Quote:
Originally posted by Dravyk@Dec 20 2004, 09:15 PM
Rolo, I never said one has to shave, just that those who want to, can -- even in a so-called "no shave" system.
Matter of fact, if I wanted to have a program that shaved, there is no way I'd have an in-house stats system! The very best way to "demonstrate" how "clean and honest" the program would be is to use some third-party processor or program that 99% of the webhamsters think is unshavable and then find a way to do it!!
Slav, Nick, everyone of you traffic guys (ditto Greenie, others) swear by PPS over revshare every time. Never has made sense to me; still doesn't. We all know sponsor PPS is not set up to be advantageous to the affiliate; it's where the sponsor makes the money. So, if you really think otherwise, post the numbers. 
|
Don't get me wrong, I feel rev share is certainly a viable option and that every webmaster should be sending a portion of their traffic to good rev share programs like Vick's and others out there BUT think of it in these terms.
Ask any economics professor which option they would choose if they won the lottery if they won 100 million (or whatever it is), the 45 million lump sum payment or the 100 million over 20 or 25 years depending on the lottery and practically down to the professor they will tell you that they will choose the lump sum. Why? It's really rather simple. That larger lump sum allows you to leverage your upfront money MUCH more so as to be able to make MUCH more through the years than were you to just take the 4 million a year. It allows you to make the MAXIMUM use of the buying power and leverage of your money right away. It's the same principle here except on a much shorter time scale.