Removal of Myvouchercodes from Play.com

[dougs]

Tweet

If I was PLAY and I was sick of having someone stick there fingers up at me I would make their life a pain. By making my issues public I could maybe help other merchants to make MVC's life a pain.

The press don't need to read the press to see the issues when the IAB are reporting massive increase in problems.

Doug

[kcheung]

No direspect to any one here, and certainly not taking sides, but surely, if you know the voucher code thing is a contentious issue then the solution is very simple.

distribute a regular perminent discount code, specifically for discount code affiliates that has no expiery date, and covers all products within the merchants margins.

we aready know that any codes will eventually find their way onto all the discount code sites anyways, so rather than trying to fight it, why not just take advantage of this.

we've put this action in place for many of our clients and it reduces the challenges that discount codes create.

Really, if you haven't factored in the very fact that discount code affiliate are going to do this anyways, then maybe its time to look at how the campaign was planned in the first place?

If a merchant doesn't want a code then thats fine too, just don't have one, the point is if it's factored in what a discount code will do at the beginning then its going to be less trouble later on.

Point to note, every affilite is give the discount code, so its not just the discount code affiliates that benefit from having the code, and because theres no expiery content affiliates won't have to stress about re-writing content all the time.


specifically in relation to Mark, and MVC, I've spoken to him where we've had expired codes, and he's been more than willing to remove any expired codes literally whilst I was on the phone with him.

[tijan]

I think play.com needs to apologise publicly for the unhealthy public debate that arose from unnecessary and disgusting public shaming in a matter that ought to have been handled confidentially, professionally and privately.

[buttersd]

Well i've just spent a fair while reading this post from start to finish and there are certainly some interesting points made.

I think when you name and shame you have to be very careful that you're not just picking on one affiliate when there could be many others doing the same.

I thought i'd do a little bit of research and within 2 minutes of searching on Google i found two other sites advertising Play both of which were displaying out of date codes. Surely if you're going to name and shame one affiliate you should make sure there aren't others doing the same???

[dougs]

Displaying wrong codes is not the issue, PLAY obvioulsy have been having this fight with MVC for ages.......they just got sick

[BFG 9000]

I think play.com needs to apologise publicly

What on earth have play.com done wrong?
If you're referring to the first post in this thread, I cannot imagine that they demanded that Summit made the announcement.


TTFN

BFG

[tijan]

Displaying wrong codes is not the issue, PLAY obvioulsy have been having this fight with MVC for ages.......they just got sick

If they got sick they should be shaming their network for incompetency of addressing the issue unless the affiliate is only working directly with play.com. It should'nt take less than a second to suspend an affiliate and No network will tell you, youre on your own. So why the headache?

[dougs]

MAny merchants deal direct with their large affiliates and really just use the network for trackings and payments.

I would imagine PLAy had direct relationships with MVC and have a sour taste in their mouth

Doug

[bapages]

I think from my days studying contract law that Play has left themselves open to legal action from Mark for breach of the implied terms of privacy to contract, and the public display here is in clear breach from Play and arguably indirectly the network that represents Play and MVC.

[dougs]

Interesting legally let us see what happens......greater issue is still that MVC will now be sorting out things as I am sure many other merchants are now looking at this thread and wondering what to do with MVC.

Doug

[tijan]

What on earth have play.com done wrong?
If you're referring to the first post in this thread, I cannot imagine that they demanded that Summit made the announcement.


TTFN

BFG

Who is Summit and who is Play.com. If and only if Summit is a PR agency having the right to represent play.com and have made an unhealthy announcement on behalf of its client (play.com). The question of demanding summit to make the announcement is not for affiliates to answer. It is still a play.com announcement.

[ChrisBishop]

Irrelevant of the activity; a public forum is certainly not a place to openly discuss specific affiliate terminations from a programme. This is private and confidential communication and never should the actual affiliate be named.

We all (networks, agencies, publishers & merchants) are trying to bring up the level of respect and professionalism within the industry and this is a complete throw back to the Wild West Days!

When the trade press see this, the voucher code model and whole affiliate industry will definitely receive derogatory and negative comments.

Chris

[Mogga]

distasteful? maybe but i can think of plenty of voucher related things that leave a bad taste in my mouth also and the only solid action ive seen is this one (if true)

I think the news is vital to be made public for all disheartened affiliates who've been asking networks and merchants to take a stand on this sort of thing.

[BASILF]

I think from my days studying contract law that Play has left themselves open to legal action from Mark for breach of the implied terms of privacy to contract, and the public display here is in clear breach from Play and arguably indirectly the network that represents Play and MVC.

There is no contract with play - the contract is with the network and MVC.

[Qui Gon Jinn]

Whatever side opinions fall on, it looks like MVC is being hung, drawn & quartered on this thread. Maybe it would have been more appropiate if Play / Summit said they had removed some commonly known voucher code sites and the reasons pertaining to it. These lifetime ban on voucher affiliates for this or that or brand bidding or whatever, jeez you get less sentences for GBH & murder. There are also big differences between intent, ignorance and simply innocently unaware.

Lets get some perspective this, re punishment fitting the crime. Though there maybe deemed by some improper practice. If a merchant loses tracking or is late paying an invoice or a network doesn't detect tracking or changes the t&cs without notification, often little is done for accountability, but hey let the heavy hammer of justice in a kangeroo court smite poor affiliate souls, or should we be smiting the almighty smiter.

So Smite Me Almighty Smiter, as for Play.com, as a customer it's a great site, as an affiliate program I think the commission is rubbish, but the agency is proactive with the program which is a plus.