who are non payers will be advertised and treated as such.

Cheers

Lee

[Leeky]

Here is a good example of why clarification is needed...

Helen from GLTC says I was rejected because my sites promote voucher codes, then today GLTC release a voucher code which starts 17th April, now although this voucher code has been entered into our database (not by me) im not allowed to use it, but you can bet the majorty of the 200+ affiliates who use our database can?

Complete madness!

Lee

[lizdav]

Lee,

I think that merchants just don't understand how your platforms work and they do treat you unfairly.

Hands up ... I am an iCodes user, not in a big way, but as a part of my digging around looking at different scripts and tools and writing about them.

So ... that out of the way, I can declare a small interest, but I can objectively see that you are adding value for merchants by creating the linking methods and promotion materials that can be served up on other content sites too ... and presently doing it for FREE, only substituting your own links when the affiliate doesn't have a relationship with the merchant and funding that FREE service through that route where possible.

I wonder how sales would dop off from other sites that use iCodes if you suspended the platform or started charging everyone and affiliates couldn't push out the same number of offers for merchants?

Nobody has a problem wth Easy Content Units and I see you as an aggregator in the same way to make Easy Special Offers and Easy Promotion possible.

With the latest update to the iCodes hosted sites, it isn't just a directory any more either ... and it never really was if people used it to the full, but now people really can can break out of the directory style of templates, making it an undoubtedly rich content platform.

Very shortsighted by merchants who reject you, in my opinion.

[Leeky]

Thanks very much for the support Lizdav :-)

We had the same problem with pagerank10.co.uk, I would get rejected by merchants all the time, but then if I contacted them or the network to say shall we ban any affiliate from promoting that merchant on pagerank10 the answer was always no or a reply which didn't say yes or no??? im completely baffled???

OMG wouldn't even let me on their network, yet when I asked them "shall I remove all OMG links from pagerank10" the email was completely ignored.

It appears some merchants want to be promoted really, but also want a good excuse not to pay out if they are starting to get a bit skint...

Lee

[John Jupp]

I agree with you Lee.

I sent the following to Heal's account manager.

This needs further statement and clarification.

1. a) An affiliate has lots of sites. One happens to be a site with details on free delivery, free gifts, special offers, discount codes or a competition. Sometimes just a listing of a merchant as a retailer with a brief description. This is IAB compliant regarding click methodology.

1. b) An affiliate has lots of sites. One happens to be a site with details on free delivery, free gifts, special offers, discount codes or a competition. Sometimes just a listing of a merchant as a retailer with a brief description. This is also IAB compliant regarding click methodology but does not have click to reveal code and visit site, instead displaying code if available with a standard link if they wish to visit the merchant.

2. What is a Discount/Voucher Code affiliate?

Does this statement therefore mean that:

a) An affiliate with a site displaying discount codes and other offers is banned from the program?

b) An affiliate with a site displaying discount codes and other offers is required not to display the merchant on that site?

c) An affiliate with a site predominantly displaying discount codes and other offers is required not to display the merchant on that site?

c) i) What is "predominantly"?

d) An affiliate with a site with more than one merchant must not feature this merchant on the same site because the other merchant offers a discount code which is displayed?

e) Is this a termination of affiliation or just a non approval of a site?

The statement -
After a long process of assessing the incremental value brought about by the Discount/Voucher Code Affiliates on the Heal’s affiliate program, the decision has been made that Heal’s will no longer be working with these Affiliates.

Can all Discount/Voucher Code affiliates please remove all Heal’s links from their site with immediate affect. We would like to monitor this affect from Monday 20th April and therefore require no Discount/Voucher Code Affiliates to be active on the Heal’s program.

This is a termination of affiliation. Without consideration as to other sites or what actually constitutes a Discount/Voucher site.

Please supply concise and accurate terminology and statement.

Kind regards

John Gilbert-Jupp

[Hero]

I think what merchants mean is that they don't want vouchers listed, unless they have asked you to list a voucher...

You know where this stems from - categorisation. This obsession (from agencies, merchants, networks) with categorising affiliates in accordance with their "main" promotional method, so they can analyse their performance.

Merchants have every right to stop working with whoever they want, provided they are well informed. And, usually, they are not.

[DanielAustin]

Surely this is a network issue when looking at segmenting affiliates, the current rules presume that each affiliate only owns one site and has one method of promoting a merchant we all know this inst the case.

An affiliate maybe listed in a network as a voucher code site as this is where the majority of their traffic is coming from, this may not be the only way the affiliate is promoting this merchant.

Networks need to look at ways at segmenting the traffic as opposed to blanket punishing the affiliates, or affiliates being open and listing all the sites they have and when they apply for a programme a check box next to each one saying Approve or Non Approval, its down to the site rather than the affiliate as a whole.

Any thoughts.

[kier]

Networks need to look at ways at segmenting the traffic as opposed to blanket punishing the affiliates, or affiliates being open and listing all the sites they have and when they apply for a programme a check box next to each one saying Approve or Non Approval, its down to the site rather than the affiliate as a whole.

We already offer this functionality, you can approve or deny on a campaign level not just for the affiliate as a whole. It's not always practical for an affiliate to list *all* their sites though.

[DanielAustin]

We already offer this functionality, you can approve or deny on a campaign level not just for the affiliate as a whole. It's not always practical for an affiliate to list *all* their sites though.

Very nice thanks Kier.

I don't think being practical comes into it, you cant have it both ways. "Don't ban me from your programme as I have other sites but its not practical for me to tell you about them", there has to be some middle ground. If affiliates own hundreds of sites then of course lets not list them all but it seems to me it would be an advantage for an affiliate to list as many as they can, stop this kind of thing happening.

[toast8172]

Could the networks have a tick box system set up for affiliates to select the methods they are going to use to promote potential merchants, such as voucher codes , PPC etc.
The merhchants could then when joining the network have the same list where they can tick the methods they are happy with, which could then generate a message for affiliates that merchant x does not want to be listed on a voucher code site, and to merchants that affiliate x operates voucher code sites.
This would then enable both parties to communicate before banning the affiliate and all their methods.
Provided the affiliate does not list them on that type of site from their portfolio then surely the merchant shouldn't have a problem with it. And if a sale does come from one of their voucher sites it would just be declined, but all other sales should be honoured.

Having rambled on I think this is almost what happens anyway, so think I have probably just missed my own point!

[kcheung]

Merchants have every right to stop working with whoever they want, provided they are well informed. And, usually, they are not.

this is the crux of the issue, even for some of the larger agencies there's not enough education in to HOW to use voucher code sites, so where brand becomes a factor for a merchant all of a sudden they get panicky about 'incremental sales', it boils down to a lack of transparency and education.

[confuscius]

I have never understood why a merchant does not simply say something like 'If the punter used 'A' voucher code then you get x%, if the punter did not use 'A' voucher code then you get x%+y%' as an affiliate - it would not matter whether I ran a voucher code site or not it would matter whether a customer used 'A' voucher or not, regardless of whose voucher it was. No cookie, no payment. Cookie present, payment made. Just set out the method and everyone is clear, instead of apparaently deciding that the wind blows in different directions every day of the week.

I would be interested to know why what appears to me to be an apparently simple system has or could not be adopted across the whole industry. At least we would know where we stand and we are then free to do what we want without multiple accounts and ridiculous decline decisions based on simple lack of knowledge or understanding.

Please enlighten me, gurus.

[Sabcom]

Am I missing something here. Why do merchants issue codes if they are going to ban sites?

[Hero]

the current rules presume that each affiliate only owns one site and has one method of promoting a merchant we all know this inst the case.

How many times have you encountered affiliates like the one you describe, Daniel?
I know of no affiliates like that.

[DanielAustin]

How many times have you encountered affiliates like the one you describe, Daniel?
I know of no affiliates like that.

If I am honest a few times and you tend to find these are the quality guy as they have one huge site or method of promoting a merchant but that's not the point I was making, the original post was about clarification from merchants as to why they blanket ban voucher code sites. I was trying saying that currently an affiliate can be listed in a network as a voucher code site as that maybe the main source of revenue for that affiliate, a merchant then comes along and decides they don't want to work with voucher code sites and hits the expire button for that affiliate, without taking the time to find out if the affiliate in question is actually promoting you via their voucher code site or via one of the 25 other sites they own.

The merchant is presuming that because the affiliate has a voucher code site or is listed via the network as a voucher code affiliate then this is how they promote you which we know ins't always the case, as Ken rightly points out it is down to education and transparency from agencies, networks and affiliates, everyone involved in the mix.

Due to a lot of voucher sites using a lot of questionable methods in the past such as click to reveal, stealing codes, I frames etc it has painted a bad picture to a less educated outsider looking in, most peoples first reaction would be to just say "ban them full stop"

What we are really talking about her is educating the industry and people involved in the best way to use codes, the fact that Frostie and others have been banned from a programme and promote the merchant via a different site shows exactly what we are up against.

This is what we should be focusing on.