<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>72Kilowatts Internet Marketing - Latest Comments in You&amp;#8217;re being watched&amp;#8230;.</title><link>http://72kilowattsaffiliatemarketing.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://72kilowattsaffiliatemarketing.disqus.com/you8217re_being_watched8230/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:13:35 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: You&amp;#8217;re being watched&amp;#8230;.</title><link>http://72kilowatts.com/2008/06/27/youre-being-watched/#comment-837019</link><description>&lt;p&gt;There's other reasons though.  Certainly, dropping a bad manager is never a bad thing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Especially in the case of OPM's we've seen programs bring them on because of their popularity, then drop them after a short recruiting period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;And I guess that's ok too.  Some affiliates, however, do prefer to work with certain OPMs, and if they build sites based on the fact that a specific OPM is managing a program, they tend to get ticked if they're gone *unexpectedly*.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's a dangerous premise though.  With very few exceptions, OPMs move on quite frequently.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kevin Webster</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:13:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: You&amp;#8217;re being watched&amp;#8230;.</title><link>http://72kilowatts.com/2008/06/27/youre-being-watched/#comment-836748</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Does that mean that a merchant should keep a worthless AM who either does nothing or knows nothing or both? I have seen many merchants switch AMs and head in a MUCH better direction. Let's face it...there are lots of AMs &amp;amp; OPMs out there who don't belong in the space. If a merchant made a bad decision they have to fix it. &lt;br&gt;With all due respect, for someone to drop an affiliate program that replaces poor management is terribly short-sited.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">scohaz</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 12:43:08 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>