Hi Lingo; I'm not Peter, but thought I'd toss some interesting thoughts in. You said; =========================================== Honestly, as an affiliate, I like the idea of being able to receive a random payment. I wish MORE affiliate programs were set up this way. I DON'T like the idea of selling the get rich quick idea... =========================================== The theory of "found money" has always been appealing. Heck, that's why lotteries will never die. Doesn't matter if I have a better chance of getting hit by lightning - seeing the people picking up their big checks/cheques is enough to keep the masses buying a ticket. The thing is, the very structure of a randomizer is that the "users" make little or nothing and the admin makes the killing. If you look at the post where I did the math (post called "for Winston" a couple of pages back) you'll see who actually makes the money. =========================================== Also, shouldn't they at least offer some type of service to those who choose to pay for a membership as well? =========================================== They're not really worried about offering something for a membership. Let's be honest. All the stuff most "randomizers" give away is stuff that "everyone" gives away free. The real meal deal is the money that admin makes while appealing to everyone else's hunger for "found money" and "money for doing nothing." Sure, it would be great if a "legit" business just gave away money to members at random. But the minute they do that, they risk being labelled as a "random money" program which falls into the ponzi label, and a legit business doesn't want that label. That's why a lot of businesses will give financial rewards to their top seller, or their top recruiter - or any other way BUT to call it random money. : ) Linda

Hi Linda, Thanks for that. I understand completely. I am not wanting to advocate the get rich quick idea that is sold on randomizer sites. Joining one of these sites will not make you a rich person who wakes up to see payment notifications in the inbox every morning. An alternative viewpoint though is that the actual rate of return, or chance for rewards is no different from any other affiliate program out there. The site owner is ALWAYS going to make the more money per sale than the affiliate as they should. The owner/company pays for developing a product, building the site, and other business expenses. But, with a typical randomizer site the product is usually no good, or non-existing to begin with. But, if I was to promote a product that I believe in because I have tried it and it works well, chances are that on average I will only make a maximum profit of 40% of the total product price. I could advertise this company's products for weeks and never receive a cent! LOL. So, I can see a danger in totally banning the technology/script concept behind a randomizer site. What's wrong with crediting a random affiliate with a payment every now and then for all of the hard work that they do? Many sites would not be where they are today if it was not for the help provided by affiliates. It's a shame that all legitimate sites now have to worry about the possibility of being associated as a "randomizer site". A random payment for promoting a legitimate product is a great concept for affiliates. Of course not all business owners will like it, but they don't have to offer it either. Lingo

Hi Lingo, This is Peter not Linda and if i could respond to this. I think that any owner of a product that wishes to pay an eatra reqrd for hard work is great. They can then make the decision on their one and send a payment to the person of choice. Good for the company and incentive for others to sell more. The rpoblem is when the person is randomly selected and paid through Pay Pal. This is not a business model it is an illegal money scheme. No one is saying paying extra for an added effort or a sales record should not be done that would be be very nice indeed. A lot of companies do it through such things as a Christmas bonus. I once worked for a company where all of the sales reps were paid 100% commision. We ran a contest and the sales winner was to win a trip to Jamaica. They sales reps all worked really hard but what they didn't know was that everyone was going to Jamaica. It would not have worked if the second and third place sales numbers were high and they received no reward for the extra effort. So instead of a 7 day Jamaica vacation for one we had a three day vacation for 7. Can you guess what the sales were like the next time we ran a contest. The reps all knew that the trip was funded by their hard work and we say sales people actually helping eachother toclose deals with no commision splits. There are ways to do things and there are ways not to do things.

Hi Peter, Point well taken. The Christmas bonus, or something similar is a more fair way to handle this for those working inside a company. Are there any companies offering a Christmas bonus to affiliates? That would really be something. But, should companies and their affiliates really be punished for engaging in this type of behavior? Would outlawing this type of payment plan benefit the gov. and the upper 1%? LOL. Is the lottery ok because it benefits the gov., but this is not, so it's wrong..? I'm just seeing if I can strike some nerves with anyone. I'm listening to George Carlin at this moment, so please don't take me too seriously at this point. Lingo p.s. I always wondered why some network marketing companies are legal (ex. USANA Health Sciences) and others aren't. I'm going to head over to the new forum thread to see if I can learn more about network marketing companies.

Hey Lingo; =========================================== But, should companies and their affiliates really be punished for engaging in this type of behavior? .... (snipped) ... Would outlawing this type of payment plan benefit the gov. and the upper 1%? LOL. .... (snipped) ... I'm listening to George Carlin at this moment, so please don't take me too seriously at this point. p.s. I always wondered why some network marketing companies are legal (ex. USANA Health Sciences) and others aren't. =========================================== Let's play a game of pretend. But don't take it too seriously. *wink* I own a hosting company. Let's say I decide to randomly give someone a cash gift every month. So - when new people "buy" my hosting, they are buying a chance to win. WAIT!! No can do. I am not licensed as a lottery. The *real* lotteries are. Now, if I reward my hardest sellng reseller with a cash bonus for being #1 in sales, THAT is not the same. Semantics? Laws? We don't make them, we're just supposed to follow them. As for what makes *some* MLMs legitimate - the answer lies in the focus of the company. If the focus is to bring goods or services to the consumer and the consumer does NOT have to join the program to buy - it's a legitimate MLM. If the goods and services are only sold to people *in* the organization, it's probaby a pyramid pretending to be MLM. Just because a company "says" they are MLM doesn't mean they are. To use a harsh example that's very real - there's lots of child abusers that go online and pretend to be "kids" to entice other kids to meet them. They don't go online saying "Hi, I'm a pedophile, will you meet me." Let's be real. Same thing. Pyramid operators aren't going to say "hey, this is illegal. wanna join?" Of course not. They'll present themselves as a legitimate business. It's up to people joining to know what's legal and what's not. And by the way - NO, I am not saying that Pyramids are pedophiles. It's an ANALOGY of people "hiding" what they really are. : ) Linda