In this post, we’ll explain all the doubts associated with rejecting transactions on the content network.
Few words about the CPS model
In the Cost Per Sale model, the advertiser shares with the publisher a commission on the sales value, which will be implemented by the publisher. If the transaction, however, is not finalized, the client will not make the payment or return the goods, the advertiser has the right to reject the commission charged to the commissioner.
For the above reason, the Cost Per Sale model is very attractive from the perspective of the advertiser, as it does not carry the risk of incurring promotion costs, which is not effective. The advertiser shares the commission when they earn.
In order for such cooperation with publishers to develop, it must be equally attractive from the perspective of the publisher. That’s why it’s important to know when an advertiser has the full right to refuse an ad commission and when not. What is in line with the cooperation agreement with the publishers and affiliate network, and which cases are an abuse of the opportunity to refuse accrued commissions for sales.
Direct or indirect?
Two basic types of transaction bans:
Directly connected to the by advertiser – client relationship, i.e. the reasons for rejection related to the customer’s order realization through the store.
Indirect affiliation related to the advertiser’s store – the publisher relationship, that is all other reasons, due to which the advertiser decides to refuse the commission assigned to a specific publisher.
Direct reasons for bounces.
Transactions are most commonly rejected for direct reasons, they will be:
- Return of the goods. It occurs when the customer, in the time specified by the rules of the store, resigns from the purchased products. Then, returns them.
- No payment if the customer does not make a payment for the order.
- Cancellation of the order, the client may in the process of cancel the purchase and cancel his order.
In the aforementioned cases, the advertiser may refuse the transaction. In accordance with the contract, in the CPS model, they settle for the sales results. Then they share the commission with the publisher when the customer pays the order. Also, when they do not not return it within the set time.
It happens, however, that the client ordered several products but several of them sends back as a return. So they gives up a part of the order. The publisher then still has a percentage of the actual sales value. Since the advertiser can not edit the value of the order individually in the webePartners system, in such a situation, please contact the program’s supervisor or the Customer Service Office and report the correct value of the order.
Indirect reasons for rejections – other sources of traffic.
Google Analitics provides a lot of data, also indicates the source of traffic from which the order in the online store originated. However, it should be remembered that GA will never take into account the basic principle of the affiliate program. That is the lifetime of 30-day cookies. What does it mean? The user redirects the cookie to the advertiser’s store. And, if they placed an order in this store within 30 days of its validity, the affiliate system correctly commits the commission to the publisher’s account.
Google Analitics does not take into account the lifetime of partner program cookies. So, the visit of each user who entered the advertiser’s store from the affiliate link… Then left the store and returned to it from another source… It will be assigned by GA to other traffic sources, such as:
SEO / organic. That is, the transition to the store from the level of the search engine. If the transaction was counted to the affiliate network system, previously the user had to click on the affiliate link, after which they left the store. Then, after a few minutes, hours or days, they searched the shop in the search engine and made a purchase.
Referal. Here the situation is analogous, except that the transition to the store came from some external service (e.g. Ceneo). The user first walked from the affiliate link, left the store. Then, after a few minutes, hours or days, entered a different service, from which the redirection finally made the purchase.
Direct. Again, similar situation, except that the user who first came to the store from the affiliate link, left it, and after a few minutes, hours or days, entered the name of the store directly in the search engine and made a purchase in it.
Social media. It often happens that users return to the store through their profile, for example on Facebook, where they will display the advertisement of the store. If the order has been counted in the affiliate system, there is no doubt that the user’s previous visit to the store was from the affiliate link, even though GA shows a different source of traffic.
The above sources of traffic included by Google Analitics are not grounds for refusing the commission charged to publishers. The Last Click Wins rule does not work for the above examples.
Last Click Wins
An advertiser may apply the Last Click Wins policy if they work with two or more affiliate networks. This means that the order is awarded to the network from which the last affiliate link was clicked. For example, if the client clicked on the link from network A and dumped the cookie, and – some time later – clicked on the network link B, then for it the transaction will be accepted. Although, it will appear in one and the other system. In this case, simply, the first-come-first-served principle does not work, it’s just the opposite! 🙂
The Last Click Wins principle aims to protect the advertiser so that they do not pay publishers twice for one completed order.
Many on-line stores have signed contracts with a wholesale customer who orders larger quantities of goods than the average consumer. Wholesale orders can also, by accident, be assigned to the publisher if they click on the affiliate link. You can reject such orders if your cooperation with a given wholesale customer is properly documented.
You can reject transactions when:
- the customer returned the goods, canceled the order or did not pay for it,
- there was deduplication, the same transaction appeared in two affiliate networks, the last click wins rule applies here
- these are test or internal orders,
- these are wholesale orders with customers with whom the contract has been signed.
You cannot refuse a transaction when:
- the customer returned only part of the order,
- an external traffic source has occurred, which is not another affiliate network,
- the customer orders the wholesale quantities of goods, but you do not have a contract with them in this matter.
How useful was this post?
Click on a star to rate it!
Average rating / 5. Vote count:
Data publikacji: 11.06.2019