What are Merchant Ts and Cs there for
Interesting thread over on abestweb and here too on MooseOnTheLoose
Which has prompted me to question again, what is the role of an affiliate network with regards to terms and conditions and enforcing them? Should networks have to police affiliates and merchants? Networks have been and probably will come under the spotlight in terms of who they are in favour of more, the merchant or the affiliate? Perhaps the suspicion from some affiliates is that they are in quantity and disposable and there fore networks will favour the merchant when things go awry.The ABWEB thread highlights the plight of the network and where they sit, but when evidence is stacked up in favour of the affiliate, do the networks have the guts to throw the book at offending merchants when it comes to the crunch?
There can be little doubt that affiliate marketing in general has a big element of trust thrown into the mix of daily business practices. That trust element leaves a hole that can be abused by any party, be they a merchant, an affiliate or even a network. All are interdependent on each other. So when conflict arises between an affiliate and a merchant what should networks do? What is their role?
Terms and conditions are created to a) protect all parties b) they are rules c) they are the written law that all parties have to abide by. So in theory, if there are clear written terms and conditions in place, conflict need never arise or at the very least conflict is reduced.
But, what happens when conflict does arise? All parties should go back and look at the terms and conditions, this has to be the first point of reference. If terms and conditions have been breached then the course of action is pretty much sorted, no debating the matter “it is as it is!” As Loxly suggests and which I agree “If a merchant changes their terms, they should pay the commissions due up to the point of the terms being changed and the affiliates being notified”.The problem of conflict can be exasperated by the sheer lack of forethought that has gone into putting ts and cs together from a merchant, from the off. Some ts and cs range from the vague and obscure and woefully lacking to the extremes of several pages of lawyers language that falls short of preventing the affiliate from even having a website let alone even hints about promoting the merchant. But, Im not sure that it is fair to expect merchants to all be able to put ts and cs together if they are just entering this space. Some will probably be on a learning curveand know very little. Also as I mentioned before, affiliate programs and the internet is not static and changes can occur, from the subtle to the extreme and ts and cs written yesterday are possibly not applicable today. By way of an example, as merchants become more educated, not just in terms of affiliate marketing but in terms of their own businesses, their own marketing strategies and internet skills.
One thing we all agree on is that merchant’s ts and cs should be clear, transparent and binding, but why bother if no one takes any notice?
One solution could be that a merchant upon signing up to the network, a ts and cs account manager at the network will help put the merchants ts and cs in place. After all, that point of contact at the network should already have some ideas about how this merchant operates. In the same way we all log in to look at our stats on a network, perhaps there should be an area that asks merchants, do you need to update your ts and cs, as was suggested by Chris AMWSO and Jorge JRami http://forum.abestweb.com/showthread.php?t=90874 which in turn can be displayed to affiliates.Whilst cj.com have attempted to address changes in ts and cs, from personal experience we lost a whole bunch of affiliates as they did not and were not aware of the new changes and commissions could not be allocated to them unless they logged in and accepted the changes (not our idea by the way, it was eforced by the new gaming laws re US bingo). Messy in a word, but… I don’t think they are too far off the mark, they just need to rethink the processes.
My role is to sit in between the affiliate, network and merchant. Where potential conflicts may arise, I see my role as primarily a negotiator, try to settle things before they get out of hand. If there is no settlement that can be reached and the merchant is clearly wrong and just is shooting themselves and their program in the foot, we are not shy at severing that relationship, it’s in no ones interests then to continue. Yes… means loss of earnings, but if you know something is wrong and the evidence supports this, then it’s quite clear what the course of action is. If we lose a client, this is a clear signal to affiliates that some thing is not right in the way the client perceives affiliate marketing and continuing will just give rise to more conflict. Having a code of conduct and sticking to it, sets us apart in other words, we are not scared we are confident in our own minds that best practice works for everyone.
I feel the role of the affiliate network should be the same. If the evidence is stacked up in favour of the affiliate, regardless if the merchant are a big high street brands or jims jams small business, rules is rules and if negotiation fails, go back to the terms and conditions and take appropriate action. The bottom line is, if the networks don’t want to police or enforce them, then who else is going to?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment