Figleaves Reducing commissions to voucher, cashback, loyalty and points affiliates

[Barry]

Tweet

And I'd expect that each employee gets a "commission" per sale against their own code too, per chance?

The oragnisation and speed that the codes were distributed in I wouldn't be surprised, I wonder if they only got 2%?

Ta

Baz

[Mogga]

And I'd expect that each employee gets a "commission" per sale against their own code too, per chance?

And that puts an interesting slant on things if it's true.

What agency are they using?

[befuddle]

I've not even seen a 20% code but the 10% automatic was historically good for me. Figleaves were once my most profitable merchant but that changed when they changed their policies. I think customers are more than happy with 'just' a 10% discount.
--<br>Posted via my Mobile Device

[KirstyM]

I believe they are with Profero for their PPC and affiliate programme.

[bapages]

I know this is slightly off topic but it doesn't help when you get the guy off moneysavingexpert telling the nation to go to a cashback site then search for a voucher on the internet as well.

[Barry]

Just thinking out loud here with you - Or hotdeals blatantly distributing the codes under 'free speech' (and there are no affiliate links on the forum) but they know that everyone on the forum is a member of their sister site quidco anyway.

Ta

Baz

[bazza99]

I know this is slightly off topic but it doesn't help when you get the guy off moneysavingexpert telling the nation to go to a cashback site then search for a voucher on the internet as well.

I think the problem is more the fact that Figleaves have offered a voucher that they can't sustain. They should have done the maths before offering the discount.

[Frostie]

Could we please have an unhindered and open debate on this please?

Ceratinly if you're willing to listen to all sides, and that includes merchants who are saying that Voucher Codes have proven to introduce new customers. 1 coin - 2 sides

Like Raymondon, I wasn't aware of any 20% code even tho its not allowed to be pushed by us, nor the the affiliate offer on their T&C's page. Think its a bit of a mess really.

When I was emailed a 20% code I emailed back and asked for verification and this is the reply

Were they giving your authorisation to promote the code via an affiliate link then mate? Thats how I would have read it, if I'd been emailed.

[bazza99]

I've just received a mailshot through the post today - apparently I can get 15% off at Figleaves by quoting the offer code that they've sent me.

On the whole issue of voucher codes, I certainly think there is a need for a fuller discussion of their use, sites that list them and the positives/negatives associated with them.

My personal opinion is that a company who issue a voucher code and then find that 75% of their customers are using them might be better advised to spend their budget on reducing prices on all products on their site (whether on a permanent or temporary basis).

In general terms, I can't see any reason why click-to-reveal should be used in any cases - it's a forced click and the networks need to make it clear that it's not acceptable going forward. Some affiliates (and I include myself here) find ourselves making use of such techniques because we know that failing to do so means that we're losing out on sales - I think most of us would much prefer to see them removed from the affiliate environment altogether.

If a merchant doesn't offer vouchers/discounts/promotional codes then they shouldn't list a box asking for people to enter them on their sites. If they do then they will often end up paying a commission to a discount code site, given the current situation.

Where retailers do offer discounts, they need to be aware that they are likely to spread around the internet very quickly (and not just due to affiliate activity). They need to factor in the costs involved, just as they would do if they were running a sale.

In general, I think discount codes are being managed very poorly at all levels. Merchants are using them without actually thinking about the real costs involved, networks are turning a blind eye to activities that shouldn't be permitted and affiliates (including myself) are becoming so focused on voucher codes that we're forgetting about the elements of affiliate marketing that really can help to drive significant incremental sales (ie content-based sites).

Anyway, that's my mixture of rant, thoughts and confessions!

[loquax]

Were they giving your authorisation to promote the code via an affiliate link then mate? Thats how I would have read it, if I'd been emailed.

To that this is what the reply said....

"I hadn't appreciated that you are part of Figleaves normal affiliate program (do you deal with Simon directly ?) .

Under the terms of use I would personally be responsible for any charges you would make. This code would not be covered by your usual or arrangementxs with Figleaves."

I didn't continue the conversation further.

Jason

[Graham@Buyagift]

Blimey I've only just seen this thread. My understanding is there was a competition amongst Figleaves staff to generate the most sales through their code. I'm guessing this was where the issue stemmed from?

Rather than a commission cut, why not just put a new discount code policy in place where if affiliates are actively promoting a code that isn't for affiliate use, they don't earn commission on any sales? Yes it's more work for the Affiliate Manager, but it's time well spent.

I think 7 days notice would be the acceptable bare minimum on this.

I guess the counter argument is that they may not have voucher code tracking in place with TD (and if that's the case they either implement quickly or take the hit).

As the Figleaves affiliate manager for 2 years (many moons ago) reading things like this makes my heart sink

Graham

[getvisible]

Ceratinly if you're willing to listen to all sides, and that includes merchants who are saying that Voucher Codes have proven to introduce new customers. 1 coin - 2 sides

you obviously haven't read my latest blog post then

[ash]

there was a competition amongst Figleaves staff to generate the most sales through their code. I'm guessing this was where the issue stemmed from?

Ahh so Figleaves were responsible for all the spam several of us received.... :td

[loquax]

Ahh so Figleaves were responsible for all the spam several of us received

... and ultimately for screwing up their affiliate programme?

[ash]

... and ultimately for screwing up their affiliate programme?

and we all get penalised yet few of us actually published the codes, and those that did in this instance i think its excusable given that the codes were distributed from figleaves staff / email addresses.....