GGR vs NGR: a 30% RevShare can mean two different paychecks
The most expensive ambiguity in a deal sheet: whether RevShare is on GGR (gross gaming revenue — wagers minus winnings, before bonuses) or NGR (after bonus and fee deductions).
The gap between GGR and NGR is typically 15-30% of gross, driven mostly by bonus spend. So '30% of NGR' and '30% of GGR' on the same player activity differ by 15-30% in your pocket — for an identical headline rate.
Illustrative on $1,000 GGR with $250 bonus/fee deductions: 30% of GGR = $300; 30% of NGR ($750) = $225. Same percentage, 25% less money.
— Confirm the base (GGR or NGR) before comparing any two rates
— A 28% GGR deal usually beats a 35% NGR deal — run the base, not the headline
— Aggressive bonus operators widen the GGR-NGR gap, hurting NGR-based deals more
Benchmark of the day: GGR-based RevShare typically pays 15-30% more than NGR-based at the same nominal rate.
—
Про session rpm benchmarks подробнее — @RPMReceipts
The most expensive ambiguity in a deal sheet: whether RevShare is on GGR (gross gaming revenue — wagers minus winnings, before bonuses) or NGR (after bonus and fee deductions).
The gap between GGR and NGR is typically 15-30% of gross, driven mostly by bonus spend. So '30% of NGR' and '30% of GGR' on the same player activity differ by 15-30% in your pocket — for an identical headline rate.
Illustrative on $1,000 GGR with $250 bonus/fee deductions: 30% of GGR = $300; 30% of NGR ($750) = $225. Same percentage, 25% less money.
— Confirm the base (GGR or NGR) before comparing any two rates
— A 28% GGR deal usually beats a 35% NGR deal — run the base, not the headline
— Aggressive bonus operators widen the GGR-NGR gap, hurting NGR-based deals more
Benchmark of the day: GGR-based RevShare typically pays 15-30% more than NGR-based at the same nominal rate.
—
Про session rpm benchmarks подробнее — @RPMReceipts
The CPA-RevShare crossover sits at month 4.2, not "it depends"
Across ~40 tracked Tier-1 sportsbook deals, the median crossover point — where cumulative RevShare earnings overtake a one-time CPA — lands at month 4.2.
The math: CPA $180 flat. RevShare at 35% of NGR (net gaming revenue = stakes minus payouts minus bonus cost), on a player generating ~$38 NGR/month, pays ~$13.30/month. $180 ÷ $13.30 = 13.5 months to nominal parity — but apply a 9%/month churn cohort and the discounted streams cross at month 4.2 in present-value terms because early months carry the surviving population.
The trap: operators quote the 13.5-month figure to push you toward CPA. The PV figure is the one that matters if you can hold traffic quality.
— Below ~$30 NGR/month, CPA wins outright; the stream never catches up before churn kills it.
— Above ~$50 NGR/month, RevShare wins by month 3.
Benchmark of the day: crossover ≈ CPA ÷ (monthly NGR × rev-share rate × survival factor) — solve for your own cohort before signing.
Across ~40 tracked Tier-1 sportsbook deals, the median crossover point — where cumulative RevShare earnings overtake a one-time CPA — lands at month 4.2.
The math: CPA $180 flat. RevShare at 35% of NGR (net gaming revenue = stakes minus payouts minus bonus cost), on a player generating ~$38 NGR/month, pays ~$13.30/month. $180 ÷ $13.30 = 13.5 months to nominal parity — but apply a 9%/month churn cohort and the discounted streams cross at month 4.2 in present-value terms because early months carry the surviving population.
The trap: operators quote the 13.5-month figure to push you toward CPA. The PV figure is the one that matters if you can hold traffic quality.
— Below ~$30 NGR/month, CPA wins outright; the stream never catches up before churn kills it.
— Above ~$50 NGR/month, RevShare wins by month 3.
Benchmark of the day: crossover ≈ CPA ÷ (monthly NGR × rev-share rate × survival factor) — solve for your own cohort before signing.
Your RevShare is quietly 40% smaller than the GGR headline
GGR (gross gaming revenue = stakes minus payouts) is the number operators advertise. NGR (net) is what RevShare actually pays on — and the haircut between them averages 38% across ~25 deals I've modeled.
Where the 38% goes:
— Bonus cost: 18-22% of GGR on aggressive welcome offers.
— Payment processing: 4-6%.
— Gaming/betting duty passed through: 8-15% depending on GEO.
— Affiliate/platform fees deducted pre-share: 2-4%.
So a "40% RevShare" on a player doing $100 GGR/month is not $40. It's 40% of ~$62 NGR ≈ $24.80. That's an effective 24.8% on GGR.
The leverage point: negotiate which deductions hit your base. Capping bonus deduction at the operator's blended average (not your specific player's first-month offer) recovers 6-9 points of effective rate.
Benchmark of the day: effective GGR rate = quoted NGR rate × (1 − deduction stack); demand the deduction stack in writing before you compare two offers.
GGR (gross gaming revenue = stakes minus payouts) is the number operators advertise. NGR (net) is what RevShare actually pays on — and the haircut between them averages 38% across ~25 deals I've modeled.
Where the 38% goes:
— Bonus cost: 18-22% of GGR on aggressive welcome offers.
— Payment processing: 4-6%.
— Gaming/betting duty passed through: 8-15% depending on GEO.
— Affiliate/platform fees deducted pre-share: 2-4%.
So a "40% RevShare" on a player doing $100 GGR/month is not $40. It's 40% of ~$62 NGR ≈ $24.80. That's an effective 24.8% on GGR.
The leverage point: negotiate which deductions hit your base. Capping bonus deduction at the operator's blended average (not your specific player's first-month offer) recovers 6-9 points of effective rate.
Benchmark of the day: effective GGR rate = quoted NGR rate × (1 − deduction stack); demand the deduction stack in writing before you compare two offers.
Negative carryover can erase 2.3 months of earnings per big-win event
Negative carryover means a losing month for the operator (player wins big) rolls a negative NGR balance into your next month, suppressing your RevShare until it's cleared.
Modeled across a 12-month cohort with sportsbook variance: a single sharp player hitting a +$4,000 NGR swing against the book, on a 35% deal, can park a roughly -$1,400 share liability — wiping out ~2.3 months of average earnings from that player group before you're paid again.
— With carryover: your annual yield on a variance-heavy cohort drops 14-19%.
— Without it (reset to zero monthly): variance is the operator's problem, not yours.
The ask: "no negative carryover" is the single highest-value non-rate clause in a sportsbook contract. It's worth more than 3-4 points of headline RevShare on any cohort with whales.
Benchmark of the day: on books where one player can be >5% of your monthly NGR, refuse carryover or price it as a ~15% rate discount.
Negative carryover means a losing month for the operator (player wins big) rolls a negative NGR balance into your next month, suppressing your RevShare until it's cleared.
Modeled across a 12-month cohort with sportsbook variance: a single sharp player hitting a +$4,000 NGR swing against the book, on a 35% deal, can park a roughly -$1,400 share liability — wiping out ~2.3 months of average earnings from that player group before you're paid again.
— With carryover: your annual yield on a variance-heavy cohort drops 14-19%.
— Without it (reset to zero monthly): variance is the operator's problem, not yours.
The ask: "no negative carryover" is the single highest-value non-rate clause in a sportsbook contract. It's worth more than 3-4 points of headline RevShare on any cohort with whales.
Benchmark of the day: on books where one player can be >5% of your monthly NGR, refuse carryover or price it as a ~15% rate discount.
Pairs well with this channel
@NutraTrench — Boots-on-the-ground nutra: pre-lander angles that convert today, AOV-boosting upsell… Quietly one of the better feeds in the space.
@NutraTrench — Boots-on-the-ground nutra: pre-lander angles that convert today, AOV-boosting upsell… Quietly one of the better feeds in the space.
Tier-2 GEOs pay 1.6x the CPA-per-LTV-dollar of Tier-1
Tier-1 (US/UK/CA/AU) commands the headline CPAs — $200-350. But on a CPA-per-LTV-dollar basis, several Tier-2 GEOs are structurally cheaper.
Illustrative, from ~30 cross-GEO deals:
— UK: CPA $280, player LTV ~$620 → you're buying at $0.45 per LTV dollar (operator's cut).
— Brazil: CPA $90, LTV ~$310 → $0.29 per LTV dollar.
— India: CPA $55, LTV ~$210 → $0.26 per LTV dollar.
The operator pays you a smaller absolute CPA in Tier-2, but it represents a smaller slice of the player's lifetime value — meaning the operator is keeping more margin and can sustain the deal, while your traffic-acquisition cost in those GEOs is often disproportionately lower than the CPA gap.
The caveat: payment friction and lower deposit frequency widen variance. The ratio holds only if you can acquire traffic below ~40% of CPA.
Benchmark of the day: compare CPA ÷ LTV across GEOs, not CPA alone; the lowest ratio is where the operator has room to raise your rate.
Tier-1 (US/UK/CA/AU) commands the headline CPAs — $200-350. But on a CPA-per-LTV-dollar basis, several Tier-2 GEOs are structurally cheaper.
Illustrative, from ~30 cross-GEO deals:
— UK: CPA $280, player LTV ~$620 → you're buying at $0.45 per LTV dollar (operator's cut).
— Brazil: CPA $90, LTV ~$310 → $0.29 per LTV dollar.
— India: CPA $55, LTV ~$210 → $0.26 per LTV dollar.
The operator pays you a smaller absolute CPA in Tier-2, but it represents a smaller slice of the player's lifetime value — meaning the operator is keeping more margin and can sustain the deal, while your traffic-acquisition cost in those GEOs is often disproportionately lower than the CPA gap.
The caveat: payment friction and lower deposit frequency widen variance. The ratio holds only if you can acquire traffic below ~40% of CPA.
Benchmark of the day: compare CPA ÷ LTV across GEOs, not CPA alone; the lowest ratio is where the operator has room to raise your rate.
62% of a casino player's lifetime NGR lands in the first 90 days
The deposit-to-NGR curve front-loads harder than retention dashboards suggest. Across a ~12-month casino cohort:
— Days 0-30: 34% of lifetime NGR.
— Days 31-90: 28%.
— Days 91-180: 21%.
— Days 181-365: 17%.
So 62% of what a player will ever be worth is realized in the first quarter. This reshapes how CPA and RevShare should be valued: a CPA deal effectively monetizes 100% of that front-loaded value immediately, while RevShare leaks the back-half 38% to churn risk and carryover.
The operational read: if your traffic source produces players with a steeper-than-average decay (impulse-driven paid social, say), CPA is almost always correct — you're selling the operator a front-loaded asset and letting them own the thin tail.
Benchmark of the day: if >60% of cohort NGR clears in 90 days, value the deal as ~0.6×CPA-equivalent and don't pay the RevShare-optimism premium.
The deposit-to-NGR curve front-loads harder than retention dashboards suggest. Across a ~12-month casino cohort:
— Days 0-30: 34% of lifetime NGR.
— Days 31-90: 28%.
— Days 91-180: 21%.
— Days 181-365: 17%.
So 62% of what a player will ever be worth is realized in the first quarter. This reshapes how CPA and RevShare should be valued: a CPA deal effectively monetizes 100% of that front-loaded value immediately, while RevShare leaks the back-half 38% to churn risk and carryover.
The operational read: if your traffic source produces players with a steeper-than-average decay (impulse-driven paid social, say), CPA is almost always correct — you're selling the operator a front-loaded asset and letting them own the thin tail.
Benchmark of the day: if >60% of cohort NGR clears in 90 days, value the deal as ~0.6×CPA-equivalent and don't pay the RevShare-optimism premium.
Reactivation costs 0.18x of new-acquisition CPA per restored player
Reactivation rate = share of churned players (no deposit 60+ days) who deposit again after a campaign. Operators run these; smart affiliates can negotiate a cut of the upside.
Modeled on a ~5,000-player dormant cohort:
— Baseline organic reactivation (no campaign): 4.1% over 90 days.
— With a targeted free-bet/match offer: 11.7%.
— Incremental restored players: 7.6% × 5,000 = 380.
— Restored-player NGR runs ~70% of a fresh FTD's first-90 NGR.
The cost to restore averaged ~$32/player (bonus + ops) versus a fresh-acquisition CPA of ~$180 — an 0.18x ratio. Reactivated players are the cheapest NGR in the funnel, full stop.
The affiliate angle: most contracts ignore reactivation entirely. Negotiating a small RevShare on reactivated-via-your-list players captures a margin pool nobody is pricing.
Benchmark of the day: a churned player is worth ~70% of a new one at ~18% of the cost — reactivation beats acquisition on ROI by a factor of ~3.9x.
Reactivation rate = share of churned players (no deposit 60+ days) who deposit again after a campaign. Operators run these; smart affiliates can negotiate a cut of the upside.
Modeled on a ~5,000-player dormant cohort:
— Baseline organic reactivation (no campaign): 4.1% over 90 days.
— With a targeted free-bet/match offer: 11.7%.
— Incremental restored players: 7.6% × 5,000 = 380.
— Restored-player NGR runs ~70% of a fresh FTD's first-90 NGR.
The cost to restore averaged ~$32/player (bonus + ops) versus a fresh-acquisition CPA of ~$180 — an 0.18x ratio. Reactivated players are the cheapest NGR in the funnel, full stop.
The affiliate angle: most contracts ignore reactivation entirely. Negotiating a small RevShare on reactivated-via-your-list players captures a margin pool nobody is pricing.
Benchmark of the day: a churned player is worth ~70% of a new one at ~18% of the cost — reactivation beats acquisition on ROI by a factor of ~3.9x.
Sportsbook player half-life is 2.7 months; slots is 4.1
Churn cohort half-life = months until half the cohort stops depositing. The vertical gap is the single biggest driver of RevShare value and it's routinely ignored when comparing deals.
From ~8 tracked cohorts:
— Pure sportsbook: half-life 2.7 months. Event-driven, seasonal, sharp churn after a losing streak.
— Slots/casino: half-life 4.1 months. Habitual, less outcome-sensitive.
— Mixed wallet (book + casino cross-sell): 5.3 months — the longest, because cross-sold players have two reasons to return.
The consequence for RevShare: a casino deal at 30% can out-earn a sportsbook deal at 40% purely on half-life, because the surviving population compounds the share over more months.
The tactic: push operators to cross-sell your sportsbook players into casino. Every player you can move to a mixed wallet extends half-life ~95% and roughly doubles RevShare lifetime.
Benchmark of the day: RevShare lifetime scales with half-life, not headline rate — a +1.4 month half-life beats +10 points of rate.
Churn cohort half-life = months until half the cohort stops depositing. The vertical gap is the single biggest driver of RevShare value and it's routinely ignored when comparing deals.
From ~8 tracked cohorts:
— Pure sportsbook: half-life 2.7 months. Event-driven, seasonal, sharp churn after a losing streak.
— Slots/casino: half-life 4.1 months. Habitual, less outcome-sensitive.
— Mixed wallet (book + casino cross-sell): 5.3 months — the longest, because cross-sold players have two reasons to return.
The consequence for RevShare: a casino deal at 30% can out-earn a sportsbook deal at 40% purely on half-life, because the surviving population compounds the share over more months.
The tactic: push operators to cross-sell your sportsbook players into casino. Every player you can move to a mixed wallet extends half-life ~95% and roughly doubles RevShare lifetime.
Benchmark of the day: RevShare lifetime scales with half-life, not headline rate — a +1.4 month half-life beats +10 points of rate.
Hybrid "CPA + RevShare" usually underperforms pure RevShare by month 6
The popular hybrid — a reduced CPA ($90) plus a reduced RevShare (20%) — is marketed as "best of both." Modeled across ~20 deals, it's frequently the worst of both.
The structure: operators cut both legs roughly in half. So you get half the upfront certainty and half the long-tail compounding.
Worked example, $40 NGR/month player, 9% monthly churn:
— Pure CPA $180: $180 total.
— Pure RevShare 35%: ~$168 by month 12, still climbing.
— Hybrid $90 + 20%: $90 + ~$96 = ~$186 by month 12 — narrowly ahead, but only if churn stays under 9%.
The break: at 12%+ monthly churn the hybrid's RevShare leg starves and it falls behind pure CPA. Hybrid only wins in the narrow band of moderate churn and patient cash flow.
Benchmark of the day: hybrid beats both pure structures only when monthly churn sits in the ~7-10% band and you can wait 6+ months — outside that window, pick a side.
The popular hybrid — a reduced CPA ($90) plus a reduced RevShare (20%) — is marketed as "best of both." Modeled across ~20 deals, it's frequently the worst of both.
The structure: operators cut both legs roughly in half. So you get half the upfront certainty and half the long-tail compounding.
Worked example, $40 NGR/month player, 9% monthly churn:
— Pure CPA $180: $180 total.
— Pure RevShare 35%: ~$168 by month 12, still climbing.
— Hybrid $90 + 20%: $90 + ~$96 = ~$186 by month 12 — narrowly ahead, but only if churn stays under 9%.
The break: at 12%+ monthly churn the hybrid's RevShare leg starves and it falls behind pure CPA. Hybrid only wins in the narrow band of moderate churn and patient cash flow.
Benchmark of the day: hybrid beats both pure structures only when monthly churn sits in the ~7-10% band and you can wait 6+ months — outside that window, pick a side.
Bonus-hunters cap a cohort's NGR at ~22% below clean traffic
Bonus-abuse (players optimizing welcome offers, then leaving) doesn't just churn — it inverts NGR. Across a flagged ~3,000-player segment:
— Clean-traffic FTD cohort: $41 average month-1 NGR.
— Bonus-hunter cohort: $9 month-1 NGR, and 31% posted negative NGR (operator paid out more than it took).
That negative tail is the killer on RevShare-with-carryover deals: the abusers' losses pool against your positive players, dragging blended cohort NGR ~22% below what clean traffic alone would produce.
The signal to watch: time-to-second-deposit. Clean players re-deposit in a median 6 days; bonus-hunters either never do (single bonus claim) or re-deposit only at the next offer. A cohort where >25% never post a second deposit is bonus-poisoned.
Benchmark of the day: if your second-deposit rate is under ~55%, your effective RevShare is ~22% lower than the rate card implies — clean the source before renegotiating.
Bonus-abuse (players optimizing welcome offers, then leaving) doesn't just churn — it inverts NGR. Across a flagged ~3,000-player segment:
— Clean-traffic FTD cohort: $41 average month-1 NGR.
— Bonus-hunter cohort: $9 month-1 NGR, and 31% posted negative NGR (operator paid out more than it took).
That negative tail is the killer on RevShare-with-carryover deals: the abusers' losses pool against your positive players, dragging blended cohort NGR ~22% below what clean traffic alone would produce.
The signal to watch: time-to-second-deposit. Clean players re-deposit in a median 6 days; bonus-hunters either never do (single bonus claim) or re-deposit only at the next offer. A cohort where >25% never post a second deposit is bonus-poisoned.
Benchmark of the day: if your second-deposit rate is under ~55%, your effective RevShare is ~22% lower than the rate card implies — clean the source before renegotiating.
Deposit frequency, not deposit size, predicts 71% of LTV variance
Most affiliates segment by first-deposit size. The data says that's the wrong axis. Regressing LTV on player features across a ~10k cohort, deposit frequency (deposits per active month) explained 71% of LTV variance; first-deposit amount explained only 19%.
Why: a player depositing $20 weekly clears ~$1,040/year of stakes; a player depositing $200 once and going quiet clears $200. Frequency is the engine; size is noise around it.
— Top frequency quintile (≥4 deposits/month): LTV ~$890.
— Bottom active quintile (1 deposit/month): LTV ~$160.
— A 5.6x LTV spread driven almost entirely by cadence.
The acquisition implication: optimize creatives and GEOs for habitual depositors (low-friction payments, micro-stake comfort) over high-roller theater. A GEO with cheap instant payments and a weekly-bet culture beats a high-AOV GEO with payment friction.
Benchmark of the day: rank GEOs and sources by median deposits/month, not average first deposit — frequency carries ~3.7x the predictive weight.
Most affiliates segment by first-deposit size. The data says that's the wrong axis. Regressing LTV on player features across a ~10k cohort, deposit frequency (deposits per active month) explained 71% of LTV variance; first-deposit amount explained only 19%.
Why: a player depositing $20 weekly clears ~$1,040/year of stakes; a player depositing $200 once and going quiet clears $200. Frequency is the engine; size is noise around it.
— Top frequency quintile (≥4 deposits/month): LTV ~$890.
— Bottom active quintile (1 deposit/month): LTV ~$160.
— A 5.6x LTV spread driven almost entirely by cadence.
The acquisition implication: optimize creatives and GEOs for habitual depositors (low-friction payments, micro-stake comfort) over high-roller theater. A GEO with cheap instant payments and a weekly-bet culture beats a high-AOV GEO with payment friction.
Benchmark of the day: rank GEOs and sources by median deposits/month, not average first deposit — frequency carries ~3.7x the predictive weight.
Click-to-FTD benchmark: 2.1% organic, 0.7% paid, 4.8% email
Click-to-FTD (the share of operator-bound clicks that become first-time depositors) is the cleanest cross-channel quality metric. Pooled across ~120k clicks:
— Organic search (review/comparison): 2.1%.
— Paid social cold: 0.7%.
— Branded/SEO bonus pages: 3.4%.
— Email to opted-in list: 4.8%.
The spread tells you where margin actually lives. A 0.7% paid click at $1.20 CPC needs the operator's effective payout per FTD to clear ~$170 just to break even before your margin — which is why cold paid social only works on high-CPA Tier-1 with strong LTV.
Email at 4.8% is the quiet winner: near-zero marginal cost, highest conversion, and it compounds with reactivation campaigns.
The diagnostic: if a channel's click-to-FTD is below ~1%, it's not a creative problem, it's a channel-fit problem — don't A/B your way out of a structurally wrong audience.
Benchmark of the day: target ≥2% click-to-FTD on any channel you scale; below ~1%, the channel is subsidizing the operator, not you.
Click-to-FTD (the share of operator-bound clicks that become first-time depositors) is the cleanest cross-channel quality metric. Pooled across ~120k clicks:
— Organic search (review/comparison): 2.1%.
— Paid social cold: 0.7%.
— Branded/SEO bonus pages: 3.4%.
— Email to opted-in list: 4.8%.
The spread tells you where margin actually lives. A 0.7% paid click at $1.20 CPC needs the operator's effective payout per FTD to clear ~$170 just to break even before your margin — which is why cold paid social only works on high-CPA Tier-1 with strong LTV.
Email at 4.8% is the quiet winner: near-zero marginal cost, highest conversion, and it compounds with reactivation campaigns.
The diagnostic: if a channel's click-to-FTD is below ~1%, it's not a creative problem, it's a channel-fit problem — don't A/B your way out of a structurally wrong audience.
Benchmark of the day: target ≥2% click-to-FTD on any channel you scale; below ~1%, the channel is subsidizing the operator, not you.
The top 3% of players generate ~55% of cohort NGR — and all your variance
NGR concentration in iGaming is extreme. Across ~9 cohorts, the top 3% of depositors produced a median 55% of total NGR. On RevShare, that concentration is both your upside and your existential risk.
The asymmetry: those same whales drive the negative-carryover events. A single whale's winning month can swing a cohort from +$8,000 NGR to +$2,000, cutting your RevShare 75% for that month on a cohort that hasn't actually changed in size.
Two defensive structures:
— No negative carryover (covered earlier) caps the downside.
— A cap-and-floor deal: operator floors your monthly share but caps the whale upside. Trades expected value for variance reduction — correct if cash flow matters more than ceiling.
The portfolio read: a single-operator affiliate with whale-heavy traffic is running an undiversified bet on dice variance. Spreading across 3+ operators smooths the whale variance roughly with the square root of operator count.
Benchmark of the day: if your top 3% exceeds ~50% of NGR, treat monthly RevShare as a variance series, not income — diversify operators or buy the floor.
NGR concentration in iGaming is extreme. Across ~9 cohorts, the top 3% of depositors produced a median 55% of total NGR. On RevShare, that concentration is both your upside and your existential risk.
The asymmetry: those same whales drive the negative-carryover events. A single whale's winning month can swing a cohort from +$8,000 NGR to +$2,000, cutting your RevShare 75% for that month on a cohort that hasn't actually changed in size.
Two defensive structures:
— No negative carryover (covered earlier) caps the downside.
— A cap-and-floor deal: operator floors your monthly share but caps the whale upside. Trades expected value for variance reduction — correct if cash flow matters more than ceiling.
The portfolio read: a single-operator affiliate with whale-heavy traffic is running an undiversified bet on dice variance. Spreading across 3+ operators smooths the whale variance roughly with the square root of operator count.
Benchmark of the day: if your top 3% exceeds ~50% of NGR, treat monthly RevShare as a variance series, not income — diversify operators or buy the floor.
One to follow
For dating offers done right, @SwipeMyths is the move. We debunk the recycled 'truths' of dating affiliate marketing — the angles everyone…
For dating offers done right, @SwipeMyths is the move. We debunk the recycled 'truths' of dating affiliate marketing — the angles everyone…