New CCBill Admin - Discuss

[Useless]

Affiliates live to be fucked.

Off topic:
I haven't seen it mentioned here, but CCBill launched a whole new admin for site owners which apparently gives their affiliates more/new tools as well. (Site owners have to request to be migrated to the new system.)
Posted March 31st, 2009 10:23:53, by CCBill Management


WMS (WEB MARKETING SERVICE) NOW AVAILABLE!

We are pleased to announce the release of WMS (Web Marketing Service), a new-generation affiliate system. By incorporating valuable feedback from clients into its design, WMS includes several new features that will help you manage your affiliate business.

* New configuration options: multiple programs and price points per subaccount
* Promotional and tiered bonus payouts on new sales and rebills
* New business activity reports
* Program management tools and Marketing material registration system

WMS also features a new user-friendly CCBill Web Admin interface to assist with system navigation. To get started using WMS, follow the steps below.

ENABLING WMS
To begin accessing WMS, contact our Client Support Department to get your account enabled. Be ready to provide your client name and account number, e-mail address, primary ID and secondary ID. Once your account is enabled, you will receive a confirmation e-mail and you can use WMS to create new programs.

MIGRATING PROGRAMS AND AFFILIATES
To start using WMS for your existing programs, contact our Client Support Department to first enable (see above) your account for WMS, and then to begin the migration process. Be ready to provide a list of subaccounts you want migrated. After migration is completed, you’ll receive a confirmation e-mail and you can use the new system to manage your current and new affiliate business.

NEXT STEPS
To learn more about WMS contact Client Support at clientsupport@ccbill.com or 800.510.2859. You can also visit our Web site to watch a brief WMS overview. Web Ex demos will be available upon request by contacting your CCBill sales representative to schedule a time.

We are excited to make WMS available to you. Check it out today!

Many thanks for your attention to this matter.

CCBill Management
A few of the new sponsor features:
• Updated User-Friendly CCBill Web Admin Interface
• New Config Options: Multiple Programs & Price
Points per Subaccount
• Promo & Tiered Bonus Payouts on new sales & rebills
• New Business Activity Reports
• Program Management Tools: Block/Remove, Private/
Public & Schedulers
• Marketing Material Registration System
• Enhanced E-mail System with Editor

A few of the new affiliate features:
• Universal ID
• Online Profile Management
• Program Management
• New Business Activity Reports
• Search, Compare & Join Program System
• Auto - Program Redirect Options
• Search / Find Program Marketing Materials

[Greenguy]

A few of the new affiliate features:
• Universal IDThe ONE thing that I like about CCBill is that I have separate account numbers for each program (and I wish it was for each site) If I need to find my Amateur Facials links or galleries, they all have 581222 in the code. Foxy Angel is 657466. Nice & Easy. You make that a universal number & you'll never be able to find just the links/galleries for one program EVER AGAIN! It's one of the biggest mistakes that Epoch did with their crappy MPA3 thing.

Maybe this needs a thread of it's own?

[Cleo]

What will happen to the old link urls when I sponsor switches over to the new system?

[Useless]

GG - I believe they said that using the universal ID is optional and that sponsor-specific codes would continue to function. Maybe Paul will stop by and clarify.
What will happen to the old link urls when a sponsor switches over to the new system?The old links are fine, thoughI think they implied that they do intend on phasing out the old system in the very distant future.

[atlant]

Demo:

http://businesscenter.ccbill.com/demos/CCBill_WMS-affiliate-v5.htm

[JImmidean]

Id like to stand back in the wings and let the dust settle a bit first.
there are ALWAYS bugs to be worked out.
But I am sure we will make the switch sooner then later.

[CCBill_Paul]

The ONE thing that I like about CCBill is that I have separate account numbers for each program (and I wish it was for each site) If I need to find my Amateur Facials links or galleries, they all have 581222 in the code. Foxy Angel is 657466. Nice & Easy. You make that a universal number & you'll never be able to find just the links/galleries for one program EVER AGAIN! It's one of the biggest mistakes that Epoch did with their crappy MPA3 thing.

Maybe this needs a thread of it's own?

Sorry for the delay.

I understand your point and I can tell you that you will still have a unique ID with each sponsor but you won't necessarily be able to view it like you can with the current/old system. You will however be able to differentiate between programs/sponsors easily so not everything will be grouped together.

[CCBill_Paul]

What will happen to the old link urls when I sponsor switches over to the new system?

Good question, the old links will still work fine if a sponsor switches to the new system, however in order for the affiliate to utilize all of the new features and functions in the new system they will need to change their linking code.

[CCBill_Paul]

GG - I believe they said that using the universal ID is optional and that sponsor-specific codes would continue to function. Maybe Paul will stop by and clarify.
The old links are fine, thoughI think they implied that they do intend on phasing out the old system in the very distant future.

Correct and correct.

[Greenguy]

Sorry for the delay.

I understand your point and I can tell you that you will still have a unique ID with each sponsor but you won't necessarily be able to view it like you can with the current/old system. You will however be able to differentiate between programs/sponsors easily so not everything will be grouped together.It's not so much what I see in the admin, it's how I link to the program's sites. When I posted that 581222 is my Amateur facials number, that means that I can easily search my link list & TGP data files for 581222 if I need to find all the Amateur Facial links.

But if I have to link to all the programs & all the sites using 1 code/number, that'll make it very difficult to find the links for just one program.

Follow? :)

[Agent]

Phasing out the old CCBILL codes? That's going to be a pain in the ass. Will this effect FHGs with the CCBILL ID in the URL? e.g. Will sponsors have to rework their old galleries for the new system and change the URLs we use to link to them? or will the old CCBill IDs be translated somehow so that old sponsor hosted FHGs need not be reworked?

I would hate having to change URLs, or worse yet, have sponsors dump galleries because they dont feel like updating them with some new ID.

[CCBill_Paul]

It's not so much what I see in the admin, it's how I link to the program's sites. When I posted that 581222 is my Amateur facials number, that means that I can easily search my link list & TGP data files for 581222 if I need to find all the Amateur Facial links.

But if I have to link to all the programs & all the sites using 1 code/number, that'll make it very difficult to find the links for just one program.

Follow? :)

Yes, yes I follow. It is going to take some getting used to and the links will not be quite as distinguishable but the new links will still be unique to each sponsor.

for example, sponsor A's links may look like this: http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-rftTOPWQUWhWHQG_TIAXtbGjdaiewnciLvJPZb2tsWMs*

While sponsor B's may look like this:

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

So, while they will not be as easily identified as the old ones you will still be able to associate one link with one program.

I hope that helps.

[CCBill_Paul]

Phasing out the old CCBILL codes? That's going to be a pain in the ass. Will this effect FHGs with the CCBILL ID in the URL? e.g. Will sponsors have to rework their old galleries for the new system and change the URLs we use to link to them? or will the old CCBill IDs be translated somehow so that old sponsor hosted FHGs need not be reworked?

I would hate having to change URLs, or worse yet, have sponsors dump galleries because they dont feel like updating them with some new ID.

The phasing out process is going to take years and it will not be done at the expense of your business. If you wish to use the new system (your choice) than your old links will no longer work. This is on a per sponsor basis.

[Simon]

Hiya Paul ... just to be sure I understand correctly (I'm getting old)... if an affiliate webmaster decides he wants to use the new CCBill system for any particular sponsor, then the webmaster will need to change all existing links since none of the old ones will work any longer. I want to be sure I'm understanding that there will be no method whatsoever employed to catch traffic coming from the old links in order to credit the webmaster for sales from that traffic. I'm really trying to pound it into my old brain that there will be no simple scripts in place to do this, and that instead the only option a webmaster will have is to change all existing links in order to use the new system.

I misunderstood, right...it's the age thing... you can tell me, I can take it.

:|

[Toby]

Yup Simon, I think you've misunderstood. Paul will correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it the old links will continue to work even after a sponsor has switched to the new system. The only gotcha is that using the old links won't allow you to utilize the additional reports available with the new system for tracking those links.

The scenario that I forsee is that when a particular sponsor moves to the new system most of us will start using the new links for anything we add from that point forward. Some existing links may also get changed if it's not difficult to do so, but we're all probably going to have a mix of old and new style links out there on the Interwebs for quite some time. The new links will gather the full range of data available in the new system, and the old links will still track as they have been.

[tickler]

Yes, yes I follow. It is going to take some getting used to and the links will not be quite as distinguishable but the new links will still be unique to each sponsor.

for example, sponsor A's links may look like this: http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-rftTOPWQUWhWHQG_TIAXtbGjdaiewnciLvJPZb2tsWMs*

While sponsor B's may look like this:

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

So, while they will not be as easily identified as the old ones you will still be able to associate one link with one program.

I hope that helps.

I'm going to presume that there are sponsor/site/affiliate IDs encoded(base64???) buried in that mess somewhere.

I think |greenguy| question is if he can easily pull one individual sponsors' sites out of links databases.

Also, please tell me that sponsors will have to use sub-account coding for their individual sites with the new linking codes.

[CCBill_Paul]

Yup Simon, I think you've misunderstood. Paul will correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it the old links will continue to work even after a sponsor has switched to the new system. The only gotcha is that using the old links won't allow you to utilize the additional reports available with the new system for tracking those links.

The scenario that I forsee is that when a particular sponsor moves to the new system most of us will start using the new links for anything we add from that point forward. Some existing links may also get changed if it's not difficult to do so, but we're all probably going to have a mix of old and new style links out there on the Interwebs for quite some time. The new links will gather the full range of data available in the new system, and the old links will still track as they have been.


Yes, you are correct Toby, thanks. An affiliate can choose to use the old links or the new ones the only difference being that the new reports and functionality will not be available unless you use the new links.

[CCBill_Paul]

I'm going to presume that there are sponsor/site/affiliate IDs encoded(base64???) buried in that mess somewhere.

I think |greenguy| question is if he can easily pull one individual sponsors' sites out of links databases.

I think you will be able to easily pull an individual sponsor's link(s), it may however, be a little more difficult than it was before.

Also, please tell me that sponsors will have to use sub-account coding for their individual sites with the new linking codes.

This will really depend on the sponsors settings, as it did before.

[Simon]

Yes, you are correct Toby, thanks. An affiliate can choose to use the old links or the new ones the only difference being that the new reports and functionality will not be available unless you use the new links.
Thanks for the clarification. I guess what confused me was when you said this...
If you wish to use the new system (your choice) than your old links will no longer work. This is on a per sponsor basis.
Emphassis is mine 'cause I'm still not crystal clear on what you meant by that, or in what way it applies.
|huh

[Greenguy]

I'm to |banghead| to comment right now - I'm going to have to re-read this after the weekend & then come up with some other questions.

But I will says that there is a difference between link codes still working & them being phased out in the coming years. My master CCBill account number is 193. I have a SHITLOAD of links out there. It'll take me YEARS just to find the old codes :D

But I am disappointed with the mess that looks to be the referring URL. To me, it'd make sense to use the existing acct code that everyone has, seeing as it's the perfect common denominator.

More on Tuesday.....

[Useless]

Emphassis is mine 'cause I'm still not crystal clear on what you meant by that, or in what way it applies.
|huhOn one hand they seem to be saying that links/codes will work, but that statement appears to be contradiction of sorts. I think the links he's referring to in that statement may be something on the sponsor's end, such as form links. That's me guessing.

For now, sponsors can request to have their program transitioned to the new system. Eventually, I'd assume that there will be a forced migration for the "all change is bad" stragglers. It seems as if they are intentionally (and very diplomatically) allowing the paysite owners to create the pace of the transition rather than setting a public deadline. Of course, this will allow CCBill to repair any unexpected bugs at a workable rate rather than flipping a switch on every site and suddenly realizing that one bug is mucking everything for everyone and creating panic throughout the industry. If a sponsor has a bunch of specialized tools that based on the old system, it could create some headaches.

Scraped from another board:
OKay just to make sure I understand this right from a program prospective, for example all the tools etc that we would have available on LTC for example would become worthless (flash videos, page peels, potd, votd, etc)? If we wanted to utilize this new system we would have to do everything via CCBill's new system and the tools etc will then be all through there?
If you have a ton of marketing materials with links already, and wish to continue using them, they WILL still work, even when migrated. But if you wanted, for example, to register those marketing materials with us to be able to track them through our new WMS marketing materials reports and make them available to new affiliates through our marketing materials screens, then yes, they would need be registered through WMS, and likely links would need to change.

[Cleo]

I'm so confused...

[Useless]

But I am disappointed with the mess that looks to be the referring URL. To me, it'd make sense to use the existing acct code that everyone has, seeing as it's the perfect common denominatorI'm not a fan of encrypted linking codes either, but at least these ones don't have "nats" in them. :D

[CCBill_Paul]

I apologize sincerely everyone, I made a mistake in my wording. Here is the official:

Your old links WILL still work even if you choose to use the new system. However, if a sponsor is using the new system and you choose to keep using your old links you will not be able to use the new system funcionality and reports for that sponsor.

I hope that clears up the confusion and I am sorry once again.

[Cleo]

So to be clear on this...
If FoxyAngel moves to the new system we could make a new tour for the new system and the old tour using the old system would also continue tracking sales for the affiliates that didn't want to switch and for all the old links that affiliates have.

[CCBill_Paul]

So to be clear on this...
If FoxyAngel moves to the new system we could make a new tour for the new system and the old tour using the old system would also continue tracking sales for the affiliates that didn't want to switch and for all the old links that affiliates have.

Yes, you could do that no problem. Making a new tour would not be altogether necessary but with all the new features it might be a good idea.

[Cleo]

Yes, you could do that no problem. Making a new tour would not be altogether necessary but with all the new features it might be a good idea.
Wouldn't the codes on the join links change with the new system and no longer properly credit affiliate traffic still using the old codes?

For sites that have a php front end, like FoxyAngel, it probably gets more complicated.

[Beaver Bob]

Thats a nice idea cleo.

[CCBill_Paul]

Wouldn't the codes on the join links change with the new system and no longer properly credit affiliate traffic still using the old codes?

For sites that have a php front end, like FoxyAngel, it probably gets more complicated.

No, the join links for sponsors will not change, this will only affect the banner linking code for affiliates ie the refer.ccbill.com links.

[Cleo]

Thats a nice idea cleo.
Yeah FoxyAngel has a bunch of old forgotten tours that are left on the server so that any old links will still get credit. No big deal to duplicate a tour to use a new system.

[Greenguy]

Let's say I'm a paysite owner & I have my affiliates using URL's for hosted galleries that look like this:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?581222

How do I get those URL's to work with the new system?

I ask this because pretty much EVERY affiliate program uses something similar to what I posted.

[Cleo]

Let's say I'm a paysite owner & I have my affiliates using URL's for hosted galleries that look like this:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?581222

How do I get those URL's to work with the new system?

I ask this because pretty much EVERY affiliate program uses something similar to what I posted.
This is why whenever FoxyAngel had a change to the linking codes we duplicated the tour and had the new linking codes point to the new tour leaving the old tour in place to be forgotten but not deleted.

This allowed us to do new galleries with the new linking code to point to the new tour without affecting any of the old stuff.

[Greenguy]

...This allowed us to do new galleries with the new linking code to point to the new tour without affecting any of the old stuff.

But then 1/2 the links are on the old admin & 1/2 are on the new fancy admin. I'd have thought/hoped that they would have thought of this ahead of time & had an easy solution that didn't involve changing EVERY link code if you wanted to take advantage of the new stats admin.

[Toby]

I'd have thought/hoped that they would have thought of this ahead of time & had an easy solution that didn't involve changing EVERY link code if you wanted to take advantage of the new stats admin.

Yes, that would have been an ideal solution, but when you're talking about implenting changes across such a large high volume database while it remains online and stable, there are simply some limitations to what can be done.

[Beaver Bob]

how about webmaster referral in the new system??

[CCBill_Paul]

how about webmaster referral in the new system??

Referrals in the new system work exactly as they did in the old system.

[CCBill_Paul]

Let's say I'm a paysite owner & I have my affiliates using URL's for hosted galleries that look like this:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?581222

How do I get those URL's to work with the new system?

I ask this because pretty much EVERY affiliate program uses something similar to what I posted.

We are currently working on some solutions for this but at this time this functionality does not exist in the new system.

[Greenguy]

We are currently working on some solutions for this but at this time this functionality does not exist in the new system.

That's VERY disappointing & honestly should have been a PRIORITY since most, if not all affiliate programs that have hosted materials use a similar system.

Toby - you can't tell me that there is no way to incorporate an account number into this new system. That just stupid.

[Greenguy]

I refuse to believe that no one at CCBill thought it'd be a good idea for the new system to take the CA and PA portion from this:
http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924527-0000&PA=501671
and insert it into the new code. Hell, what part of the paysite's acct number & affiliate's acct number is useless to the new system?

I'm honestly speechless at the stupidity of this.

[CCBill_Paul]

I refuse to believe that no one at CCBill thought it'd be a good idea for the new system to take the CA and PA portion from this:
http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924527-0000&PA=501671
and insert it into the new code. Hell, what part of the paysite's acct number & affiliate's acct number is useless to the new system?

I'm honestly speechless at the stupidity of this.

Those values are inserted into the enrypted string located in the new linking code. For example: http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsct/w_id/fo663K-ExNTSnzwZgfRDcgXtbGENsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

[Greenguy]

So this code:
http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924527-0000&PA=501671
is tracked by the new system?

[CCBill_Paul]

So this code:
http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924527-0000&PA=501671
is tracked by the new system?

No. That code will continue to work with the old features and old reports but if you want to use the new reports and new features of the WMS you will have to use the new linking code.

[Trixie]

Are any sponsors using it yet? We're on the list to add it (understanding the old way will run concurrently for affiliates who want to keep using the old way) but I would love to sign up as an affiliate to any sponsors who're using it right now to see.

I have no expectations that everything will be perfect, but I'm still really excited to be able to customize delivery of promos and stuff to affiliates and as an affiliate myself, I hope that smaller sponsors like myself will be able to market themselves more effectively to me and other affiliates and have the playing field leveled a bit so we can get more exposure and offer more options.

[Greenguy]

BROWN NOSE!

[Greenguy]

No. That code will continue to work with the old features and old reports but if you want to use the new reports and new features of the WMS you will have to use the new linking code.Is there a reason that the old codes do not work with the new admin? Honestly, I'd think that would have been on the top of the list when CCBill wrote up what they'd want the new admin to do.

Meaning, why would you PURPOSELY design an admin that completely left out every existing link code from the last 12+ YEARS?

[Preacher]

...I hope that smaller sponsors like myself will be able to market themselves more effectively to me and other affiliates and have the playing field leveled a bit so we can get more exposure and offer more options.
I'd like to see that too. Hopefully this new system will be better than what Epoch promised and failed to deliver on.

[CCBill_Paul]

Are any sponsors using it yet? We're on the list to add it (understanding the old way will run concurrently for affiliates who want to keep using the old way) but I would love to sign up as an affiliate to any sponsors who're using it right now to see.

I have no expectations that everything will be perfect, but I'm still really excited to be able to customize delivery of promos and stuff to affiliates and as an affiliate myself, I hope that smaller sponsors like myself will be able to market themselves more effectively to me and other affiliates and have the playing field leveled a bit so we can get more exposure and offer more options.

Currently no one has been moved over to the new system. We will begin the migration process very soon and it should not be long before you can start using the system.

We feel that you will be very pleased with all of the new features and reports.

[CCBill_Paul]

Is there a reason that the old codes do not work with the new admin? Honestly, I'd think that would have been on the top of the list when CCBill wrote up what they'd want the new admin to do.

Meaning, why would you PURPOSELY design an admin that completely left out every existing link code from the last 12+ YEARS?

Trust me, keeping the old style linking codes was certainly a top priority for us however due to the complexity and amount of new features coupled with the introduction of the unique ID's there was just no way we could pull it off.

[Greenguy]

That's a lie. I refuse to believe that the programmers could not include the paysite's & affiliates code into the new system.

Hell, here's the solution: if my new "unique" account number is 1234567, then have a database that has ALL my old codes in it. Each time it sees one, like 581222 for Amateur facials, replace it with 1234567.

Problem solved.

[MadCat]

Currently no one has been moved over to the new system. We will begin the migration process very soon and it should not be long before you can start using the system.

We feel that you will be very pleased with all of the new features and reports.

I feel you might want to have a, how shall we say it, open beta for a while first before you go and throw real world traffic at it?

[MadCat]

That's a lie. I refuse to believe that the programmers could not include the paysite's & affiliates code into the new system.

Hell, here's the solution: if my new "unique" account number is 1234567, then have a database that has ALL my old codes in it. Each time it sees one, like 581222 for Amateur facials, replace it with 1234567.

Problem solved.

From a programmer: problem solved in about 2 days worth of coding, testing, and a few dry conversion runs.

One way or the other you still need a userid, and a siteid that is being linked to. This means that the hash algorithm is reversible, or you have the hash stored as a key with userid/siteid stored alongside of it.

So... you're basically using the same values internally, just that on the outside it looks different.

I utterly fail to see how redirecting the old codes to the new ones becomes impossible -- you already know how the hash is generated, so go ahead and do it.

So far, all I've seen compares to:

"We're releasing a new shiny system, unfortunately our architects and programmers are fucking idiots who can't figure out how to get the old links redirecting to the new links, but we're going to go ahead with it anyway because well, it's new and shiny".

Good luck with that.

[Toby]

That's a lie. I refuse to believe that the programmers could not include the paysite's & affiliates code into the new system.

Hell, here's the solution: if my new "unique" account number is 1234567, then have a database that has ALL my old codes in it. Each time it sees one, like 581222 for Amateur facials, replace it with 1234567.

Problem solved.

Greenie, I understand that you don't like change, but I really think you're being a little unreasonable about this.

Adding that additional data for every existing affiliate and the corresponding data lookup for every affiliate link processed isn't as simple as you make it sound. There are substantial side effects and consequences. Hence my mentioning "large high volume database remaining online and stable" in my earlier post.

[Greenguy]

Unreasonable? Change? I'm actually fucking estatic that CCBill has finally decidedd to upgrade their stats/admin. I can't want to see what they've added - I'm a stats junkie!

But I do not think it's unreasonable to ask that the millions of old link codes out there work with the new system, especially since it's taking 2 sets of numbers & converting/adding them to the new URL's.

Why are you so high on CCBill anyway? You really plan to change ALL your old codes? Or will you be happy logging into 2 admins to get your stats, some basic, some full of bells & whistles?

Hell, Paul said that this was a high priority - that statement alone lets me know that I'm not off my rocker with these questions.

[MadCat]

Greenie, I understand that you don't like change, but I really think you're being a little unreasonable about this.

Adding that additional data for every existing affiliate and the corresponding data lookup for every affiliate link processed isn't as simple as you make it sound. There are substantial side effects and consequences. Hence my mentioning "large high volume database remaining online and stable" in my earlier post.

Also to grab this in from your earlier post:


Yes, that would have been an ideal solution, but when you're talking about implenting changes across such a large high volume database while it remains online and stable, there are simply some limitations to what can be done.


There's a reason that in the software development best practices there is such a thing as a "testing environment" -- a set of systems that mimics the production environment that can be used for testing.

Also, the procedure to switch from one db to another db is this:

1: Get new hardware
2: Set up new DB (dbnew)
3: Poke up the new system and point it at dbnew
4: The new system should in fact be able to update both the dbnew and the old db (dbold).
5: Run both db's simultaneously
6: check db's daily for differences
7: fix whatever is causing differences
8: switch over fully

Presto.

There's a ton of methods to do a live transfer between different db's -- high volume or not. If they are doing anywhere near the amount of db transactions I think they're doing they will have a high availability cluster anyway, and the money to get a 2nd cluster set up for the new system.

All it requires is people that know what they're doing.

[cd34]

First question: Are there any sponsors using the beta where a webmaster can sign up?

Second question: Are there screenshots or the ability for one of the members of this board to sign up for that sponsor program and look around, or, can some additional screenshots of the webmaster interface be posted?

As for your referral id tracking:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?581222

is a current link. That follows through in a hosted gallery to a link that looks like

http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924000-0000&PA=581222

The new link code appears to look like:

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-rftTOPWQUWhWHQG_TIAXtbGjdaiewnciLvJPZb2tsWMs*

and

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

I don't believe it would be any different to send a link like:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

and have it counted on the new site. This is a non-ccbill issue. The coding on the hosted content would need to change slightly, and wouldn't be backwards compatible, so, if a sponsor started using the new system, all of the hosted content would then need to be tagged as 'new format.' Webmasters could then use the new links from this day going forward leaving the legacy links out there. Its possible that the sponsor could mirror the existing content, make the changes for the new link format so that new webmasters could utilize the 'newly' coded 'older' hosted content.

However, the only real issue is the old-traffic versus new-traffic link format.

Based on the example for Sponsor A and Sponsor B and the url's given above, There's obviously some encoding that has been done. Since you are able to generate the encoded values above for the url, you can take:

http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924000-0000&PA=581222

parse out the CA (sponsor) -???? (site) and the partner account number, and generate the encoded value that the new system uses and redirect the traffic from refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi over to the http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/ script. Since all of the values you need for the new system should be contained within the old urls, it would be easy to write that redirect. It wouldn't require any re-integration of the existing redirect script to try and insert data into the new system. A surfer would get a double redirect, but, if you can rewrite that url on the fly based on the data in the old link url, you wouldn't have any need to access a database to move old-style link traffic to the new referral link. No integration nightmares of old to new.

[Greenguy]

That's a lie...I'd like to apologize for that comment. I don't think Paul is a liar, I just think he's being lied to by the programmers.

[Agent]

Hell, here's the solution: if my new "unique" account number is 1234567, then have a database that has ALL my old codes in it. Each time it sees one, like 581222 for Amateur facials, replace it with 1234567.

Problem solved.
Agreed. Naughty America changed their codes around a few times. When they moved from their #-based ID system to NATS, they developed a way to translate the old ID to the new encrypted NATS one. Their old linkcodes still track and translate to the new NATS system, to this day.

[kit]

for example, sponsor A's links may look like this: http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-rftTOPWQUWhWHQG_TIAXtbGjdaiewnciLvJPZb2tsWMs*

While sponsor B's may look like this:

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

So, while they will not be as easily identified as the old ones you will still be able to associate one link with one program.

I hope that helps.

Another "NATS encoding" crap?
The worse thing I ever seen is encoded affiliate links.

Paul, do you discussed your new features with valued webmasters before official pressrelease?

[Cleo]

The worse thing I ever seen is encoded affiliate links.
I would have to agree with Kit on that.

[cd34]

The only real valid reason I can think for encoding the links is that a toolbar or proxy server doing a 'man in the middle' replacement, wouldn't be able to quickly determine the sponsor/site in order to do their replacement. A toolbar currently only needs to look for the CA code to know whether they have an account with that sponsor, and then can do a replacement on the PA part of the url.

With an encoded url, that sponsor/site/affiliate data is somewhat hidden from a quick automated replacement script making it much harder for a toolbar/proxy to replace that info on the fly.

Whether that toolbar is still as prevalent as it used to be is the issue, but, it does prevent the type of variable replacement attack that was being done with that toolbar.

[kit]

NATS code is pretty easy for decoding on toolbar side.
If CCBill provide hard encoded link, adware toolbars will cheat us anyway.

[rooty]

Paul it would be cool to see a full working demo somewhere?

translating to the new system would be possible but that would most likely mean the system has way more overhead. as it now has to do this

refer.ccbill.com |new system installed OR old system still intact|...
if new system -> CA & PA & HTML -> encrypt -> redirect to wms.restofurl/encrypted(values)*

the additional OR check in SQL might very well be the programming issue alone.

not that its hard to do it.... would be the cost of new servers i could imagine... might be wrong.

[CCBill_Paul]

Paul it would be cool to see a full working demo somewhere?

translating to the new system would be possible but that would most likely mean the system has way more overhead. as it now has to do this

refer.ccbill.com |new system installed OR old system still intact|...
if new system -> CA & PA & HTML -> encrypt -> redirect to wms.restofurl/encrypted(values)*

the additional OR check in SQL might very well be the programming issue alone.

not that its hard to do it.... would be the cost of new servers i could imagine... might be wrong.

We can give you a demo but right now the best we can do is an online meeting style demonstration in which you can ask questions and go over most of, if not all of the new functionality. Please shoot me your name and account number if you are interested in more information.


paulk @ ccbill.com

[Greenguy]

Paul - you can ignore every other post in this thread if you find the answers to this one, since cd34 is the smartest man any of us have ever met.

First question: Are there any sponsors using the beta where a webmaster can sign up?

Second question: Are there screenshots or the ability for one of the members of this board to sign up for that sponsor program and look around, or, can some additional screenshots of the webmaster interface be posted?

As for your referral id tracking:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?581222

is a current link. That follows through in a hosted gallery to a link that looks like

http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924000-0000&PA=581222

The new link code appears to look like:

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-rftTOPWQUWhWHQG_TIAXtbGjdaiewnciLvJPZb2tsWMs*

and

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

I don't believe it would be any different to send a link like:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

and have it counted on the new site. This is a non-ccbill issue. The coding on the hosted content would need to change slightly, and wouldn't be backwards compatible, so, if a sponsor started using the new system, all of the hosted content would then need to be tagged as 'new format.' Webmasters could then use the new links from this day going forward leaving the legacy links out there. Its possible that the sponsor could mirror the existing content, make the changes for the new link format so that new webmasters could utilize the 'newly' coded 'older' hosted content.

However, the only real issue is the old-traffic versus new-traffic link format.

Based on the example for Sponsor A and Sponsor B and the url's given above, There's obviously some encoding that has been done. Since you are able to generate the encoded values above for the url, you can take:

http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924000-0000&PA=581222

parse out the CA (sponsor) -???? (site) and the partner account number, and generate the encoded value that the new system uses and redirect the traffic from refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi over to the http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/ script. Since all of the values you need for the new system should be contained within the old urls, it would be easy to write that redirect. It wouldn't require any re-integration of the existing redirect script to try and insert data into the new system. A surfer would get a double redirect, but, if you can rewrite that url on the fly based on the data in the old link url, you wouldn't have any need to access a database to move old-style link traffic to the new referral link. No integration nightmares of old to new.

You get a reply from the programmers on this & we'll all be happy |shake|

[CCBill_Paul]

First question: Are there any sponsors using the beta where a webmaster can sign up?

There is not at the moment but there will be soon. If you want to hit me up I can probably help here shortly.



Second question: Are there screenshots or the ability for one of the members of this board to sign up for that sponsor program and look around, or, can some additional screenshots of the webmaster interface be posted?


Again I don't have any at the moment but I can gather this data for you here very soon.



As for your referral id tracking:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?581222

is a current link. That follows through in a hosted gallery to a link that looks like

http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924000-0000&PA=581222

The new link code appears to look like:

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-rftTOPWQUWhWHQG_TIAXtbGjdaiewnciLvJPZb2tsWMs*

and

http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

I don't believe it would be any different to send a link like:

http://www.domain.com/gallery01/?Lt-KAJSFDNJASDFAKFQG_TIAXasdcvcxsoSLvJPZb2tsWMs*

and have it counted on the new site. This is a non-ccbill issue. The coding on the hosted content would need to change slightly, and wouldn't be backwards compatible, so, if a sponsor started using the new system, all of the hosted content would then need to be tagged as 'new format.' Webmasters could then use the new links from this day going forward leaving the legacy links out there. Its possible that the sponsor could mirror the existing content, make the changes for the new link format so that new webmasters could utilize the 'newly' coded 'older' hosted content.

However, the only real issue is the old-traffic versus new-traffic link format.

Based on the example for Sponsor A and Sponsor B and the url's given above, There's obviously some encoding that has been done. Since you are able to generate the encoded values above for the url, you can take:

http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=924000-0000&PA=581222



Correct.


parse out the CA (sponsor) -???? (site) and the partner account number, and generate the encoded value that the new system uses and redirect the traffic from refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi over to the http://wms.ccbill.com/wmsi/w_id/ script.

So yes, you can do the above but no, you cannot create your own hashes by encoding it yourself.

Hope that helps.

[Greenguy]

There's an interesting thread over on GFY about this:
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?p=16718253

Make sure you read Trixie's post:
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?p=16718253#post16718253

Unbelievable that 8 months later, these same issues we brought up are still unresolved.

[Greenguy]

Just got this email from CCBill - Trixie knows how to get shit done!

Dear CCBill WMS Affiliate:

We wanted to contact you regarding an issue we discovered with the CCBill WMS Affiliate sales payouts to your account. After careful review, we have determined that your WMS Affiliate Account was underpaid for your referred WMS Affiliate sales for the time period from November 29, 2009 to December 26, 2009.

To resolve this issue, we will return the identified funds to your account as soon as possible. These funds will be deposited back into your account in the CCBill sales period of 12/27/09 - 1/02/10; and paid out in the weekly sales check dated 1/11/10.

Please note: Because our payout system performs weekly reconciliations based on each CCBill sales period, we will send you a follow up email notification with the exact amount you are owed soon after the completion of that period's reconciliation process on 1/08/10.

Thank you for your patience in this matter, and please know that we truly value your affiliate business, and we have taken every step to identify and resolve this issue completely.

If you have any questions regarding the resolution of this issue, our Client Support Team is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to assist you. They can be reached toll-free at 800.510.2859, on LIVE CHAT in our Web Admin, or by email at clientsupport@ccbill.com,

Thank you and we wish you the happiest of New Years!

CCBill Management

[Trixie]

LOL -- I know they would've fixed it sooner or later without me going ballistic on GFY.

One of the other things I think is "funny" about this particular situation, though, is that no other sponsors apparently have the balls to complain about any of this or acknowledge noticing what was going on and I *know* I was not the only client to have this problem.

[JustRobert]

I got the exact same email so its obviously a form letter which means I probably do not have any surprise money coming :(

What I would like to know is where the hell is the WMS section in the admin of ccbill. It was there for a short time (with links that were broken) and then it disappeared.

[Fonz]

So what's this WMS thing all about, could someone please explain that to me? :)

[Ms Naughty]

I had a look around yesterday trying to work out what was going on with the underpayments. But it's only with the WMS system, yes?

I should add... I'm only just back from too much time on the beach... my brain is still on holiday.

[Agent]

I got the same e-mail. I assume it's addressed to those missing credit for sales. But who knows. I haven't gotten a follow up e-mail yet.

[Agent]

I got a follow-up e-mail. Thanks Trixie and everyone else who caught this.

[JustRobert]

I also got a follow up email and I was underpaid. I am now hoping that I will be able to figure out which sponsors once the money is received.

Thanks to Trixie for being persistent :)

Who knows, maybe one of those sales belongs to her program.

[JustRobert]

A couple of weeks ago I received a check that included what I was underpaid so I figured this issue was fixed.

Just went thru the last couple of ccbill checks and they are both short from what looks like 1 sponsor (escort cash) that I believe switched over to WMS, not that I am sure because I cannot find the WMS section at all in ccbill's admin.

You may want to check your ccbill checks as well, if you were shorted before, for periods 1/3 to 1/9 and 1/10 to 1/16

[Cleo]

I cannot find the WMS section at all in ccbill's admin.
Are you using this admin?
https://admin.ccbill.com/login3.cgi

[JustRobert]

Thank You Cleo
I was still using https://affiliateadmin.ccbill.com/
Be forewarned, once you sign into the new admin you cannot sign into the old one.

Spoke with online help, here was initial answer:
Currently I have an account specialist looking at your program. There are reporting issues with WMS affiliate programs still, however it should not effect the checks. As soon as I have more information, I will let you know.

Received email from account specialist:
You contacted us concerning short checks for your affiliate program. This is due to the fact that the client has not made enough money to payout his affiliates the full amount. The reason for this is because when we had the initial reporting payout errors in December affiliates did not get paid. They are now paying those amounts which is cause them to be behind.

[tickler]

Received email from account specialist:
You contacted us concerning short checks for your affiliate program. This is due to the fact that the client has not made enough money to payout his affiliates the full amount. The reason for this is because when we had the initial reporting payout errors in December affiliates did not get paid. They are now paying those amounts which is cause them to be behind.
Error, Error, Does Not Compute! |crazy|

Are they saying they overpaid the sponsor, so there is not enough available funds to pay the affiliates.

What dialect is this? "which is cause them" |scared|

[Simon]

Sounds like the problem is CCBill accidentally overpaid the client (sponsor) and underpaid the affiliates. Now they want to make good on the amounts they underpaid to the affiliates *only* out of dollars generated by each individual affected sponsor program.

CCBill's better option, in my opinion, would be to make good on *their* mistake by paying all affiliates immediately on all funds owed to them due to the mistake made by CCBill which caused this problem. CCBill could then make adjustments in the amounts paid to their clients (sponsors) on an ongoing basis until they'd balanced the numbers to what they should actually be.

Having the affiliates wait to get paid on something that was the billing company's problem is too reminiscent of what other billing companies no longer around (or recently resurrected) did to many of us in the past.

Come on, CCBill, you're the *one* billing company most of us trust and recommend to everyone who asks. Don't act like those other guys. Give us something to believe in.


.

[JustRobert]

Thats my feeling as well Simon.

Over pay the client and under pay the affiliate. How do you fix it? By continuing to underpay the affiliate, how nice.

[Trixie]

SO TRUE, Simon. I didn't know that's what was happening, but I'll chalk that up to yet another inexcusable mistake. Fuck shit up? That's one thing, but fuck shit up when we pay them such a substantial percentage and only apologize with their mouths without doing a single thing to even try to make up for it except eventually get the money to people in bits and pieces? NOT OKAY.

And now? Our (sponsors') signup forms for affiliates are all fucked up; nobody can sign up to our program or apparently any other sponsor who made the mistake of "converting" to WMS.

I put "converting" in quotation marks because we were led to believe it would run concurrent with the old program (not that one would replace the other as in a "conversion") and wouldn't be the living hell this has turned into with trust we'd established with our affiliates eroded when they sent out those stupid emails, and then now this bullshit with people not being able to log into the old admin (I haven't seen it firsthand as an affiliate myself because I haven't signed in that way so the old way still works).

I could rant about this all night, but I'll leave it at that and try to relax on Saturday night. The way CCBill's staff seems to be able to do.

[Greenguy]

I got 2 emails like this last week - tell me what you think is wrong with it :D

RE: Your CCBill.com Affiliate Account #: 8774


Dear Affiliate:

A change has been made in the payout settings for WebCashMaker.com (926455-0000).

Details regarding this change can be found by clicking on the following link www.url.com.

If you have any questions regarding the Web Marketing Service, please e-mail clientsupport@ccbill.com.

Regards,
CCBill Client Support
1-888-596-9279 (U.S.)
1-888-906-0666 (International)
Open 24 hours a day; 7 days a week; 365 days a year
www.ccbill.com

[JustRobert]

Forgot to mention this week that I have received a portion of the payout shortage, which means I still have to monitor new checks coming in. Thankfully, I print out all end of period earnings and put them in a waiting to be paid file to verify against checks coming in.

Greenie, I received that same email |huh

[[BV]]

I got 2 emails like this last week - tell me what you think is wrong with it :D

the url.com thing?