Pulling out of NATS sponsors?

[-HF]

i can see it coming, once all the fuss about the security breach actually sinks in with the average webmaster, there may well be a massive movement away from NATS sponsors.

a good time to position one's ccbill based sponsor program more prominently to pick up the fall out?

it's not like it was surprising really, despite using a unique email account for nearly every sponsor, we are being spammed on these dedicated email accounts since years. who really thought the customers would be safe for long?

[tdf]

its understandable that this may happen, what do you think people will do regards sponsors on MPA3 do you think they will be given the same cold shoulder?

[-HF]

i do not even know if any one gets a cold shoulder. considering the level of things, i feel the thread on the selfabuse board is pretty tame so far.

personally i am not that surpised about it happening, more about the dimension of it and the fact it's being pointed out since yonks but only now hit the fan properly. being the holidays and all, we might see people coming back from mum's roast beast and having forgotten all about it again.

i could imagine though that ccbill only programs could reap quite some new affiliates, if they play this right. granted, it's playing on fears, but hey, that's what biz and politics is often about.

[Mattyboy]

What about Verotel sponsors, Epoch sponsors, those using custom cascade systems, clickman (used by the might Bangbros) etc etc?

[JT]

I doubt anyone will leave nats as in terms off affiliates, but a few sponsors might

[-HF]

playing with peoples' fears makes them do amazing things. heck, some start ill-inofrmed hate threads over 150 quid, calling the sponsor scum and thieves. lots of potential out there.

whether it's an ethical thing to do and worth the effort is a totally different matter, obviously.

[Paul Markham]

I've spent some time reading the thread on FYG, in between football, shopping and preparing for Xmas.

What has struck me is that this is not a new situation and they were warned, warnings they chose to ignore. Not a lawyer but if it can be proved they did ignore them or did not do their utmost to protect their clients, they could be liable to getting sued.

There is also the situation that it could be an employee, also very damaging.

IMO this is just the beginning.

[MMarko]

playing with peoples' fears makes them do amazing things. heck, some start ill-inofrmed hate threads over 150 quid, calling the sponsor scum and thieves.

That was not a hate thread.