Quote:
Originally posted by Sean416
This email from xxxjay about OCCash really had me thinking about the other sponsors I use that are still on CCBILL
"After about a couple weeks of pre-beta testing, we are ready to start using OCCash V2. This is an email is going out to all of our old CCBill affiliates. We've been running cascading billing through NATS and the difference in the numbers is phenomenal...
...We are now running on a NATS backend, which is a huge improvement over using CCBill only. In our first two months running on CCBill only, we found scrubbing up to 30-40% of our sales and there is also the issue cookie loss for affiliates. The cascading NATS backend now tracks everything and is quite solid. Conversions for new affiliates have more than doubled. We will also have a few new sites that are pending Visa approval and free hosted sites for you to promote by the end of the week. "
30-40%! The only reason I still use ccbill sponsors is because of some of the smaller niches like handjobs, footjobs & creampies where if I dropped them, I'd have a lot loss sites listed.
|
no offence, Jay have a great LL with some nice traffic, but he is still new within the paysite biz. He didnt compare apples and apples. The decline ratio on ccbill is about 10%, not 30-40%, I never heard, that somebody would have that high decline ratio. And also he posted that his affliates has a average ratio of 1:1800 at ccbill, forgot that those are raw first page hits + the ratio is not a problem of ccbill. I have 1:500-1000 raws on ccbill stats on average, so he shouldnt blame ccbill. Cascadding is great, but to expect a 10-15% increase from it, is more real.