Plus they employ lawyers
Okay you are basically just rehashing what Angel of Wealth said. Read and comprehend my post please. It's not expensive to draft a complaint and file it in court if the defendant can't afford a lawyer.
Plus they employ lawyers
Hello there. Without any way to identify you, I cannot tell what might have happened here. I can assure you and anyone reading this that if you were removed from the network, it was because of fraud. If the quality was so low that it pissed off the merchant, then you were either misleading surfers, offering incentives when you shouldn't, using a bot to autosubmit leads, deceptively iframing, or doing something else that violated the rules of the campaign to the point where the leads had no value.I've never spoken to you directly Steve, but don't try to put yourself in the same boat as Copeac. I was personally screwed out of $1,200 by your network. I never took it public because I figured the amount was not worth it. I was removed from your network afterwards because apparently the quality on the $1200 was so low you believed it to be fraudulent. I had an account with MaxBounty for several years at the time (never ran volume beforehand) and your network just booted me because the advertiser didn't like my traffic. I've been in the industry for 5 years, work with all the major aff networks, and do over 500k in a good month, so it wasn't me, it was your network. Oh, and when I repeatedly emailed your compliance department, my AM, and the higher-ups whose contact information I could find, I got 0 answers. (I definitely still have all those emails to prove it too.)
So... you're no Copeac.
I'm certainly not going to step up to the plate for a fraudulent affiliate, nor am I going to pay them for leads that are fraud. I know this is an exception that rarely happens, but that's what most clauses in contracts are for - to handle the exceptions. And that's why I have a similar clause in my affiliate terms and conditions, and why I'd never remove it. How many times have I exercised this clause in the 5+ years MB's been around? Zero. But I leave it in as a just-in-case.
I can assure you and anyone reading this that if you were removed from the network, it was because of fraud. If the quality was so low that it pissed off the merchant, then you were either misleading surfers, offering incentives when you shouldn't, using a bot to autosubmit leads, deceptively iframing, or doing something else that violated the rules of the campaign to the point where the leads had no value.
The clause I've never exercised is the one that says I won't pay an affiliate if I didn't get paid by a merchant. That is a separate clause from the ones dealing with fraud. Bottom line, my collection issues do not affect my affiliates.I thought the 1st paragraph sounded odd when I read it yesterday ... you've never exercised the clause that deals with fraud?
Would you mind clarifying for me what clause you're talking about that's a fat bastard (read: un-exercised)? I think I missed something.
Hello there. Without any way to identify you, I cannot tell what might have happened here. I can assure you and anyone reading this that if you were removed from the network, it was because of fraud. If the quality was so low that it pissed off the merchant, then you were either misleading surfers, offering incentives when you shouldn't, using a bot to autosubmit leads, deceptively iframing, or doing something else that violated the rules of the campaign to the point where the leads had no value.
That's doesn't seem fair... I haven't seen anything from him that makes his network seem any worse than any other network out there.Just based on Steve's responses in this thread I would probably never sign up for Max-Bounty.
You think you'd make a lot of money without publishers? Cause I'll be very honest, I would NEVER sign up for a network that makes an absurd comment like this.Because it puts too much protection on the side of the affiliate, and that's dangerous.
Just based on Steve's responses in this thread I would probably never sign up for Max-Bounty.
This statement is way too broad.Payment for Commissions is dependent upon Clients providing such funds to COPEAC, and therefore, you agree that COPEAC shall only be liable to you for Commissions to the extent that COPEAC has received such funds from the Clients. You hereby release COPEAC from any claim for Commissions if COPEAC has not received such funds from the Clients.
BTW, it is also total bullshit that an advertiser may need "weeks" to determine if the traffic is good. If they put forth the effort it would be days and, again, if it isn't fraud they need to cut you off but PAY.
I've never spoken to you directly Steve, but don't try to put yourself in the same boat as Copeac. I was personally screwed out of $1,200 by your network. I never took it public because I figured the amount was not worth it. I was removed from your network afterwards because apparently the quality on the $1200 was so low you believed it to be fraudulent. I had an account with MaxBounty for several years at the time (never ran volume beforehand) and your network just booted me because the advertiser didn't like my traffic. I've been in the industry for 5 years, work with all the major aff networks, and do over 500k in a good month, so it wasn't me, it was your network. Oh, and when I repeatedly emailed your compliance department, my AM, and the higher-ups whose contact information I could find, I got 0 answers. (I definitely still have all those emails to prove it too.)
So... you're no Copeac.
Just based on Steve's responses in this thread I would probably never sign up for Max-Bounty.
But why is it so fucking hard to collect on these advertisers?