Quidco no longer working with Affiliate Window

[Qui Gon Jinn]

Tweet

I ve sometimes thought, that affiliates (the introducer) should simply refer cashback customers as a sub affiliate, the introducer receives an override of the commission and be done with it. That way any affiliate can refer a customer for cashback. Would this eleviate potential problems.

I read Joes comments on & more or less agree with what he is saying

IWOOT Affiliate Marketing Blog: How Quidco Leaving Affiliate Window Affects Me

I believe your sales will recover quickly with other affiliates (hopefully including myself) filling the void.

I won't ever drive a large volume of sales BUT (as someone on the a4u forum suggested) more affiliates sending a lower volume of sales seems likely - which means less eggs in one basket from your POV.

It will be interesting to see how Quidco respond. It's hard to believe they simply won't promote merchants that are exclusively on AW and it's more likely they will actively steer their gadgt traffic to your competitors.

While this may damage you in the short term you said 71% of your Quidco traffic was repeat orders so it seems likely those people would shop with you anyway and after a quick look around for codes will click through via another cashback site or discountcodes.tv using my lovely exclusive code ;-)
(thanks Guys).

I'm sure Quidco will regret this move and it definitely makes it harder for the other cashback sites to maintain their 100% cashback models.

How much of a void would quidco honestly leave, that couldn't be partially or wholly filled by other affiliates. voucher code sites & cashback sites?

Without knowing much about cashback sites, isn't the phrase "100% Cashback" a misnoma (is it false advertising) when it appears that the consumer is not really getting back 100% of the actual commission the cashback site receives? Unless there is network kickback.

It would be interesting to ascertain if these agreements are in place between quidco & other networks, and though it maybe contrived that it's private & nothing to do with us, is there a larger concern? So why isn't there a ‘SureShop’ style agreement in place for all other affiliates?

Why isn't there the same protection for all other affiliates with regard to auto approval etc, surely the needs of the sum of all the smaller affiliates is greater than the needs of one cashback site.

Again silence is golden, if any networks / merchants maybe cashback site dependent. How do / have cashback sites sort out fraud problems?

What are the advantages & disadvantages between Cashback & Voucher Code Sites? One in favour seems to be that with VC'S / DC's the discount is instant & requires no chasing up by the customer, but they (the VC / DC affiliate) cannot chase sales for non tracking problems unless specific / individual codes are given / attributed for each aff, maybe this could be simplified with aff ID preceding the code number (so we all know who's code is where). Plus the customer doesn't have to wait for the cheque or reach a minimum threshold. A disadvantage for cashback customer maybe on lead generation programs, I can only speculate if there is more fraud in this area..

[jase951]

Hi

This I think this is known as 'over trading'. Quidco have become so big that they aren't able to cope with dealing with large number of queries being sent back and forth - they'd need a very big team of people who of course would need to be paid. As a result, IMO this is why they've launched that SureShop thing to ease queries being sent. This way they don't need as much man power with auto approval.

The fact that they are '100%' cashback (though of course they don't offer the max) must have fuelled the need to reduce costs.

So AWIN are right to say they aren't thinking about everyone, inc the merchants.

Of cource this is what I think...

Jase

[3wdl]

So why isn't there a ‘SureShop’ style agreement in place for all other affiliates?

Why isn't there the same protection for all other affiliates with regard to auto approval etc, surely the needs of the sum of all the smaller affiliates is greater than the needs of one cashback site.

The Sureshop agreement, to my knowledge, is just an SLA that says that missed transactions submitted by Quidco users should be dealt with and resolved (i.e. either accepted or rejected) within 28 days.

Other cashback sites have similar agreements in place with networks.

In theory, any affiliate could set this up and ask their network to agree to it, but they would have to have the details of where transactions did not track (such as order numbers, email addresses, etc), which most affiliates do not have.

As you will know, a missed transaction can happen for a variety of reasons, such as cookies being blocked or issues with the merchant tracking.

I don't see an issue with Sureshop personally, but we have not suffered from the level of fraud that Affiliate Window seem to be suggesting & with the launch of Veracitag our tracking is pretty darn good.

[jase951]

The SureShop bit that I was on about is:

This was an obligation designed to guarantee members that networks resolve any Quidco member transaction queries within 28 days or they would be auto-approved

From AWIN's statement.

[MFI-ecommerce]

There is no reason why aw couldnt ask all their merchants to have an auto approval system, a merchants should not need 28 days to verify a sale.

It all depends on what you're selling... leads times on some of our ranges are in the region of four to eight weeks so auto approval at 28 days would not be suitable for us.

- Charles

[aotagain]

Surely it is fair that the time/cost of dealing with queried transactions should be shared between affiliate, merchant and network. This inevitably puts up everyone's costs a bit. Shoving the onus all in one direction seems inappropriate. Its Quidco's chosen business model and they have to live with it or adapt.

Dealing with queried transactions from the merchant end is very time consuming and of course many of the transactions are queried by people who are either just disorganised or after something for nothing, or who have completely misread or misinterpreted the offer, or read something someone else put on a forum somewhere.

So you can get a string of queries from people with no order number information or an email address or name that isn't on your merchant system. Going into the database trying to search for vague personal details can take as long as doing a couple of hundred normal approvals.

So you do a reject of some sort and it can keep coming back. Goodness knows what its like for a big merchant - it would be interesting to know what proportion of time is spent dealing with it.

Its the nature of cashback I guess - there's an odd, tenuous and probably very misunderstood (by public) relationship between the merchant and the cashback site. The cashback site is publishing something which may or may not be exactly right all the time, the user is acting on an odd mix of information from other users and sites, while ultimately not being sure who is to blame for missing commissions, or expired offers, the cashback site or the merchant.

Looks like thats the price of a very simple business model, where forecasting ongoing admin. costs is probably very difficult. It may have been a gravy train originally that's reached the bottom and on its way uphill. ie. membership all up front, cash in the bank, but now the true costs are appearing.

[Qui Gon Jinn]

Hi James,

Let me take a recent example. A merchant was tracking for a period, affiliate were not informed. The network and merchant agree there wasn't tracking then turnaround and say can you tell us what the sales were for. How the heck is a non psychic affiliate meant to know? A cashback site has the fallback of members tranaction Ids, most of us unfortunately don't. And to add to it, how often do affiliates really get remuneration, It seems to me that as a rule of thumb you only get unless you ask, you may end up receiving some when others don't because they didn't ask & vice versa.

What happens when a program leaves a network leaving pendings sales not confirmed or auto deleted for the sake of it. Is there a different rule for one or several cashback affiliates than the average non cashback affiliate.

It also be interesting to see which networks start trying to poach aw clients to go dual network, when perhaps that merchant has been over dependent on Quidco without putting effort into their program then as a knee jerk reaction join another network, that one i guess would be quite obvious to see.

Hence why it maybe possible just to have just voucher codes rather than cashback sites at all (would that eleviate part of that problem), or as mentioned customers become sub affiliates of the introducing affiliates.

[sellingschool]

The Sureshop agreement, to my knowledge, is just an SLA that says that missed transactions submitted by Quidco users should be dealt with and resolved (i.e. either accepted or rejected) within 28 days.

Other cashback sites have similar agreements in place with networks.

In theory, any affiliate could set this up and ask their network to agree to it, but they would have to have the details of where transactions did not track (such as order numbers, email addresses, etc), which most affiliates do not have.

As you will know, a missed transaction can happen for a variety of reasons, such as cookies being blocked or issues with the merchant tracking.

I don't see an issue with Sureshop personally, but we have not suffered from the level of fraud that Affiliate Window seem to be suggesting & with the launch of Veracitag our tracking is pretty darn good.

You might not, but I am sure that plenty of your merchants would (or should).

28 days, becomes 14, becomes 7, becomes automatic.....

[8601cam]

also be interesting to see which networks start trying to poach aw clients to go dual network.

Let's just say one network has been particlarly active, however they do seem to have the gift of 'second sight' since one call was timed just as the AWin merchant received Quidco's email.

Speaking for Affiliate Window we are all genuinely bowled over by the support we've received, both via this forum and directly. Having disputes like this in public are never nice at the best of times but in this instance our hand was forced by the actions of Quidco.

Let's just say that Quidco and said network(s) may be finding out first hand that the loyalty of merchants who work exclusively with AWin are not so easily bought or traded.

Kind Regards

Mark

[prepaid365]

Let's just say one network has been particlarly active, however they do seem to have the gift of 'second sight' since one call was timed just as the AWin merchant received Quidco's email.

Speaking for Affiliate Window we are all genuinely bowled over by the support we've received, both via this forum and directly. Having disputes like this in public are never nice at the best of times but in this instance our hand was forced by the actions of Quidco.

Let's just say that Quidco and said network(s) may be finding out first hand that the loyalty of merchants who work exclusively with AWin are not so easily bought or traded.

Kind Regards

Mark

Hi Mark,
This may already have been covered elsewhere but given the financial implications on both sides - Quidco and AW - and the potential impact on affiliates and merchants - was the "simple" proposition of duplicate requests/previously declined requests not being considered within the SureShop agreement not discussed.

Unless Quidco had already made a decision not to work with AW based on other circumstances, I cannot see how either side can be feeling great about the outcome. You have lost a valuable traffic partner and Quidco have lost access to one of the leading affiliate networks.

I have seen this mentioned in one of the posts before but surely the way forward was to include within SureShop a system which did not allow transactions already rejected to be resubmitted?

I have a lot of admiration for the AW team and I'd hate to see the netwrok suffer for making a stand on behalf of affiliates and merchants.

Also, I wonder if Merchants actually realise this as well - that AW have taken a position which benefits them as well unless they want to continue expending resource running after the same queried transaction over and over again until someday it slips through the system.

So well done for standing by your beliefs to the betterment of all of us - but would a more measured approach have provided a better solution?

Ash

[KevinEdwards]

Hi,

Just to clarify on the last point - we as a network extended the time period merchants were able to query transactions that we did not believe were wholly valid beyond the SureShop 28 day requirement.

Quidco ceased the working relationship by contacting our merchants directly with an email - we had no indication they planned to do so.

[prepaid365]

Hi,

Just to clarify on the last point - we as a network extended the time period merchants were able to query transactions that we did not believe were wholly valid beyond the SureShop 28 day requirement.

Quidco ceased the working relationship by contacting our merchants directly with an email - we had no indication they planned to do so.

Hi Kevin,
Are you saying there was absolutely no dialogue between AW and Quidco prior to their decision to cease working with AW?

So basically, one day out of the blue, an email was sent to AW Affiliates/Merchants without any discussion on this issue?

[KevinEdwards]

We had discussed SureShop issues and our concerns but no, we had no idea they intended to stop working with us.

[prepaid365]

We had discussed SureShop issues and our concerns but no, we had no idea they intended to stop working with us.

Well, I am sure Quidco's loss will be some other cashback networks gain and you will look to quickly plug the gap by working with one or two of the other big boys.

All the best. :tup

Ash

[3wdl]

Let me take a recent example. A merchant was tracking for a period, affiliate were not informed. The network and merchant agree there wasn't tracking then turnaround and say can you tell us what the sales were for. How the heck is a non psychic affiliate meant to know? A cashback site has the fallback of members tranaction Ids, most of us unfortunately don't. And to add to it, how often do affiliates really get remuneration, It seems to me that as a rule of thumb you only get unless you ask, you may end up receiving some when others don't because they didn't ask & vice versa.

What happens when a program leaves a network leaving pendings sales not confirmed or auto deleted for the sake of it. Is there a different rule for one or several cashback affiliates than the average non cashback affiliate.

I see what you're saying Paul but this is something completely different. Missed transactions are not just down to tracking going down and if tracking does go down, it's often impossible for a merchant to tell which affiliate these sales have come from to define compensation.

I do think that you raise some good points and I think that some merchants and networks are better than others at compensating all affiliates for tracking that goes down but that deserves a different thread for itself I think

In regards to your second point, re: a merchant leaving a network with pending sales, I think this is handled differently by each network - with our 5 day validation we don't have the issue of pending sales as once it's past the 5 days it's locked in the system and we pay.