Network Over-Rides

[Qui Gon Jinn]

Tweet

A topic totally plucked out of the air.

But the theme is network over-rides. The industry seems to have widely imposed or automatically given itself a 30% over-ride

Is this earned?

Shouldn't there be some kind of sliding scale basis?

Looking at the various levels on affiliate earnings

A) £100 per mth = network earns £360 per annum
B) £1000 per mth = network earns £3,600 per annum
C) £10000 per mth = network earns £36,000 per annum
D) £100000 per month = network earns £360,000 per annum

This is purely a rule of thumb that is:

In instance C) wouldn't you expect a dedicated affiliate manager working for you permanantly or at least between several affiliates.

In instance D) or between C) and D) I don't think any netork gives the support to warrant that amount.

Shouldn't there be some scheme in place whereby if you hit certain tiers, the affiliate is rewarded with a bonus or performance incentive.

I am not sure of all the instances, but where merchnats have these tiers in place, don't the network still receive an over-ride of the same proportion as that improved tier.

[morleymouse]

I like the idea of if the affiliate hits a certain amount the network gives them a cash bonus, after all the affiliate would be making them much more money.

So id vote yes for network bonuses.

The networks could just offer a level of support basis couldn't they? Different packages like, if the merchant has no aff. manager and nobody to really help out they take the starter package where the network gives them someone to manage the programme, set % rates and help out - obviously this would cost more.

Right up to where the merchant has an affiliate manager and plenty of help to get the programe going, the networks only needed for tracking which would cost less.

hm just a thought.

[Supercod]

Networks need to make money some place, lots of admin, programming and support time and systems are in place to deal with levels of affiliates that most merchants could not cope with and still sell products.

However I agree that with (c) there should be an affiliate manager for a small group of affiliates say 10 but only if they want that level of support because an affiliate manager dealing with 10 people is going to have loads more time for you and may end up becoming a "boss" like character constantly reviewing and going over what is happened in your account. I think the level of support they offer would need to be an option.

As for (d) well if you make me that level of money a month I hire you a PA that will work out your office, or if you don't want that someone who manages your household making sure kids are at school, dogs taken for a walk, bills are being paid and so on so you can get on with work

Plus I would imagine we would have all ready got you better deals with your merchant partners so you would be already on a better rate but when it's your birthday we send you a brand new car or something else you could buy yourself but would be happy to get as a gift

In short I don't think network over-rides are un-just, as I know the amount of work, systems and support that goes in to a small network never mind a large one, however I do think you would be totally mad not to reward your top partners when they start hitting high levels.

I know in one place alone I make them enough money for them to hire at least 2/3 members of staff just to support me alone

[Qui Gon Jinn]

I do totally agree with you Supercod. And don't think at all over-rides are unjust.

It's just trying to find the right balance where libertys are not taken.

[Frostie]

I agree with most, but I often think that it is best to have a dedicated point of contact for ALL programs for ALL affiliates. Even if a site is only in scenarios A or B, it would benefit the Affiliate if they had a single point of contact.

The main aim of the affiliate game, is to generate income, both for the affiliate and for the networks. So with this in mind, I think having a single affiliate manager for ALL sites generating income, would be great. The people who only earn £100 or £1000, could have potential to hit £10,000 etc, so why not nurture them and help them in every possible way?

I know its asking for a lot, and I understand that if 1 affiliate is making £17 per month, then forget it, but those that are hitting the £100-£1000 mark, maybe worth investing a bit of time in?

[Supercod]

Yeah not saying people not making top money should not have a point of contact for help and advice, what I think is not on is having 1 affiliate manager for 50,000 affiliates (not that there is actually 50,000 affiliates in the UK) yet have 10 merchant managers for 100 merchants.

If you making a network a sizable amount of money then they should have some resources to deal with you as a priority, over the guys that make £20 a month no offence to them

[Qui Gon Jinn]

For new comers, or affiliates who are genuinely very keen but not driving the revenue they desire. Maybe some kind of open workshops for them to regularly attend.

[Frostie]

I think the workshop is a fantastic idea - let me know when you organise the next one Only things is, do you think it will still attract the 'oldies' as well, as I am sure they will not want to miss out on anything. Then you just end up with G2G all the time - which isn't a bad thing!

If all the networks could get together, and not sell their own network above the others, but work towards the aim of educating affiliates, then this would be hugely valuable.

[Qui Gon Jinn]

Should we negotiate the over-rides with networks?

Depending on what you earn, should there be some kind of sliding scale.

1% to 10% Bonus if you earn between £1k and £10K a month

Depending on the merchant / network deal some merchants also pay management and consultancy fees to the network in addition to the over-ride.

So I think it's only fair some kind of bonus deal structure is in place for the affiliate.