Home > Vendors >

---

Be careful with Avazu (35)

---

Hey, guys!

I've decided to share my experience with Avazu Private Exchange, so STMers would be warned.

Short story: Avazu refuses to pay me $860 with the reason "duplicate ips" and refuses to show me exact part of Agreement or an offer description or whatever quote where Avazu tells anything at all about IP. The best reason my AM gave me by now - it's because our tech department said so.

Long story: I came to our AM world with 6WAMC. A part of our education process was registering and working with Avazu, which I've done trying to be a good student. I didn't find much success back then, but last month I finally found something. I hit xx.xxx/month with one offer.



My relationships with my AM were perfect, I was pleased with their ability to transfer my money to my mDSP account by simply pressing one button! I was thinking Avazu APX + mDSP is the greatest couple in the world.... until a day of my first payment came. My payment term is "Weekly Payment Net3" and finally I so a string, wich said I will have my revenue "07/01/2015 - $8863.86" with the status "Not paid". Days came and past and after ten days I've asked my AM why are you still not paying me. He said like they're waiting for an advertiser report. I've asked - why? We were in touch every day, I've asked you about my retention rate ten times, you said there is nothing to worry about, just keep going and now, when it's time to pay, you finally decided to ask an advertiser ? Why now, why not when I asked you? And anyway, what advertiser has to do in our relationships? I'm done as I was told, I violated nothing from our agreement, so why not to pay me? He said like you don't worry, buddy, everything will be OK, we just need to wait a little. As I wasn't short on money - I've decided not to push him more to keep his good mood. A couple of days ago he told me they've got a report and campaign manager said there will be no reduction for me. Despite of that, they didn't pay me yet.

Yesterday I've noticed a new string in my account:



Of course first of all I've asked what is the meaning of that. He said it's duplicate IP. I answered that much I can see myself. I mean could you show me any document, agreement, an offer description or anything at all from Avazu, which forbids traffic from shared IP? He sent me a link to Avazu's Terms of Service, that one http://apx.avazutracking.net/home/terms.php. I said there is no even "IP" abbreviation in entire agreement, did you read it yourself? So, I asked him again, could you show me.... etc. I've asked that question three times and he never gave me an answer, he only spoke about tech team. He sent me a file with those two IP's, but it's nothing unusual for me, I've been targeting only one carrier in one country. Now he sent my Wikipedia link about shared IP to his tech team and we're waiting for their verdict.

I've been hesitate about decision to share that with you, guys, but since my AM never answered my question about legal reason for not to pay me, I afraid maybe tomorrow their tech team refuse to pay to one of you because there was digit 4 in IP's or phones were red, so I feel like I must warn you. That's what for friends are.

P.S. I never ran incentive or deceptive or any shit at all on Avazu or any other network for that matter. I have tons of stats, screenshots or whatever evidence to prove myself, so feel free to ask me anything. I'd like to help everyone not to be in my shoes.

---

Must be tough! Did you at least get the rest of that close to 9 grand in payout? Thanks for the heads up!

It would be nice if an Avazu rep could chime in with the other side of the story, and provide some explanation on the reasoning behind their decision to withhold that payment.


Amy

---

Nope !



Not speaking of this month's money (keeping in mind weekly net 3)

I've asked my AM when they gonna pay, but probably he has no time to answer me.

---

Where did you run your traffic and were you cloaking?

Provide them most info as possible.

---

I was running that traffic mostly on Decisive and Avazu mDSP and I never use cloaking because I have nothing to hide. of course I can provide them anything at all, but they never asked me to.

the funny thing I just found is - part of that traffic came from Avazu mDSP! (the first two IP's)



so, should I ask Avazu mDSP for a refund since APX considers that traffic as "duplicate ips" ?

btw, here is their accusations (without any dates, so I'm not sure what time period is that)



(added) there is nothing mysterious here for them. I never cloak, they have Avazu mDSP with my banners, so they can see all my campaign with easy.

---

Sorry to hear your pain. I was running an MY content download offer and was informed by Avazu mDSP that some leads were duplicate numbers and they simply deducted a few hundred bucks from my revenue. Which is fair enough. In your case with the duplicate IP issue its strange because with mobile lots of ip's are shared. Maybe try get them on the phone and don't hang up til they find someone to offer you a valid explanation

---

Hey Andy, Guus here VP publishers of Avazu EU. Let me start by saying you will get paid the remaining amount.
The AM you mention came to me this morning about the Duplicate IPs and we are still investigating. This issue got flagged by our tech team yesterday.

I added you on Skype so we can connect directly and hope to solve this asap.

Guus
Skype: guus.esbir

---

Duplicate IP??? That's funny. Sometimes the whole campus sharing the same IP.... Lol

---

Guus, thank you for your fast reaction!

We've spoken on Skype and I hope next couple of days will bring more light to that situation. He's a pleasant guy in any matter and it feels like he knows how to solve problems.

Still nobody answered my question "Based on what Avazu rule they gave me a fine", so I still don't understand how to avoid such things in the future, but we'll see.

---

My stats from some random campaign

Duplicate IPs?

---

I have some update from Guus in Skype. He works on my "problem" and I'm grateful about that.

Also he had answered my question, but his answer raised even more questions for me and gave no answers. May be I'm wrong or don't understand something, I hope he'll be so kind to repeat it here tomorrow so you guys would judge yourself.

---

Honestly there is no way to avoid this with carrier traffic in the future, with our limited data set we can confidently say that carriers traffic uses shared IPs. (Check egor's screenshot and I think everyone who has targeted specific carrier traffic can post screenshot like that too!) The data set that Avazu has with the DSP and affiliate network they should know this better than anyone. So I am very interested to see what their explanation is...

---

man, I hate to disappoint you, but there is nothing new in his answer.

I believe I have no right to quote Guus, but in general his explanation was like duplicate IP are not allowed because they never were allowed. unwritten rule and stuff like that. that's why they don't even include this condition in user agreement. and not a single word about shared IP.

honestly, for me all that smells bad. like double standards. so if we'd like to say there is not enough IPv4 in the world for each person so carriers forced to have thousands of people behind one IP - we'd call it shared IP. If we'd like to keep someone's money - we'd call it duplicate IP. could someone tell me the difference between those two ?

---

It was probably an error somewhere in the chain. I am certain Guus and the Avazu team will deal with it appropriately, fairly and expeditiously. I have worked with that gang since they launched their European division, driving 100's of thousands of leads, and have never had an issue that wasn't taken care of quickly and correctly.

No need to worry bro, you will be fine. This is one of the better networks out there, trust me.

---

I am sure they are a great network but to fine you for having duplicate IPs is BS.

There are many good networks out there find one that will work with you better. I mean if you ask 10 times for retention check and they don't do it till just before payday that is a killer when you are scaling your campaign...

---

Avazu pays for sure but I am certainly surprised about the duplicate ips problem. They already know that carriers bundle ips. They should be able to tell from the different devices signing up anyway. Hopefully you get this resolved regardless.

---

Glad this issue got resolved - even if part of the mystery remains to be solved...

News travel really fast nowadays, which makes it that much harder for a business to maintain a good reputation. Although I'm referring to businesses in general, this is especially true for ones that have an online presence.

A smart aff network will not (or at least should not) risk getting a bad rap by withholding affiliate payments without a pretty darn good reason. Otherwise, future business that will be lost as a result of the damaged reputation will probably far exceed whatever trivial amounts were "saved" in withheld payment.

STM is a perfect example of power in numbers. And of course, much respect goes to Avazu for stepping up to resolve the matter in a timely manner.

Just expressing my personal opinion. I'm glad to see that this story led to a happy ending! Congrats Andy for getting every cent of your well-deserved paycheque!


Amy

---

Look, you yourself should read it properly before being condescending:

It's pretty clear there. These kinds of things fall under the umbrella of "anti-fraud" processes. IP isn't stated but it doesn't really need to be, it's deliberately not explicit since people could rotate IPs on the same device to create duplicate conversions (which would now circumvent that specific part of the clause if they said duplicate IPs).

In the crowded IP space of mobile carriers it's normal to get a lot of conversions from one IP, but in some cases the results may be above average and trigger fraud flags that the tech/compliance team investigates.

Affiliate networks should be well used to it, but there will always be situations that get handled a little differently, a new person on board, a mistake in assessing data, etc.

I'll be honest - a lot of the processes here don't seem to be that great - across all networks. There should be data transparency, and often there is not, and I get the feeling there can be mismatches in communication internally with the fallout landing on the AM and whoever has to come in and rescue the situation.

I would counter by sending them a breakdown of IP > brand > model (may not be possible with Voluum, but could send live clicks report or ask Voluum support to do an export) to show the heterogeneous traffic and then ask them to validate that against their own data (which surely they have), and furthermore ask them to get feedback from the advertiser - they surely can also investigate all traffic from affiliate X with IP Y and see if they are actually real engaged users.

In some cases it will be the advertiser's stubbornness or lack of 'gives a shit' here that holds things up, and sometimes AMs (and/or biz dev) may side too strongly with the advertiser.

Another note - it's definitely not cool for an AM to ask you to drive more traffic, acknowledge your requests for lead quality feedback, then turn around and withhold payment. If you are doing everything clean and to the best of your knowledge have remained compliant, it's the affiliate network's obligation to honour payment. If the lead quality sucks, you stop and they still pay you - data takes time and that's a risk they absorb. But it kinda all goes to hell when some one in the tech team raises a fraud flag - it's like you've been flagged by Interpol and suddenly things go south.

I can't comment on Avazu's anti-fraud systems and I can't really say if they are justified or not here with the withholding, slowness of communication aside, without seeing data from both sides of the fence...

In any case, I'm sure Guus will help you see this to some end that provides some clarity. Be patient and give him at least 48 hours or so to investigate, he's only human and likely coming into this without knowing your specific situation while trying to discuss things with people from god knows where in the world.

Take it from me who works closely with 10+ people in 5+ countries and time zones at any one time... it can take days just to reconcile the current information and get up to date.

---

Zeno, first of all - thank you for your advice - I'll definitely will follow. you post is a biggest post in this thread, which I really appreciate, but with all my respect to you as to my Sensei, it seems you've missed some tiny detail. I told in my first post

so an advertiser already accepted my traffic one day before when they gave me a fine. thus you're referring to a wrong part of an agreement, "rejected by an Advertiser for any reason, including but not limited to duplicates". the key word here is an Advertiser, and an Advertiser has nothing to do with this accusation, that much Guus just told me himself.

would you please give your opinion in this new light ?

guys, please, don't get me wrong. I'm not in a rush to solve this "fine problem", I'm only asking to show me the part in an agreement. the LEGAL reason to give me a fine. not someone's assumption. does it really so much to ask for ?

---

guys, the issue is solved for me. Guus, thank you, I'm still with Avazu because of you only. fine is still there, but Guus said they'll retract it and I trust him.

the problem is (as I understand) in a way, how system works. there is no any difference now between states "fine" and "this amount of traffic is under investigation". so there is no way to know if you got fine or just some traffic of yours looks different and you have to discuss that with your AM. Guus, correct me please if I'm wrong.

well, I hope Avazu will change it soon and this case save us a lot of time and nerve in the future.

STM and all you, guys - thank you very much !

---

With networks, you are bound to have disputes, and situations you believe are unreasonable. This happens to all of us. Key thing here is to communicate the issue to your rep, as they typically have 1,000's of affiliates and aren't up to speed on every problem. In my experience, once they see your case painted out, and your professionalism in dealing with the problem, they will do everything they can to fix the problem expeditiously.

Glad to hear your issue got solved quickly man. Not surprised, as Guus is top notch, and has consistently come through for me every time I have had an issue.

---

An interesting case - if I'm honest Avazu was much more responsive than I've seen in other cases. And, while I am not a lawyer, when I ran an affiliate network we made sure that all our LEGAL bases were covered - we could withhold payment for any and all reasons. That doesn't address the BUSINESS logic for doing so and maintaining important relationships, but in general as an AM I assume that I seldom have legal recourse when I don't get paid. It's kind of part of the landscape.

---

I am glad to hear it is all sorted!

TBH I think there is a big difference between payment withheld on leads in question for a legitimate reason and a fine for your apparent wrongdoing. It really is the first time I have heard a affiliate network fining somebody... If i did something wrong in the real world and a court fines me then so be it there is evidence, judge and jury. With a affiliate network fining you we really don't have a leg to stand on as they are the judge and the jury. I just hope this will not be common practice with all networks...

---

guys, in order to keep my report precise... All Done !

---

We're seeing a lot more of the Chinese companies just decide not to pay cause they decide the traffic wasn't good enough. No documentation, no substantiation, just we're not going to pay.

I'd be very cautious with these Chinese networks and merchants as it seems to be getting worse.

---

Damn which networks in particular?

I haven't had one payment issue with any of the Chinese networks I've worked with for the past year or two.

---

In terms of communication over these issues with your AM I would strongly recommend to not go through skype, but instead draft up an email with your case to your AM, so that they can forward that email without having to type up your life-story and shoot it to someone actually in charge of dealing with these matters. Because I can guarantee you in 99.9% of all cases your AM can't do shit about your problem, and needs to elevate it to either finance, tech support or biz dev.

Also, three simple rules to live by:

1. you have a winning campaign, don't be greedy. Scale responsibly.
2. have regular and early on quality checks, OR throttle/stop traffic (your commission driven AM will push you to drive more traffic).
3. don't run up the bill if you aren't getting paid.

---

More direct advertisers. Youzu the most recent. "Oh we didn't make enough money on the traffic. We're not going to pay".

We've had others I just don't handle much on that side of the biz. Hearing from other networks as well.

---

I have seen some Chinese offers where in the terms it says if they don't get 55% second day retention, etc. they don't pay. No way I am touching that offer.

---

Yeah, how do you guarantee that. You tell the user "pls open the app tomo I need moneyz."
And at this point advertiser can just make up numbers and decide not to pay.

---

From my perspective this is a network issue, which their risk/business development team must evaluate prior to taking on the offer. Affiliates have no input or control over a network's customer credit process or accounts receivable, and therefore should not be penalized when a merchant refuses to pay (unless the non payment is a direct result of the affiliate breaching any of the offer's terms/restrictions or volume cap).

---

There have been numerous threads about Appflood not paying / delaying payments on this forum.

---

I agree with you. We paid all the publishers. Just saying this is happening and be aware.

---

golden words. that's why I've created this thread at the first place.

as for Appflood - yes, I can accept it too, they've delayed my payment of $5k for more, than two month. the reason - some computer mistake. though they've paid me recently without any argue. btw, that's why I don't work with them now: I've been waiting for payment first and then it just became of habit (not to work with them).

---

i've also had problems with appflood and will never be work with them again.

---

Home > Vendors >