I'm As Mad As Hell, And I'm Not Going To Take This Anymore!

[Toby]

...with a nod to Howard Beale (Peter Finch).

Pre-checked cross sales have gotten completely out of control. So the following has been added to the submit page on all my TGP's.

EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY:
Any gallery that promotes a sponsor that
uses pre-checked cross sales below the submit
button on their join page will not be listed.
click for example (http://www.dressingforsex.com/images/xsale.gif)

In the grand scheme of things my sites are just an inflamed pimple of the buttocks of the WWW, but perhaps some others with a bit more influence will see this and follow suit. If not, well... at least I tried.

[DangerDave]

Hello to all the users of NATS |waves|

[ArtWilliams]

Toby,

For the benefit of some (including me), would you please explain this? I don't know what "pre-checked cross sales" are and why they are not good. Thank you.

---AW

[Toby]

View the example image linked in my first post.

The two check boxes pointed at by the red text are pre-checked cross sales, meaning that the boxes are checked by default when the page loads. In order to NOT accept the offer the surfer must uncheck the boxes before they click the submit button to process the sign-up.

Look further down to find the fine print explaining the terms of these cross sales.

If the surfer fails to scroll down and see the pre-checks before clicking submit then they've actually just signed up for three sites instead of just one. If their spam filters eat the join notification emails (which is highly probable these days) then they'll be unaware of the additional trial memberships they just agreed to and therefore won't know to cancel those before the trial periods expire. End result. $1 for intended trial join, $1 for one of the cross sale trial joins, $39.95 and $39.97 for full month rebill on uncancelled cross sale trials. Total $81.92 before it shows up on their monthly statement. If the billing cycles fall just right, or they don't check the bill right away when it arrives in the mail there could be second pair of monthly rebills added on.

Do you think that surfer is ever going to join a porn site again?

On top of that, many times there will be additional cross sales on the cancel pages. If the surfer isn't on his toes he'll end up being billed for even more sales after thinking he's cancelled the others.

This sleazy shit has to stop before it kills this entire industry.

[InfoGuy]

This sleazy shit has to stop before it kills this entire industry.

And the multiple popups, popunders and exit consoles are also big problems that will cannibalize the industry. This stuff only makes the anti-virus companies more aggressive in blocking ads, cookies and URLs.

[Toby]

And the multiple popups, popunders and exit consoles are also big problems...Not even in the same league, and to be honest, pretty minor these days due to vastly improved popup blockers.

[Simon]

I wonder if it might be worth either starting a new thread or listing in this thread all the sponsors that we know are using pre-checked cross selling techniques like this. Some webmasters may not even be aware of the join forms on some tours that have these pre-checked cross sales on them. And maybe some sponsors will see the light if they can read how much their affiliate webmasters object to this practice.

[justbondage]

Is it the sponsor who selects them, or is it the affiliate who requests them? I mean I have never seen an option to "allow cross sales" or anything, but then I had only heard about these before in this post.

[Toby]

Simon, there are rumblings of the jungle drums in regards to compiling and maintaining a comprehensive list on an independent domain.

Here's a partial list...

OCCash

TopBucks

Brazzers

Dee's Evil Empire:
DeeCash
Rage Cash
Extreme Paychecks
Triple X Cash
Jason & Alex
Elite Dollars
Mayors Money
Join Right Now
Bad Girl Bucks
Milf Cash
Epic Cash
Pure Meds

[Toby]

Is it the sponsor who selects them, or is it the affiliate who requests them? I mean I have never seen an option to "allow cross sales" or anything, but then I had only heard about these before in this post.
Strictly sponsor choice.

There are a very few sponsors that do pay revshare percentages on cross sales, but they are very few. 99.44% of the time they are of absolutely no benefit to the affiliate.

[Greenguy]

Hello to all the users of NATS |waves|Don't you really mean "Hello to all users of programs that process thru Epoch"? Hell, why blame either of them? It's the affiliate program's OPTION to use the cross sales. Yes, Epoch offers that OPTION and yes Nats makes that OPTION easy to use, but it's still an OPTION.

...Some webmasters may not even be aware of the join forms on some tours that have these pre-checked cross sales on them...Some webmasters should do their homework before they sign up or start to promote a sponsor.

***

You guys are talking as if this is some new thing. Epoch has been offering cross sales for YEARS! I can remember when Jim worked at Flash Cash, once of his jobs was to try & find programs to do cross sales with.

As far as the surfer joining a site, if they are dumb enough to put their CC info in there without reading the entire page - and there's not a lot of text on the example Toby posted - who's fault is that?

Everyone that reviews complains that the submitters need to learn how to read, yet those same people often support surfers that need to learn how to read.

I'm thinking it's time for Jim to get back in the game & assist in this thread, since I know he's had 1st hand experience with the affiliate side of cross-sales.

[Toby]

Yes, I agree, cross sales are nothing new. For quite some time I've had a personal policy of not promoting sponsors using any form or pre-checked cross sale.

What seems to have increased dramatically in recent months is their use below the submit button with text that makes it less than clear that you're really signing up for another trial membership, with terms in fine print even further down the page.

If you view the actual page from my example in a browser window at 1024x768 the pre-checks are not visible without scrolling down, and that's not by accident.

[Greenguy]

At 1024x768, the bottom thing on my browser is the time that you started the thread:
Yesterday, 08:44 PM

I know it's not the same thing, but come on. Who doesn't know that internet pages scroll down? That you should read the entire page before entering your credit card info?

This isn't exactly a porn problem either - there's a lot of pre-checked boxes all over the internet.

[Toby]

Of course you should read the full page, but the sponsor shouldn't be deceptive about it either. They're taking advantage of people, and that's wrong, with potentially serious long term consequences for all of us.

[ArtWilliams]

Thanks for taking the time to explain it.

View the example image linked in my first post.

The two check boxes pointed at by the red text are pre-checked cross sales, meaning that the boxes are checked by default when the page loads. In order to NOT accept the offer the surfer must uncheck the boxes before they click the submit button to process the sign-up.

Look further down to find the fine print explaining the terms of these cross sales...

[Jim]

If this is a partnership program and the webmaster is not given a taste of the cross sale, I have to say I agree a little. But not much..

To run a PPS program, the expenses are huge. Pre-checked cross sales are mostly used to help finance a PPS program so webmasters can get paid much more than their traffic is really worth. Even if it is a partnership program doing this and you don't get a taste, if they are also running a PPS program, again....it is used to finance the huge expense of paying for PPS.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with this practice.

[Toby]

So deceptively banging the surfers credit card for $80 or more when he thinks he's buying a $1 trial is just business?

Bullshit! If that's what's necessary to run a PPS program then the payouts are too high, and retention isn't what it should be.

[Greenguy]

So deceptively banging the surfers credit card for $80 or more when he thinks he's buying a $1 trial is just business?...It's not deceptive. It's right there on the page! Assuming you didn't shrink it, that's a 600x800 page - or the size of a standard picture. You're telling me that it's deceptive because the person entering their credit card info did not see/read a 600x800 page?

Crap like Zango is deceptive. This is nothing.

[SykkBoy]

Pre-checked cross sales are a risk management game.

They are also figured into pps payouts. Like Jim said, they are often being paid less than their traffic is actually worth.

I hear a lot of affiliates complaining about things like pre-checked cross sales, and they threaten to pull traffic, etc. but they almost never do...why? because they want the higher payout.

[Toby]

It's not deceptive. It's right there on the page! Assuming you didn't shrink it, that's a 600x800 page

I did crop the page to make it more generic. When viewing the actually page at 1024x768 the bottom of the visible screen falls just below the cc logos.

Take off your webmaster hat for just a minute and try to think like a porn surfer with a stiff dick. It would not be difficult to think the page ended below the logos.

While all the info may technically be there on the page (otherwise it would be fraud and subject to legal action) it's pretty damn obvious to most that the sponsors are trying to slide it by unnoticed. If they weren't it would be above the submit button where it could not be missed.

Abusing the surfer financially so that he never buys porn online again is BAD business.

[SykkBoy]

I did crop the page to make it more generic. When viewing the actually page at 1024x768 the bottom of the visible screen falls just below the cc logos.

Take off your webmaster hat for just a minute and try to think like a porn surfer with a stiff dick. It would not be difficult to think the page ended below the logos.

While all the info may technically be there on the page (otherwise it would be fraud and subject to legal action) it's pretty damn obvious to most that the sponsors are trying to slide it by unnoticed. If they weren't it would be above the submit button where it could not be missed.

Abusing the surfer financially so that he never buys porn online again is BAD business.

He also receives emails concerning the signups....shouldn't he read his email too? I know I would if I just purchased something.

[Greenguy]

What's the old saying? Ignorance is no excuse?

[Toby]

He also receives emails concerning the signups....shouldn't he read his email too? I know I would if I just purchased something.
How much spam do you get in your InBox daily? How much is eaten by spam filters? If he's not aware he just signed up for two additional sites, how likely is he to not notice two emails he isn't expecting? Keep in mind that most of the time these will be coming from entirely separate entities, not from the original site he actually intended to join.

Try to justify the practice any way you want, but tricking the surfer is wrong.

[Evil Chris]

Well here's my take.

Pre-checked is ok if it's not hidden from view, and I know there is a lot of that going on now.
Toby, if you're going to ban all programs that have pre-checked cross sales on their join forms, you're going to run out of people to promote in short order. Times are not just tough for affiliates, they are tough and competitive for program owners as well. I don't agree with any sort of shady business practices within the adult industry, but pre-checked cross sales in the buyer's face is ok in my opinion.

[Toby]

Toby, if you're going to ban all programs that have pre-checked cross sales on their join forms, you're going to run out of people to promote in short order.

I'm not banning all sponsors with pre-checks, just those sponsors that have them placed below the submit button.

[Greenguy]

Toby - be honest :) Did you know that, when posting:
You have the option to not show your sig?
You can turn off smileys?
You can attach a file?
You can rate a thread?
You can choose to subscribe to a thread?

All these "Additional Options" are located below the "Submit Reply" button when you reply to a thread :)

[faxxaff]

I'm not banning all sponsors with pre-checks, just those sponsors that have them placed below the submit button.

I think that is appropriate. Programs that post pre-checked boxes under the join/purchase button are trying to hide this from the surfer or at least they hope they will not notice.

A few years back Ibill and a few AVS had this practice of doing the same thing. If I recall correctly they made the text with the pre-checks far smaller to make sure no one would have a chance of reading them.

It's certainly a very questionable way of making money imho. I would never promote a sponsor if I knew they were playing such tricky games.

[Useless]

I don't really have much to offer here except that I am in agreement with Toby. Having the pre-checks below the submit button and/or below the fold is deceptive. The entire purpose of asterisks and fine print is for the purpose of deception, just like their placement on the page AND the fact that they are PRE-CHECKED in the first place. There's plenty of room for the true costs to be right there with the pre-checks and there's plenty of space for additional offers at the top of the form instead of below the submit button.

Professional marketers study advertising statistics. They know that HUGE amounts of surfers do not scroll below the fold for further information (only 10% did earlier in this decade) or read fine print. Sure, we webmasters realize how dangerous it is to place trust in sponsor programs, but a horny surfer doesn't know what we know, nor is he or she in their correct state of mind, at least not if we did our job correctly. ;) Is it the surfers fault for being lazy or ignorant? Perhaps, but that doesn't make it ethical for a program to take advantage of that ignorance.

Ok, I have to go to my telemarketing job now and see if I can sell some supplemental life insurance to senior citizens who aren't eligible for the benefits, but at least they can afford it. |thumb

[Toby]

Toby - be honest :) Did you know that, when posting:
You have the option to not show your sig?
You can turn off smileys?
You can attach a file?
You can rate a thread?
You can choose to subscribe to a thread?

All these "Additional Options" are located below the "Submit Reply" button when you reply to a thread :)
But there's no money being taken from my credit card if I fail to notice.

[papagmp]

Hey - I wanna put the "Enter" link above the LL recip table on all my Free Sites and make sure the table starts at say the 800th pixel from the top. Of course, all my adds will be within the first 768 pixels. |couch|

[Greenguy]

Hey - I wanna put the "Enter" link above the LL recip table on all my Free Sites...I never said I didn't have inconsistencies :D

BTW - I completely understand what everyone is saying, I just don't think it's that big of a deal. Consoles, on the other hand, pop regardless of any boxes being checked & that annoys the living shit out of me.

The world of advertising & marketing lives off stupid people. If it's on sale 2 for $5, you'll buy 2 even if you only need 1, which costs $2.50. I do this EVERY time I go to the grocery store. Why? Because I'm a dummy.

[SykkBoy]

I only wish we could have cancellation policies like AOL has ;-)

In all fairness, affiliates can choose who they promote. If they choose to not promote us because of pre-checked cross sales, I'll wish them well and tell them to go ahead and promote another sponsors. Those that love the checks they receive from us and the size of them as well as everything we offer are more than welcome to keep continuing to send us traffic.

Everyone has the right to decide who they will conduct business and who they will conduct business with. No one should let people on a message board dictate to them how they should run their business. They need to decide for themselves and even though Toby and I probably disagree, at least he's willing to state publicly his intentions to pull links and really, let's see if he does. I would never tell anyone how to conduct business nor should anyone listen to me in such regards (unless they want to send to us and earn big checks ;-)).

[Greenguy]

I tell people how to conduct their business all the time & everyone loves me! |couch|

Banning a sponsor is BIG, regardless of how big your site is. I've only done it twice: Epic Cash & Ultra Cash - and I think everyone can agree that I had VERY valid reasons for each.

I completely understand what Toby's doing. I sometimes wish there was an option to turn it off & take a lower payout like programs do with consoles.

But, this is a BIG part of the PPS business model & I'm a PPS kinda guy |thumb

[Greenguy]

Toby - before I forget, great topic & I love the anger.

It's also perfect timing for a long board discussion seeing as it's Monday. If this thread started on a Friday, no one would remember it Monday morning :)

[Toby]

Toby and I probably disagree, at least he's willing to state publicly his intentions to pull links and really, let's see if he does.
Well, that's where I differ from the board warriors over on GFY. I had either never promoted said sponsors or had already pulled any links long before I started this thread.

Brazzers and AFF were already on my banned sponsor list for other unsundry activities, and I regularly decline submits promoting those sponsors.

As I noted in a reply to this same topic on another board, I don't go on the war path often, but when I do I neither fight fair nor take any prisoners.

[SykkBoy]

I tell people how to conduct their business all the time & everyone loves me! |couch|

Banning a sponsor is BIG, regardless of how big your site is. I've only done it twice: Epic Cash & Ultra Cash - and I think everyone can agree that I had VERY valid reasons for each.

I completely understand what Toby's doing. I sometimes wish there was an option to turn it off & take a lower payout like programs do with consoles.

But, this is a BIG part of the PPS business model & I'm a PPS kinda guy |thumb

That's because we dig the fact you have had the same haircut since 1989 ;-)

I understand what he's doing as well and truly do wish him well...I don't begrudge anyone conducting business the way they want. I also admire the fact he's arguing his point without resorting to name calling or anything like that. We could use more of that in this industry.

[Toby]

Toby - before I forget, great topic & I love the anger.

It's also perfect timing for a long board discussion seeing as it's Monday. If this thread started on a Friday, no one would remember it Monday morning :)
But it's really fucking up my productivity. |banghead|

[bluemoney]

I just showed a join page to my 22 year old son. I asked him if he were buying how he would go about it.

He looked at the sign up page that had one pre-checked box and one unchecked box.

He looked the page over for a minute.

“I thought you wouldn’t have to buy porn”? he said |loony|

“Would you please throw me a bone here and pretend your buying it” I said

He grabbed the mouse and unchecked the pre-checked box and checked the one that had been unchecked (it was less expensive)

“I would probably get this one but not both”

I asked him if he thought the pre-checked box was deceptive

“No I can see it right there . . . but if it were unchecked I probably wouldn’t have noticed either of them”

Let me add he was not coached and the boxes were in full view without scrolling at all.

My take! There is a line between “suggestive selling” and “sneaky selling”

[Toby]

From a similar discussion on another board. Reposted with the authors permission.
Let my try painting a picture here and you tell me whether it's white, black or grey.

We're at a point where pretty much every sponsor with an own merchant account and the bulk of sponsors with enough volume to be allowed to are doing pre-checked cross-sales. While pre-checked cross-sales per se may not be bad, what these people are doing is shady, at best. Oftentimes the price of the cross-sales is hidden in fine print, the boxes are tucked away far below the submit button, the wording is made up so it doesn't clearly imply that you'll get charged for the memberships, etc, etc. Shortly put, pushing the legality of the practice to its limits.

Now, how does this affect the industry? Well, for one, these sites do cross-sales between them on pretty much the same pool of surfers. Much like we trade TGP traffic, passing the same surfers from one site to another. The end result? The surfer gets slapped with anything from $100 to $200 (depending on the sites he joins and his location) in charges for the cross-sales and never trusts a paysite with his creditcard again. In many cases the cross-sales are even for sites they'd actually get access to anyway, by joining the site they want in the first place. And as if that was not enough, if they want to cancel, they often get even more cross-sales thrown at then hidden below the submit button on the cancellation page. So they think they cancelled one or two memberships but end up having signed up for different ones instead. Their credit cards get practically raped.

Now, you'd think bleeding the market dry for potential customers would be bad enough, but as it turns out, that's not the biggest problem. See, being that these people are pushing things to such an extreme degree, can you imagine what would happen if the mainstream media got a whiff of this? Just imagine one single loon with an agenda (remember minusonebit anyone?) starting doing research, putting together names of individuals and companies and sending it to mainstream media channels, while dragging in VISA and MasterCard along with it, as supporters. All it takes is one fairly reputable mainstream media source to run a comprehensive story on this and many others would follow suit. Let's face it, in a time when the consumer is struggling to make ends meet, the economy is darker than it's been in many decades and people are losing their jobs and homes, this would make for an incredibly great story and unbelievably suitable scapegoat for many.

Does anyone remember the big stink caused by dialers 6-7 years ago? That is a piss in the ocean compared to what would happen if the above scenario were to take place. What could happen? Worst-case scenario, the end of this industry as we know it. Processors would go out of business, many sponsors (good and bad) would go out of business and with them the majority of affiliates.

Now going back to the sponsors-shooting-themselves-in-the-foot part, they don't give a fuck. They're leveraging their size to squeeze the industry out of one last fast buck, because the ones doing this could easily retire yesterday since they've already got it made. In fact, it is my belief (and to a certain degree actual knowldge) that it's exactly what some of them are doing, squeezing the last drop of blood from the industry, while they already have mainstream projects lined up, getting ready to move on to greener pastures.

Now, the only reason why no one has tipped off the mainstream media about this yet is because those to whom the idea occured also realized that they'd go down with the ship as well. However, the risk of this happening is getting bigger and bigger and all of you who promote these sponsors are, in fact, also risking your short-term paychecks, not only your long-term ones. Because if the shit hits the fan, the FTC gets involved and VISA and MC pull out, fucked doesn't even begin to describe what you will be.

So tell me, is it white, black or grey?

[ArtWilliams]

Epic Cash. Shit, I can type Epic Cash. Wasn't there a time when I couldn't type Epic Cash? I would just get **** **** or ********? Okay, I know I am bringing nothing to the thread here but I just wanted to say it.

I tell people how to conduct their business all the time & everyone loves me! |couch|

Banning a sponsor is BIG, regardless of how big your site is. I've only done it twice: Epic Cash & Ultra Cash - and I think everyone can agree that I had VERY valid reasons for each.

I completely understand what Toby's doing. I sometimes wish there was an option to turn it off & take a lower payout like programs do with consoles.

But, this is a BIG part of the PPS business model & I'm a PPS kinda guy |thumb

[plateman]

I believe that the people who dont see them when joining and find out later will become a non joiner later

I've looked at some and most are visible...

IMO if your worried about it, educate your surfers about it on your site on some pages of it, take care of your surfers and hopefully they will take care of you by keep joining your pay links

cross sales are a way of life for the PPS programs, if they hide them then it is not acceptable...

IMO it's far worse to have link trades with other sites that have those free join email sites that have aggressive popups on there tours

[justbondage]

From a similar discussion on another board. Reposted with the authors permission.

Visa and Mastercard are making too much money to pull out, and even if they did find out (I am almost 100% certain they already know) unless it is illegal activity, they have far bigger things to be worrying about.

[nekrom]

Visa and Mastercard are making too much money to pull out, and even if they did find out (I am almost 100% certain they already know) unless it is illegal activity, they have far bigger things to be worrying about.

The online income that is generated in adult with visa/mc is but a drop in the bucket compared to mainstream non-adult.

-N

[tigermom]

The online income that is generated in adult with visa/mc is but a drop in the bucket compared to mainstream non-adult.

-N

Interesting. Can you please point us to some data about this? I'm not sure at all that this is the case.

I agree that pre-checked boxes under the fold is shady at best. I would think that anyone who gets screwed by those has the sense to contact their CC company and get their money back. Next you would have a lot of charge backs and then the companies would stop - right? I wonder why this isn't happening - maybe not enough people fall for this trick?

[papagmp]

Interesting. Can you please point us to some data about this? I'm not sure at all that this is the case.

I agree that pre-checked boxes under the fold is shady at best. I would think that anyone who gets screwed by those has the sense to contact their CC company and get their money back. Next you would have a lot of charge backs and then the companies would stop - right? I wonder why this isn't happening - maybe not enough people fall for this trick?

I have to agree with tigermom, it's devious but if the CC companies were really getting enough complaints (chargebacks) then they would jump in and monitor the vendors. They do this in mainstream so it would be foolish to assume that they don't do it in adult.

I process just under $1,000,000 in credit cards annually in my mainstream businesses, and chargebacks are rare, but the merchant account companies hate them - they cost way more in time and effort than the CC companies will ever recover so if there truly were too many, we'd see a change in the rules.

[justbondage]

The online income that is generated in adult with visa/mc is but a drop in the bucket compared to mainstream non-adult.

-N

Possibly, but it is still a lot of money.

[Useless]

Visa and Mastercard are making too much money to pull out, and even if they did find out (I am almost 100% certain they already know) unless it is illegal activity, they have far bigger things to be worrying about.Visa proved a long time ago what it thinks about the adult industry and its willingness to say, "fuck you and your money and the headaches you've created." We'd be fucked without Visa - Visa would be fine without us.

[justbondage]

Visa proved a long time ago what it thinks about the adult industry and its willingness to say, "fuck you and your money and the headaches you've created." We'd be fucked without Visa - Visa would be fine without us.

Why, what did they do?

[Mr. Blue]

Funny when Toby posted this on another forum I asked if he got the Link List guys opinion on it. I figured you guys would have a lot more piss and vinegar then TGP guys and sure enough...lol

My take! There is a line between “suggestive selling” and “sneaky selling”

blueeee, lol, it's not exactly an ideal scientific experiment you set up there. What I mean to say is if my father brought me to a porn page and asked me to signup I'd start questioning what the hell he was up to and I'd be expecting a |club| behind the head. So I'm pretty sure he was more observant then he'd be in a real situation:

Real situation, hand on dick, trying to join quickly while typing with one hand. There's a good chance you might not notice pre-checked cross sales below the submit button, especially if he's a cheapskate and buying a trial. If someone is buying a trial, it essentially means they want something on the cheap, not an extra $80 in passes. That guy will never buy another membership after that experience.

With all that said though, I do support Toby, but at the same time realize the inevitability of the situation. Sponsors do this because they’re catering to what some affiliates want and they have to keep up with the Joneses. I personally think pre-checked cross sales below the submit is shady as shit, it hurts the business, but it just gets added onto the very long list of things that hurt the industry. I mean when you see a site like XNXX, a once fine traffic source, turning into a tube site giving away 30 minute videos…umm…yeah, you can see as an industry we don’t always do what’s best in preserving what we have.

[Mr. Blue]

As far as the surfer joining a site, if they are dumb enough to put their CC info in there without reading the entire page - and there's not a lot of text on the example Toby posted - who's fault is that?

Everyone that reviews complains that the submitters need to learn how to read, yet those same people often support surfers that need to learn how to read.

Do the Russians still hate you? lol. What I mean to say whether you're right or wrong about it's the responsibility of the individual, it's how the individual perceives the situation that matters most.

So when you ban someone from your Link List do they go, "Gee, GreenGuy was completely right, it's all my fault and I'll suffer the consequences of not reading" or will they go, "GreenGuy is a dick"

9 out of 10 banned people would probably go with the Dick line, even if you were completely right. When I reject galleries or ban people, the submitter that screwed up thinks I'm 100% wrong. Whatever, in that situation you can give them the one finger salute because there's 500 more people waiting to replace that one.

However, it's not applicable when it comes to potential customers. Whether it's their responsibility or not, how are they going to feel when they get an $80 bill for a trial membership that they thought they were buying. You can say what's right and wrong till the cows come home, that surfer / customer, is going to think he's right and got ripped off. Unfortunately paying porn customers in this age of free porn on the net, is not so easily replaced.

[bluemoney]

blueeee, lol, it's not exactly an ideal scientific experiment you set up there.
That's true! . . . . although I was wearing my lab coat & goggles at the time :D

[nekrom]

Interesting. Can you please point us to some data about this? I'm not sure at all that this is the case.

I agree that pre-checked boxes under the fold is shady at best. I would think that anyone who gets screwed by those has the sense to contact their CC company and get their money back. Next you would have a lot of charge backs and then the companies would stop - right? I wonder why this isn't happening - maybe not enough people fall for this trick?

While there is no doubt that adult generates big money, as an example compare it to the billion dollar yearly industry that is just adwords/Ypn. (Yes I know adult uses it but it's a minor % compared to mainstream)

That is just 1 industry in mainstream. You can also add in the millions made by each of the different publisher networks, such as clickbank, cj, roirocket and so on.

Then there is the shitload that is made pushing Pharma & Replicas.

There is also the multi million dollar field of mlm. Each with it's different areas. One example is payed info forums, with hundreds of thousands of members each paying $99 a month for access.
-
As for the Cb issue. A lot of high volume programs use Offshore MA's. They do this as the CB ratio is much higher then the USA level, which gives them more room to work. They also most likely rotate the joins through several MA's so that they don't burn them.

As for customers that claim a CB, you'd be surprised to know that not every customer calls their bank. Most just move on.

-N

[faxxaff]

As for customers that claim a CB, you'd be surprised to know that not every customer calls their bank. Most just move on.
-N

In many cases it is not that easy to file a CB. Some banks are a pain in the ass and ask you to get in contact with the program and even ask you for prove of it or threaten you that a CB will automatically cause your CC to be replaced by a new one.

My guess would be that many users will just swallow the 80 bucks and move on as you said, but they will draw their consequences: they will never ever join a porn site again. They will use Google to locate a tube site and enjoy their payback from the porn industry.

BTW: I just noticed a similar screen on a signup page from the same biller, where it would cost around 110$ if the surfer wasn't aware of the prechecked buttons and the small text on the very bottom of the page.

[faxxaff]

I found this cross-selling scheme on a lot of programs and as a revshare affiliate I was having the imagination that - under NATS at least - I would be receiving a shave-free share of the sales. I am sure it's not a NATS problem, but it certainly shows, that NATS programs have a possibility to play crazy games with the term 'shave free' ... or am I getting this wrong?

[Toby]

There are lots of ways to "shave" the affiliate that don't involve manipulating the data after the sale. I'd have to agree that cross sales on revshare is certainly one of many.

However, that wasn't my concern when I started this thread. I'm more concerned with the deceptive use of cross sales to take advantage of the customer. Whether they actually charge back or not, they're not likely to buy a porn site membership again anytime soon.

[Licker4U]

Hey - I wanna put the "Enter" link above the LL recip table on all my Free Sites and make sure the table starts at say the 800th pixel from the top. Of course, all my adds will be within the first 768 pixels. |couch|

I was thinking the same exact thing the other day when I started reading this thread. The reason recips have to be above the Enter link is because surfers don't look below the Enter link. When a purchaser gets to the purchase place I would think he stops scrolling. If a checked box is below where he makes his purchase it's the same as recips under the enter link and usually doesn't get seen.

[Toby]

I sometimes wish there was an option to turn it off & take a lower payout like programs do with consoles.

Ask and ye shall receive.

Twistys now has no-xsell link codes available for both their revshare and PPS programs, 60% vs 70% and $25 vs $30. They're in the process of adding FHG's with those same options.

BosBucks have said that they now also have a no-xsell option, and OCCash have said they will be adding one too.

It also appears that JuggCash (Brazzers et. al.) have now moved their pre-checks above the submit. Not sure if all the pre-check threads on the boards was the motivation or if perhaps a processor took them to task. Either way it's a step in the right direction, albeit a small one.

[lassiter]

My guess would be that many users will just swallow the 80 bucks and move on as you said, but they will draw their consequences: they will never ever join a porn site again.

True, but some percentage will definitely charge back, and given the punitively low allowable chargeback ratios that Visa/MC have imposed on the adult industry, I have a hard time believing that these sorts of tricks are really good business for the sponsors.

I agree with Greenie that it's up to the buyer to pay attention to what he's agreeing to, but I also think that the practices that Toby is pointing to are gonna bite the sponsors in the ass.

[Bobc01]

That example Toby posted up is very deceptive, it's not clear at all what you're getting.

$80 could mean alot to some people that can't afford it so shame on the desperate sponsors that mislead people like this.
If they need a fix that badly they only have to say and we'll have a whip round.

[CD Smith]

I'll have to agree with EC on this one. Those programs that have the prechecked stuff hidden from view are the ones I have the real problem with. It's shady, it's deceptive, and it's for all intents and purposes straight-up thievery.

Having them visible on the page is nothing compared to that.

[CD Smith]

Twistys now has no-xsell link codes available for both their revshare and PPS programs, 60% vs 70% and $25 vs $30. They're in the process of adding FHG's with those same options.

This is good to see happening. |thumb