45 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
45 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

BEWARE: Payment Rotating Scripts BAD...

by WillR
35 replies
I have seen a couple of products released recently that allow people to rotate the payment buttons on their sales page. I am not going to mention any product names because that is NOT what this post is about. This is more of a warning for anyone thinking about using one of these products.

The theory behind it is that by rotating payments between two accounts or even two payment providers, you are reducing your risk should one of your accounts ever get suspended. This is also suppose to help people reduce the risk of having Paypal accounts limited because you are putting less volume through each account.

Sounds sensible right?

WRONG!

By using a script like this what you are actually doing is INCREASING the risk of having your accounts come under review. The reason being that a script like this has the ability to instantly double your refund rate with either payment processor or account you are using.

Let's do some quick maths.

Scenario #1 (no payment rotator)

1000 sales

20 refunds

= 2% refund rate

NORMAL

Scenario #2 (using a payment rotator script)

500 sales through two separate accounts (1,000 sales total)

20 refunds

= 2% refund rate?

NOT necessarily. Although a payment rotator script like this WILL split your sales right down the middle it will NOT necessarily split your refund rate right down the middle. Using a script like this we are processing half of our sales through one account and half through another. Now what happens if the 20 people (out of 1,000) who refund, all come from sales made to either one of those account?

That means your refund rate COULD now be:

500 sales

20 refunds

= 4% refund rate

That's DOUBLE the original refund rate without actually adding anymore refunds. Helping the problem? I don't think so.

Be warned!

Although these scripts might look like they help the problem the potential is there to actually do more harm than good.

Kids, say NO to drugs
#beware #payment #rotating #scripts
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    I did not realize that this is what you were going to talk about when I opened the thread. I figured you were going after Rap, RapBank, Warrior Plus, etc.

    Now that I understand the real focus of your post, you are absolutely right.

    There is also a potential issue of credibility, when someone comes to buy on one day, but decides to wait. Then when they come back, the payment processor is different. For me that would be a huge red flag.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5576270].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      I did not realize that this is what you were going to talk about when I opened the thread. I figured you were going after Rap, RapBank, Warrior Plus, etc.

      Now that I understand the real focus of your post, you are absolutely right.

      There is also a potential issue of credibility, when someone comes to buy on one day, but decides to wait. Then when they come back, the payment processor is different. For me that would be a huge red flag.
      Use cookies or put both payment options on the page at the same time, giving the buyer an option and get rid of the rotator script.

      In the past I've used both Paypal and 2CO buttons on the same page at the same time.
      Signature
      Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
      Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5576620].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    While it's possible all refunds will use the same processor, it's as unlikely as flipping a coin and having it come up heads 20 straight times, assuming there's no bias caused by the processor itself.

    It is likely one processor will have more refunds than the other, since it's also unlikely that after 20 tosses a coin will come up exactly 10 heads and 10 tails. However, if one processor has a higher refund rate, the "other side of the coin" is the second processor will have a lower rate.

    So in the example Will gave above, while one processor had a "high" rate of refunds, the other had a refund rate of zero, which even in this extreme example protects one of the services.
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5576597].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author WillR
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      It is likely one processor will have more refunds than the other, since it's also unlikely that after 20 tosses a coin will come up exactly 10 heads and 10 tails.
      Exactly my point.

      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      However, if one processor has a higher refund rate, the "other side of the coin" is the second processor will have a lower rate.
      Yes, but you need to look at both accounts as separate accounts because that is exactly what they are. By running this script you are increasing the chances of one of those accounts having a higher refund rate than if you did not use the script.

      So whereas you may have cruised along with one payment account and never had an issue you are now unnecessarily putting a potential red flag over half of your income.

      Originally Posted by Chris Kent View Post

      Kurt is right, this is basic probability theory 101.
      And that's why so many people win on Blackjack

      Probability aside, reality is all I care about .By using something like this you now have the chance of doubling your refund rate on one of your processors. It might not happen for you but the potential is now there and you introduced it by using this type of script. There is no denying that fact.

      So, as I said, be careful.
      Signature

      .


      .

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5577139].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kurt
        Originally Posted by WillR View Post

        Exactly my point.



        Yes, but you need to look at both accounts as separate accounts because that is exactly what they are. By running this script you are increasing the chances of one of those accounts having a higher refund rate than if you did not use the script.

        So whereas you may have cruised along with one payment account and never had an issue you are now unnecessarily putting a potential red flag over half of your income.



        And that's why so many people win on Blackjack

        Probability aside, reality is all I care about .By using something like this you now have the chance of doubling your refund rate on one of your processors. It might not happen for you but the potential is now there and you introduced it by using this type of script. There is no denying that fact.

        So, as I said, be careful.
        BTW, I was a semi-pro blackjack player before doing IM. I was a content provider on the subject for The Luna Network, which became About.com as you know it today.

        You are saying that one has a chance. This is true, but it's a very small chance and is very unlikely to happen as defined above. However, you made an assumption that a 4% refund rate will get an account closed, while a 2% won't. I'm not sure this is correct.

        Now let's REALLY talk reality. Which is safer, a single engine air craft or a double engine air craft? You're saying that because an airplane has twice as many engines, it has twice the chance of getting a bird in the engine, which is true. But with a bird in one engine, it can still fly. What happens when a bird gets in a single engine? You crash.
        Signature
        Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
        Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5578279].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author WillR
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          However, you made an assumption that a 4% refund rate will get an account closed, while a 2% won't. I'm not sure this is correct.
          No, I did not. I said that having a higher refund rate is going to put your account at a higher risk than an account with a lower refund rate. That's common sense. Where did I say it will get your account closed?

          And I quote:

          By using a script like this what you are actually doing is INCREASING the risk of having your accounts come under review. The reason being that a script like this has the ability to instantly double your refund rate with either payment processor or account you are using.
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          Now let's REALLY talk reality. Which is safer, a single engine air craft or a double engine air craft? You're saying that because an airplane has twice as many engines, it has twice the chance of getting a bird in the engine, which is true. But with a bird in one engine, it can still fly. What happens when a bird gets in a single engine? You crash.
          I'm afraid that analogy does NOT match up with what we are talking about here. (You also left out a very important point. With a single engine aircraft the chances of the bird getting into the engine are now half because there is only one engine compared to two. With the twin engine aircraft that one bird now has TWO engines he can get caught in.)

          If you want to talk reality, the reality is this. By using a payment rotator script you now have the possibility of doubling your refund rate. You can't deny that no matter what your debate about probability or planes with birds in engines. They are the facts.

          I have a small probability of being hit by a bus or winning lotto, but people do every single day of the week. If you run your business based on luck then that's your call but I know a lot of other marketers out there would much rather play things smart.... and that's what this thread was about.

          No point arguing for arguments sake. The facts are right there for everybody to see.
          Signature

          .


          .

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581451].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Fraggler
            Originally Posted by WillR View Post

            By using a payment rotator script you now have the possibility of doubling your refund rate.
            Probable - but unlikely.

            That's the mathematical truth.

            It all depends on how a person handles risk. Some people will prefer the risk of the unlikely chance that all refunds will all come from the same payment processor for the safety net of having another payment processor to fall back on.

            Others will prefer the risk of not doing anything wrong that will cause their payment processor to close their account.
            Signature

            - Stop Wasting Time & Money on Traffic!
            - You Can't Improve What You Don't Measure
            - Why You Should Create Separate Desktop and Mobile Google Adwords Campaigns
            Connect with me on LinkedIn
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581603].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kurt
            Originally Posted by WillR View Post

            No, I did not. I said that having a higher refund rate is going to put your account at a higher risk than an account with a lower refund rate. That's common sense. Where did I say it will get your account closed?
            It's implied, as it's the only risk.


            I'm afraid that analogy does NOT match up with what we are talking about here. (You also left out a very important point. With a single engine aircraft the chances of the bird getting into the engine are now half because there is only one engine compared to two. With the twin engine aircraft that one bird now has TWO engines he can get caught in.)
            I'm afraid your wrong and clueless when it comes to basic probability.

            And I didn't leave out your point, you just didn't reason out what I said. I'll repeat it for your convenience and see if you get it this time:

            I said:
            You're saying that because an airplane has twice as many engines, it has twice the chance of getting a bird in the engine, which is true.


            If you want to talk reality, the reality is this. By using a payment rotator script you now have the possibility of doubling your refund rate. You can't deny that no matter what your debate about probability or planes with birds in engines. They are the facts.
            Again, you only cite the half of the equation that benefits your point. You're omitting the other part where the risk will be reduced with the second processor.

            This is a fact.

            have a small probability of being hit by a bus or winning lotto, but people do every single day of the week. If you run your business based on luck then that's your call but I know a lot of other marketers out there would much rather play things smart.... and that's what this thread was about.

            No point arguing for arguments sake. The facts are right there for everybody to see.
            I see the problem now, you're confusing "possibility" with "probability". It's possible that McDonald's will be sued because an older woman spills hot coffee in her lap, therefor McDonald's should quit selling coffee. :rolleyes:

            And in order to "play smart", marketers should understand basic probability before trying to lecture others on it.

            Again, using your own example, you REDUCE the implied risk on the second processor, so everything balances out. I suggest you consider BOTH possible outcomes, not cherry-pick the one side that fits your argument.

            Because according to your own "logic", I can just as easily say that using a rotator can LOWER your refund rate. Your own example proves it. It works both ways, and this is the important part you're missing.
            Signature
            Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
            Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581814].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ben Gordon
        Originally Posted by WillR View Post

        Yes, but you need to look at both accounts as separate accounts because that is exactly what they are. By running this script you are increasing the chances of one of those accounts having a higher refund rate than if you did not use the script.

        So whereas you may have cruised along with one payment account and never had an issue you are now unnecessarily putting a potential red flag over half of your income.
        But again, you are also decreasing the chances of one of those accounts having a smaller refund rate It could go either way.

        Unless you have incredibly high refund rates then you shouldn't worry at all because you'll either have a little higher refund rate or a little lower refund rate. It is super unlikely that one account will get ALL the refunds and another will get none. That's just like, Kurt said, flipping a coin 20 times and having it land on heads every time.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8237710].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ErikNilsson
    It's better to use a single Payment option or double from diff providers..
    Signature
    USA Bank Account + ATM Card for Non-USA Residents Service PM me
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5576798].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sal64
    Do people actually do this?

    Man, I gotta get out into cyberspace a bit more.

    Sal
    Signature
    Internet Marketing: 20% Internet - 80% Marketing!
    You Won't See The Light Until You Open Your Eyes.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5577128].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    you are reducing your risk should one of your accounts ever get suspended. This is also suppose to help people reduce the risk of having Paypal accounts limited
    Sorry, i don't get that. If you are "normal" marketer not using any semi-criminal or B@H tactics, there is no risk your accounts are getting "suspended".

    Also..Paypal limitation SHOULD usually not be an issue, i could resolve those each and any time.

    If you are already anticipating account suspensions and problems with paypal, maybe such people need to re-think their marketing as a whole or get into another career altogether. Just my $0.02.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581666].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author WillR
      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      Sorry, i don't get that. If you are "normal" marketer not using any semi-criminal or B@H tactics, there is no risk your accounts are getting "suspended".
      An example would be a "normal" marketer who does an abnormally high amount of sales in a short period of time. The person has done nothing wrong but it doesn't stop their account being limited pending investigation. The risk is there and it's real.

      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      Also..Paypal limitation SHOULD usually not be an issue, i could resolve those each and any time.
      I am not saying issues can not be resolved. I am talking about preventing those issues from arising in the first place.

      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      If you are already anticipating account suspensions and problems with paypal, maybe such people need to re-think their marketing as a whole or get into another career altogether. Just my $0.02.
      Correct. I am merely talking about a script I saw and thought there would probably be a lot of people who thought it was a great idea. The reality is, it isn't as great as it sounds.

      Originally Posted by Fraggler View Post

      Probable - but unlikely.

      That's the mathematical truth.

      It all depends on how a person handles risk. Some people will prefer the risk of the unlikely chance that all refunds will all come from the same payment processor for the safety net of having another payment processor to fall back on.

      Others will prefer the risk of not doing anything wrong that will cause their payment processor to close their account.
      One of these scripts doesn't even rotate the button 50/50. The button on the sales page simply rotates every x amount of seconds. So it's very hard to calculate probability based on something as random as that.
      Signature

      .


      .

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581705].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Fraggler
    I was talking about people handling risk in general and in the context of this thread. (If you don't think PayPal can suspend a legitimate account then you might want to have some searches of this forum - and Google too.)

    Here are some quick maths to show how unlikely a rotating script will double your refund rate.

    Let's assume you have 10 refunds from 500 sales (2%).

    The chance of all of those refunds going to the one processor (to double your refund rate) is:
    • All 10 belonging to 1 Processor: 0.097%
    • 9/10 : 0.195%
    • 8/10 : 4.4%
    • 7/10 : 11.7%
    • 6/10 : 20.51%
    • 5/10 : 24.6%
    There will be some variation in your refund rate but as Kurt was saying - it's unlikely and the benefit of having the backup will not convince everyone otherwise.
    Signature

    - Stop Wasting Time & Money on Traffic!
    - You Can't Improve What You Don't Measure
    - Why You Should Create Separate Desktop and Mobile Google Adwords Campaigns
    Connect with me on LinkedIn
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581730].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author WillR
      Originally Posted by Fraggler View Post

      I was talking about people handling risk in general and in the context of this thread. (If you don't think PayPal can suspend a legitimate account then you might want to have some searches of this forum - and Google too.)

      Here are some quick maths to show how unlikely a rotating script will double your refund rate.

      Let's assume you have 10 refunds from 500 sales (2%).

      The chance of all of those refunds going to the one processor (to double your refund rate) is:
      • All 10 belonging to 1 Processor: 0.097%
      • 9/10 : 0.97%
      • 8/10 : 4.4%
      • 7/10 : 11.7%
      • 6/10 : 20.51%
      • 5/10 : 24.6%
      There will be some variation in your refund rate but as Kurt was saying - it's unlikely and the benefit of having the backup will not convince everyone otherwise.
      I never said it was going to happen to everyone. What I AM saying is you are introducing a potential problem into your business that previously did not exist. For those who like to play the odds then by all means, use the script. The chances of getting hit by a bus are tiny but I bet the people who actually get hit don't think it's such a trivial issue.
      Signature

      .


      .

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581769].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Fraggler
    It is a matter of playing the odds. People using these scripts obviously think they have a greater chance - or think the consequence is worse - if they rely on one payment processor to handle all of their sales.

    I think the guys taking a proactive approach to protect their income are onto something, especially if their refund rate is low to begin with (so doubling it won't even cause dramas).
    Signature

    - Stop Wasting Time & Money on Traffic!
    - You Can't Improve What You Don't Measure
    - Why You Should Create Separate Desktop and Mobile Google Adwords Campaigns
    Connect with me on LinkedIn
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581809].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Blognation
    Originally Posted by WillR View Post

    Let's do some quick maths.

    Scenario #1 (no payment rotator)

    1000 sales

    20 refunds

    = 2% refund rate

    NORMAL

    Scenario #2 (using a payment rotator script)

    500 sales through two separate accounts (1,000 sales total)

    20 refunds

    = 2% refund rate?
    I know what you're trying to get across, but it's all statistics. Your worst case (4%) could happen at 50,500,1000 or even 2000 sells.
    If we talk about an average refund rate, than it's exactly that: average. There will be of course peaks and lows, but on average you will land on 2%
    Saying that a lower sales number makes it more likely to encounter anomalies (4%) doesn't work out: What if my business doesn't have 1000 sales, but only 500? Then I have the same risk as the guy who uses the rotation script (500 on each account). I don't know the rotation plugins, but if you go by the numbers, it shouldn't concern you.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5581893].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
    Will, you may want to consider that if 2% of your customers refund and it's disproportionately weighted toward one of the accounts, it's just as disproportionately weighted AWAY from the other one. So while you may get your PayPal account shut down for too many refunds, you also have this stellar reputation on AlertPay for hardly getting any refunds at all. Statistically, if the two payment methods are equally attractive to a normal distribution of customers, these inequities should disappear over time.

    It is also worth considering whether this correlation means that if you only used the processor that got fewer refunds, your refund rate would go down across the board. If my statistics showed that almost 4% of PayPal users refund and less than 1% of AlertPay users refund, I would at the very least want to TEST a sales page which only used AlertPay and see whether I got the averaged-out 2% refund rate (meaning that whether people refund has nothing to do with which payment processor they use), or the same sub-1% rate (suggesting that AlertPay users are actually less likely to refund). That's a vast oversimplification, of course - if there are several times as many PayPal buyers, maybe I don't care about refund rates because the bottom line is so much larger. There are a lot of variables.
    Signature
    "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5582269].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author hustlinsmoke
    Remember though a rotator script can be a good thing also.
    If you have a partner, much easier to share the profits on that project with a rotator script.

    I don't think I would ever do it for launches though or could I intergrate that with jvzoo, warriorplus ect. I doubt it, but it can be a good thing also.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8237351].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by hustlinsmoke View Post

      Remember though a rotator script can be a good thing also.
      If you have a partner, much easier to share the profits on that project with a rotator script.

      I don't think I would ever do it for launches though or could I intergrate that with jvzoo, warriorplus ect. I doubt it, but it can be a good thing also.

      Warrior Plus offers rotating payments or split payments.

      JVzoo offers split payments.

      To be honest, for my own products, I want the split payment option.

      And as an affiliate, although I promote both types, I much prefer split payment offers.


      p.s. Yes, I know this thread is nearly 1.5 years old.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8237653].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ChrisDouthit
    In theory this logic is correct, but I think a 1000 sales is a large enough sample to where the refunds would be pretty close on either side.

    Unless you have a product that gets a lot of refunds I would not worry. Use one payment system, two or three, I don't really care, just deliver a quality product in the end and you will have little to worry about.
    Signature

    Make a Full Time Living With Options <- Warrior Discount
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8240938].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WillR
    Whose digging up 1 and a half year old threads.
    Signature

    .


    .

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8241387].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tariqahmad007
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8241999].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author SunilTanna
      Assuming 1,000 sales, split evenly, 20 refunds, and equal probability of refund regardless of accounts A and B, the probabilities of different number of refunds are:




      Assuming 2 accounts, A, B, with equal chance of getting a refund on either account, you can work out the probability of any distribution of refunds uisng this formula (where a & b are the number of refunds on each account)

      Prob = (a+b)! / ( a! * b! * ( 2^(a+b) ) )

      So for example, if you have 20 refunds total, and want the probability of them being split: 7 refunds from a, and 13 from b

      Prob = 20! / ( 13! * 7! * (2^20) )

      As has already been mentioned, as you make more refunds, a split where most of the refunds are A or B, becomes less likely.

      Key points:

      1. More refunds = more likely to have an even split
      (this should be intuitively obvious: if you have only 1 refund, then 100% of your refunds will be in A or B, and 0% in the other. Likewise if you have 2 refunds, there is 50% chance of an even split (AB or BA), but 25% chance of all the refunds on one account (AA or BB), etc.)

      2. It's more refunds, NOT more sales, that encourages an even split of refunds. Notice the formula for calculating probabilities of different splits of refunds, doesn't include the total number of sales.
      (although yes of course if you have more sales, then it's likely you'd have more refunds).

      3.The assumption in this math, is that both A & B have equal probability of refunds. However, if one is really comparatively poor (gives refunds to easily, is very highly subject to fraud, etc.), this would throw the calculations off.
      Signature
      ClickBank Vendor?
      - Protect Your Thank You Pages & Downloads
      - Give Your Affiliates Multiple Landing Pages (Video Demo)
      - Killer Graphics for Your Site
      SPECIAL WSO PRICES FOR WARRIORS + GET THE "CLICKBANK DISCOUNT" TOO!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8242138].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
        Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

        You are saying that one has a chance. This is true, but it's a very small chance and is very unlikely to happen as defined above. However, you made an assumption that a 4% refund rate will get an account closed, while a 2% won't. I'm not sure this is correct.
        By itself, a 4% refund rate might not attract attention. Assuming the bird hits the fan, suddenly going from 2% to 4% on half the sales volume might.

        Going back to the coin flip scenario, a truly honest coin has the same 50/50 probability on every flip. In other words, the result of any flip has no bearing on the result of the next flip. So the probablility of getting all heads, all tails, or anything in between is the same.

        Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

        Now let's REALLY talk reality. Which is safer, a single engine air craft or a double engine air craft? You're saying that because an airplane has twice as many engines, it has twice the chance of getting a bird in the engine, which is true. But with a bird in one engine, it can still fly. What happens when a bird gets in a single engine? You crash.
        That's why, when wade fishing in heavy current, I wear both a belt and suspenders...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8243856].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Ben Gordon
          Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

          Going back to the coin flip scenario, a truly honest coin has the same 50/50 probability on every flip. In other words, the result of any flip has no bearing on the result of the next flip. So the probablility of getting all heads, all tails, or anything in between is the same.
          0.5^20 = 9.53674316e-7 which equals to ~0.000001%. That is the probability of a coin landing on the same side 20 times in a row.

          If you don't understand this basic probability then try this example... just keep flipping a coin until it lands on one side 20 times in a row. It wouldn't have 50/50 probability. You'd be lucky to have it flip 20 times in a row by next week if you were flipping those coins 24/7.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8243972].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tom Reed
    You could also use a script that works with multiple gateways like authorizenet and firstdata. By keeping it transparent to the customer, there is no risk of a lost conversion.

    And since the law of averages will resolve itself, there is no need to worry about differing refund rates, it's a non-issue.

    Splitting between PayPal and 2co could obviously create a conversion issue.
    Signature

    Sell More ...Faster! CloudNet360.com

    The ultimate CRM / Autoresponder & Sales Automation System - The Online Coaches Dream Team

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8244609].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Hill
    Some people use rotation scripts combined with their own ClickBank affiliate accounts to their own product to boost affiliate sales which can screw with the gravity, making your product seem more popular to promote.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8245059].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
      Originally Posted by Ben Gordon View Post

      0.5^20 = 9.53674316e-7 which equals to ~0.000001%. That is the probability of a coin landing on the same side 20 times in a row.

      If you don't understand this basic probability then try this example... just keep flipping a coin until it lands on one side 20 times in a row. It wouldn't have 50/50 probability. You'd be lucky to have it flip 20 times in a row by next week if you were flipping those coins 24/7.
      I understand the probability just fine.

      If you have an honest coin, the probability of landing on heads is 50%, same as the probability of landing on tails.

      For a twenty flip sequence, the probability of landing all heads you gave is accurate, the same as the probability of landing all tails or any other exact sequence.

      Since you are the one that seems to have a problem understanding probability, consider this:

      I'm equally likely to get that 20-head sequence the first time I try it. That (admittedly) small probability doesn't change if I've made one prior attempt or several thousand.

      That is the truth in predicting the outcome of a sequence of independent events, like coin flips or sales that refund.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8246250].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ben Gordon
        Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

        I understand the probability just fine.

        If you have an honest coin, the probability of landing on heads is 50%, same as the probability of landing on tails.

        For a twenty flip sequence, the probability of landing all heads you gave is accurate, the same as the probability of landing all tails or any other exact sequence.

        Since you are the one that seems to have a problem understanding probability, consider this:

        I'm equally likely to get that 20-head sequence the first time I try it. That (admittedly) small probability doesn't change if I've made one prior attempt or several thousand.

        That is the truth in predicting the outcome of a sequence of independent events, like coin flips or sales that refund.
        John, you just proved me point. It is not likely at all that you'll get 20 heads in a row (or in that case, 20 refunds in one account and none in another).
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8246780].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
          Originally Posted by Ben Gordon View Post

          John, you just proved me point. It is not likely at all that you'll get 20 heads in a row (or in that case, 20 refunds in one account and none in another).
          Take the same math and come at it from a different angle. If you split the sales between two sources, there is a decent probability that you may have more refunds from fewer sales. As I said before, that might just attract some attention.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8246928].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Ben Gordon
            Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

            Take the same math and come at it from a different angle. If you split the sales between two sources, there is a decent probability that you may have more refunds from fewer sales. As I said before, that might just attract some attention.
            Yeah, but on the other hand, there is also a decent probability that the other account will have a lower refund rate.

            An increase of a refund rate of 2% will not attract attention. If they have a 10% refund, as an example, and it jumps to 20%, then it could cause some attention. But then again, if the refund rate is 10%, then they are even more likely not to have all the refunds go into one account. Allow me to demonstrate...

            0.5^100 = 7.8886091e-31

            That's like a 0.00000000.....% of getting all the refunds in one account.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8247191].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
              Originally Posted by Ben Gordon View Post

              Yeah, but on the other hand, there is also a decent probability that the other account will have a lower refund rate.

              An increase of a refund rate of 2% will not attract attention. If they have a 10% refund, as an example, and it jumps to 20%, then it could cause some attention. But then again, if the refund rate is 10%, then they are even more likely not to have all the refunds go into one account. Allow me to demonstrate...

              0.5^100 = 7.8886091e-31

              That's like a 0.00000000.....% of getting all the refunds in one account.
              I wonder how many more rounds we can go before we max out your scientific calculator...

              Given the number of sites that use algorithmic checks to flag accounts, what would you say is the probability of getting flagged if there's a sudden deviation of say 50% more refunds from 50% fewer sales? Or even the same number of refunds from half as many sales?

              If it's worth the risk, go for it.

              I could go fishing in a thunderstorm, and the odds of getting hit by lightning are still pretty small. That doesn't mean I'll be out there waving a nine foot lightning rod when the thunder rolls.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8247435].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Ben Gordon
                Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

                I wonder how many more rounds we can go before we max out your scientific calculator...
                Google's* scientific calculator

                [quote=JohnMcCabe;8247435]Given the number of sites that use algorithmic checks to flag accounts, what would you say is the probability of getting flagged if there's a sudden deviation of say 50% more refunds from 50% fewer sales? Or even the same number of refunds from half as many sales?

                Actually it would be the same number of refunds from 50% fewer sales. But again, what are the chances of getting the same number of refunds..? Nearly nothing. You'd have to be a lottery winner to get that lucky Most likely you'll have around 50% less refunds from 50% less sales, give or take.

                Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

                I could go fishing in a thunderstorm, and the odds of getting hit by lightning are still pretty small. That doesn't mean I'll be out there waving a nine foot lightning rod when the thunder rolls.
                The real question is... why would you go fishing in a thunderstorm? If it was just the chance of getting hit by thunder, then that's ok. But when there's a thunderstorm, it's dark and rainy. The tide gets larger. There are much more chances of drowning then getting hit by thunder. When using a payment rotating script, you don't have all the other dangers you have to worry about. It's just the chance of getting all the refunds in one account -- which is very slim.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8247465].message }}

Trending Topics