<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Paying to Apply to an Affiliate Program</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/</link>
	<description>Affiliate marketing news and opinion from Shawn Collins, an affiliate marketer since 1997, and co-founder of Affiliate Summit.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:44:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Immodest Proposal for Affiliate Marketing &#124; Affiliate Marketing Blog by Shawn Collins</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-2/#comment-77019</link>
		<dc:creator>Immodest Proposal for Affiliate Marketing &#124; Affiliate Marketing Blog by Shawn Collins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 14:51:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-77019</guid>
		<description>[...] I wasn&#8217;t too high on this method, but in reflection I think it could be quite useful in qualifying affiliates and cutting out some [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I wasn&#8217;t too high on this method, but in reflection I think it could be quite useful in qualifying affiliates and cutting out some [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Walters</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-2/#comment-72301</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Walters</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:09:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72301</guid>
		<description>There are other pertinent replies over at
http://blog.affiliatewindow.com/?p=49
so I&#039;ll try not to reiterate the dialogue.

Jess, you&#039;re so right, it is about choice.  If we lose the odd good affiliate because they are deterred by the sign up then this has to be weighed against the safety of stopping fraudulent attempts to set up accounts, (which are diminishing in frequency). 

AdGuy and Franklin, I made a reply in the AW blog which probably covers in more detail why we chose Â£5 and the reason not to refund for fraudulent attempts.

Carsten, affiliates who set up their first AW account are able to contact account managers who will supply unique invitation codes which by-pass the charge and credit process when setting up additional accounts.  Alternatively we can set them up for you.  Once you&#039;ve proved who you are, there&#039;s no reason to have to do it time and time again.

I agree with you on AdSense but it would be interesting to gauge the comparison of custom ContentWidgets to display relevant products, especially if they carry specific codes or bespoke offers.  It&#039;s being used by numerous affiliates including some new media portals

http://www.virginmedia.com/shopping/goshop/
http://sunshop.shopwindow.com/

As mentioned in my last post on the AW blog, working with us hopefully makes the investment worthwhile, which is probably why so many of our affiliates have chosen to defend us.   All networks will tell you what you want to hear, we want you to hear it from our partners as they have no reason to deceive.  

OK just a bit of reiterated dialogue :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are other pertinent replies over at<br />
<a href="http://blog.affiliatewindow.com/?p=49" rel="nofollow">http://blog.affiliatewindow.com/?p=49</a><br />
so I&#8217;ll try not to reiterate the dialogue.</p>
<p>Jess, you&#8217;re so right, it is about choice.  If we lose the odd good affiliate because they are deterred by the sign up then this has to be weighed against the safety of stopping fraudulent attempts to set up accounts, (which are diminishing in frequency). </p>
<p>AdGuy and Franklin, I made a reply in the AW blog which probably covers in more detail why we chose Â£5 and the reason not to refund for fraudulent attempts.</p>
<p>Carsten, affiliates who set up their first AW account are able to contact account managers who will supply unique invitation codes which by-pass the charge and credit process when setting up additional accounts.  Alternatively we can set them up for you.  Once you&#8217;ve proved who you are, there&#8217;s no reason to have to do it time and time again.</p>
<p>I agree with you on AdSense but it would be interesting to gauge the comparison of custom ContentWidgets to display relevant products, especially if they carry specific codes or bespoke offers.  It&#8217;s being used by numerous affiliates including some new media portals</p>
<p><a href="http://www.virginmedia.com/shopping/goshop/" rel="nofollow">http://www.virginmedia.com/shopping/goshop/</a><br />
<a href="http://sunshop.shopwindow.com/" rel="nofollow">http://sunshop.shopwindow.com/</a></p>
<p>As mentioned in my last post on the AW blog, working with us hopefully makes the investment worthwhile, which is probably why so many of our affiliates have chosen to defend us.   All networks will tell you what you want to hear, we want you to hear it from our partners as they have no reason to deceive.  </p>
<p>OK just a bit of reiterated dialogue <img src='http://blog.affiliatetip.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carsten Cumbrowski</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-2/#comment-72299</link>
		<dc:creator>Carsten Cumbrowski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 05:41:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72299</guid>
		<description>I also think that volume is a problem. I just have to look at my small resources site about internet marketing. I use affiliate links to the resource, if they have an affiliate program and allow me to link to the page that I want to refer to. 

Some generate more commission than others, depending on the subject and the amount of competition. Because of the amount of platforms and networks out there, did I end up with 50+ accounts or so, just for affiliate links for this one site alone. If each of them would require me to pay 5 pounds for the signup, I would have 250 pounds and more spent , just to add the affiliate link. I think I would have been better off with AdSense under such circumstances and made Google happy. However, I am glad that this is not the case and that I am able to use editorial links (affiliate or not) to monetize the site instead of ads where I do not have control over. Needless to say, the number of AdSense ads on my site is getting less and less.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I also think that volume is a problem. I just have to look at my small resources site about internet marketing. I use affiliate links to the resource, if they have an affiliate program and allow me to link to the page that I want to refer to. </p>
<p>Some generate more commission than others, depending on the subject and the amount of competition. Because of the amount of platforms and networks out there, did I end up with 50+ accounts or so, just for affiliate links for this one site alone. If each of them would require me to pay 5 pounds for the signup, I would have 250 pounds and more spent , just to add the affiliate link. I think I would have been better off with AdSense under such circumstances and made Google happy. However, I am glad that this is not the case and that I am able to use editorial links (affiliate or not) to monetize the site instead of ads where I do not have control over. Needless to say, the number of AdSense ads on my site is getting less and less.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Franklin</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-2/#comment-72281</link>
		<dc:creator>Franklin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:34:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72281</guid>
		<description>This is really a compelling discussion. I just wanted to say that here in the US, free registration in a network is the norm, and most networks have a look at a new affiliate&#039;s work online before approval. They verify email too, and some do other checks as well.  Some have no approval process at all.

At this point in my years online I would pay the fee that is being described if I had to in order to get into a good network, if they all started doing this. However, since we have great networks right here that are free to join, I personally see no incentive to join Affiliate Window even though there are a ton of testimonials in this discussion.

I would suggest that if they need this type of verification they could simply use a one time debit and credit of Â£1.00 by Paypal, and it would serve the same purpose, and all the affiliate is giving up is the email. Moneybookers would work too of course.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is really a compelling discussion. I just wanted to say that here in the US, free registration in a network is the norm, and most networks have a look at a new affiliate&#8217;s work online before approval. They verify email too, and some do other checks as well.  Some have no approval process at all.</p>
<p>At this point in my years online I would pay the fee that is being described if I had to in order to get into a good network, if they all started doing this. However, since we have great networks right here that are free to join, I personally see no incentive to join Affiliate Window even though there are a ton of testimonials in this discussion.</p>
<p>I would suggest that if they need this type of verification they could simply use a one time debit and credit of Â£1.00 by Paypal, and it would serve the same purpose, and all the affiliate is giving up is the email. Moneybookers would work too of course.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AdGuy</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-2/#comment-72271</link>
		<dc:creator>AdGuy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:43:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72271</guid>
		<description>Having some insight into the number of dodgy affiliates who sign up for an affiliate account, I think this is an excellent idea (although i do believe the Â£5  should be refunded if the affilaite is not accepted into the system).  I wouldn&#039;t be surprised if we started to see this practice in the US sooner, rather than later.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having some insight into the number of dodgy affiliates who sign up for an affiliate account, I think this is an excellent idea (although i do believe the Â£5  should be refunded if the affilaite is not accepted into the system).  I wouldn&#8217;t be surprised if we started to see this practice in the US sooner, rather than later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jess Luthi</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-2/#comment-72269</link>
		<dc:creator>Jess Luthi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:21:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72269</guid>
		<description>Id send her an email and send them awins contact details. From the affiliates that have referred to awin, I have never come across one saying that they had a problem, but.. I did not mean to imply that there were none, my bad :0)
I still cant see why any affiliate would have a problem with a Â£5 investment that they get back. But as you say... the affiliate has a choice anyway and if them apples dont grab her then indeed she can go else where and surely thats the point, she is not confined to just one network and perhaps one networks loss is anothers gain? Or maybe lucky escape for the network and merchant? Depends how you look at it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Id send her an email and send them awins contact details. From the affiliates that have referred to awin, I have never come across one saying that they had a problem, but.. I did not mean to imply that there were none, my bad :0)<br />
I still cant see why any affiliate would have a problem with a Â£5 investment that they get back. But as you say&#8230; the affiliate has a choice anyway and if them apples dont grab her then indeed she can go else where and surely thats the point, she is not confined to just one network and perhaps one networks loss is anothers gain? Or maybe lucky escape for the network and merchant? Depends how you look at it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Ross</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-2/#comment-72267</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Ross</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:13:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72267</guid>
		<description>Shawn

This may have had something to do with the wording on the sign up page.  This has now been updated.  Would be interested to hear your feedback on the new text. 

Adam</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shawn</p>
<p>This may have had something to do with the wording on the sign up page.  This has now been updated.  Would be interested to hear your feedback on the new text. </p>
<p>Adam</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shawn Collins</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-1/#comment-72266</link>
		<dc:creator>Shawn Collins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:09:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72266</guid>
		<description>Hi Jess -

Thanks for your perspective.

Please note that I was answering a question from a perspective affiliate, and she was concerned about it.

Based on her question, I would venture to guess that it has deterred newbies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jess -</p>
<p>Thanks for your perspective.</p>
<p>Please note that I was answering a question from a perspective affiliate, and she was concerned about it.</p>
<p>Based on her question, I would venture to guess that it has deterred newbies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jess Luthi</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-1/#comment-72260</link>
		<dc:creator>Jess Luthi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:40:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72260</guid>
		<description>Hey Shawn :0)

The move to charge Â£5.00 back in the day was met with some scepticism here, I myself wondered if this would be a barrier to entry, the answer is no, itâ€™s not. Your looking at this from the outside looking in. Had you done your proper research and actually asked the people that use this network, from an affiliateâ€™s perspective, agency perspective, merchant perspective, then I believe you may have drawn a different conclusion. 

I am an affiliate, an agency within affiliatewindow.com 

My clients expect me to do my due diligence with regards to affiliates, this Â£5 entry actually makes my job a lot easier. It does deter fraudsters, especially with the pay per lead programs. I believe at affiliatesummit Vegas last year, this was very much spoken about in one of the sessions. Pay Per Lead programs attract a certain element that need to be vetted. Seems to me some of those speakers spend a good chunk of time just vetting affiliates.  If by affiliate window charging Â£5.00 for entry into their network deters just one fraudster, then clearly it works!  I could understand your shock if awin pocketed Â£5.00 but you have been told, you get this back. Andâ€¦ as an affiliate referrer, I get Â£2.00 commission for affiliates I referr, so where does awin make its money if this is what you are veering toward? It doesnâ€™t, it spends money to acquire serious affiliates. I work with affiliatewindow.com on a daily basis and I know what they do with affiliates, I know how proactive they are with affiliates. Quality control is evident with affiliatewindow.com which is seriously lacking in most other networks. I can count on one hand the number of affiliate networks home and away that actually care about who is joining their aff network. Something else re aff managers doing their due diligenceâ€¦ as an agency, we donâ€™t always get to see referring links, some networks donâ€™t support this, some clients donâ€™t provide us with their back end stats. Meaning the way affiliates are allowed to sign up using one out of many websites urls (its all you need for most networks), any email address and taking onboard that in some networks you cant even contact your affiliates yadaâ€¦yadaâ€¦ its nigh on impossible to be able to tell who is a potential fraudster. Affiliatewindow.com have put one measure in place which is not 100% full proof but certainly minimises the chances of a chancer and that can only be a good thing, surely?

I reiterate has this Â£5.00 ever deterred an affiliate I have referred from signing up?
No it has not!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Shawn :0)</p>
<p>The move to charge Â£5.00 back in the day was met with some scepticism here, I myself wondered if this would be a barrier to entry, the answer is no, itâ€™s not. Your looking at this from the outside looking in. Had you done your proper research and actually asked the people that use this network, from an affiliateâ€™s perspective, agency perspective, merchant perspective, then I believe you may have drawn a different conclusion. </p>
<p>I am an affiliate, an agency within affiliatewindow.com </p>
<p>My clients expect me to do my due diligence with regards to affiliates, this Â£5 entry actually makes my job a lot easier. It does deter fraudsters, especially with the pay per lead programs. I believe at affiliatesummit Vegas last year, this was very much spoken about in one of the sessions. Pay Per Lead programs attract a certain element that need to be vetted. Seems to me some of those speakers spend a good chunk of time just vetting affiliates.  If by affiliate window charging Â£5.00 for entry into their network deters just one fraudster, then clearly it works!  I could understand your shock if awin pocketed Â£5.00 but you have been told, you get this back. Andâ€¦ as an affiliate referrer, I get Â£2.00 commission for affiliates I referr, so where does awin make its money if this is what you are veering toward? It doesnâ€™t, it spends money to acquire serious affiliates. I work with affiliatewindow.com on a daily basis and I know what they do with affiliates, I know how proactive they are with affiliates. Quality control is evident with affiliatewindow.com which is seriously lacking in most other networks. I can count on one hand the number of affiliate networks home and away that actually care about who is joining their aff network. Something else re aff managers doing their due diligenceâ€¦ as an agency, we donâ€™t always get to see referring links, some networks donâ€™t support this, some clients donâ€™t provide us with their back end stats. Meaning the way affiliates are allowed to sign up using one out of many websites urls (its all you need for most networks), any email address and taking onboard that in some networks you cant even contact your affiliates yadaâ€¦yadaâ€¦ its nigh on impossible to be able to tell who is a potential fraudster. Affiliatewindow.com have put one measure in place which is not 100% full proof but certainly minimises the chances of a chancer and that can only be a good thing, surely?</p>
<p>I reiterate has this Â£5.00 ever deterred an affiliate I have referred from signing up?<br />
No it has not!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shane</title>
		<link>http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/comment-page-1/#comment-72249</link>
		<dc:creator>shane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 00:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.affiliatetip.com/archives/paying-to-apply-to-an-affiliate-program/#comment-72249</guid>
		<description>Bearing in mind the number of networks out there that don&#039;t seem to care how affiliates drive traffic it&#039;s a positive step forward for us all if Affiliate Window are actually bothered exactly WHO their affiliates are and exactly WHO has access to their publisher&#039;s programs, and by default the traffic of other affiliates if that publisher turned out to be a spy/adware publisher with many active installs etc.

Carston I agree with your comment regarding this approach being &quot;in extreme opposition to the approach taken by companies here in the US &quot; ...

We are well aware  that many networks in the US market basically take all comers in any shape or form however they may drive traffic.

Now here&#039;s a UK network moving the bar higher and taking the time to deter dodgy affiliates and validate genuine ones and you guys are grumbling over a fiver .. that&#039;s a short sighted view IMO

I bet that most active US affiliates reading this have each lost more than Â£5 today (some far more !!) in traffic that they have had pimped via spy/adware publishers active on networks you may work with that don&#039;t care to check just exactly who their affiliates are, and welcome anyone with sign up bonuses and open arms and no pertinent questions asked.

If you are a genuine affiliate then Â£5 (never mind the refund !) is a bargain to ensure that you&#039;re not paying a ppc bill that another affiliate is benefiting from.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bearing in mind the number of networks out there that don&#8217;t seem to care how affiliates drive traffic it&#8217;s a positive step forward for us all if Affiliate Window are actually bothered exactly WHO their affiliates are and exactly WHO has access to their publisher&#8217;s programs, and by default the traffic of other affiliates if that publisher turned out to be a spy/adware publisher with many active installs etc.</p>
<p>Carston I agree with your comment regarding this approach being &#8220;in extreme opposition to the approach taken by companies here in the US &#8221; &#8230;</p>
<p>We are well aware  that many networks in the US market basically take all comers in any shape or form however they may drive traffic.</p>
<p>Now here&#8217;s a UK network moving the bar higher and taking the time to deter dodgy affiliates and validate genuine ones and you guys are grumbling over a fiver .. that&#8217;s a short sighted view IMO</p>
<p>I bet that most active US affiliates reading this have each lost more than Â£5 today (some far more !!) in traffic that they have had pimped via spy/adware publishers active on networks you may work with that don&#8217;t care to check just exactly who their affiliates are, and welcome anyone with sign up bonuses and open arms and no pertinent questions asked.</p>
<p>If you are a genuine affiliate then Â£5 (never mind the refund !) is a bargain to ensure that you&#8217;re not paying a ppc bill that another affiliate is benefiting from.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->
