Hi everyone
We are a media buying team — Good Traffic Media and we would like to share a case we’ve encountered with Trips Casino
In September 2025, we agreed on launching a slots approach on Facebook for AU and CA GEOs. The deal was KPI-based, and we заранее discussed the possibility of a payout adjustment if KPIs were not met.
The traffic continued to play, but the KPIs were not reached. From our side, we consistently provided feedback and suggested ways to improve performance, however, responses from the advertiser became less frequent over time.
On October 24, 2025, we received an approval for €3,360 (all communication and confirmations are documented). We accepted this as a compromise to at least partially cover our costs, even though we would still remain at a loss even with the full payment.
We also planned to discuss this case in person at a conference, but we started being ignored.
After the amount was approved, the situation worsened:
— responses became irregular
— payments were promised “today/tomorrow” but never processed
— deadlines were constantly postponed
As a reason, we were told about “financial rearrangements.” At the same time, we continue working with Trips Casino on other projects where no such payment issues occur.
Additionally, in recent messages, the advertiser referred to third-party information about “unsuccessful launches by others,” which, in our view, cannot be a valid reason to deny already approved payments.
We fully understand that Facebook traffic, like any social traffic, does not always guarantee стабильное качество, and not every test launch is successful — this is standard market practice. That’s exactly why we agreed to work under KPI conditions.
From our side, we invest our own funds into traffic acquisition and use proven approaches, the quality of which has been подтверждено with screenshots from other brands. In such cases, partners usually manage to find compromise solutions.
For this specific launch, we spent nearly $9,000 on traffic acquisition:
— AU: $4,521
— CA: $4,200
As of now, almost 6 months have passed, and the payment has still not been made.
We consider this approach towards partners unacceptable and would appreciate your support in resolving this situation.
We are ready to provide all supporting materials, including correspondence, screenshots, and statistics.
I’m reposting here all the screenshots of our conversation, translated into English using AI
We can also provide the original versions if needed, but they are in Russian.
Hello everyone,
We would like to clarify our position regarding the case raised by Good Traffic Media.
The cooperation with Good Traffic Media was launched under KPI-based conditions that were discussed and mutually agreed upon before any traffic was delivered. As also stated in their own communication, the possibility of payment adjustments in cases where KPIs were not met was part of the original agreement between both parties.
Following an internal review conducted together with our anti-fraud and retention teams, we identified serious quality concerns regarding a significant portion of the delivered traffic.
Out of 36 FTDs:
* 22 users made only the minimum deposit,
* showed no meaningful gaming activity afterward,
* left their deposits untouched in their balances,
* and never returned to the platform again.
In addition, our retention team made multiple attempts to re-engage these users through various campaigns, including welcome offers and no-deposit bonuses. Despite these efforts, none of the accounts demonstrated any further activity or engagement.
Based on this analysis, our internal teams classified a substantial part of the traffic as non-qualified and potentially incentivized or non-organic. For this reason, the payment approval process was temporarily paused pending additional review.
At the same time, we want to emphasize that we never refused communication and remained actively engaged in discussions aimed at finding a compromise solution throughout the process. The €3,360 amount mentioned by Good Traffic Media was part of ongoing negotiations and internal discussions, and should not be interpreted as a finalized or unconditional payment approval.
We fully understand that social traffic can be volatile and that not every campaign performs successfully. However, as an advertiser, we also have a responsibility to carefully verify traffic quality before processing significant payouts, especially in cases where anti-fraud concerns arise.
TripsPartners has always been committed to fair, transparent, and professional cooperation with its partners, and we remain open to resolving this matter constructively based on an objective analysis of traffic quality and the KPI conditions originally agreed upon.
Best regards,
TripsPartners
AskGamblers
Dear @goodtrafficmedia,
The AskGamblers Complaint Team is kindly asking you to update your complaint in a timely manner and confirm if you consider the issue resolved. Please note that, in case you fail to respond within the given timeframe we will consider your case resolved and it will be closed accordingly.
Please keep in mind that as per the AGCCS Terms and Guidelines which you accepted upon registering and using our complaint system, you are obliged to provide the necessary level of assistance and cooperation during the process and providing updates in a timely manner is a must.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
1. Let’s start with the main point — this is Facebook traffic, and if you have experience working with it, you know that results can vary significantly from product to product, and this is a normal characteristic of this traffic type. Evaluating traffic without considering the nature of the source is, at the very least, not a fair assessment.
2. Accusations of “fraud” are not just a comment on quality — this is a serious statement. Fraud implies intentional manipulation. In our case, players are active and have been playing six months. This is not theory — this is reflected in your own statistics. If we look at the data objectively, this is real, live traffic. We are also ready to provide additional proof from our side, including screenshots and video of statistics. Therefore, such claims without any evidence do not look like analysis, but rather like an attempt to avoid previously agreed obligations.
3. We worked with you under KPI terms, as with all our partners — there were no exceptions. However, the key issue is not the traffic quality or the test result. The key issue is that the payout amount was approved by you, and only after that the delays started, followed by different reasons, “financial changes,” and continuous postponements.
4. As of today, you have been delaying an already approved payout for more than 8 months. During this time, we have repeatedly received confirmations, promises, and new timelines from your side. We have screenshots where:
— you confirm the payout amount;
— you postpone deadlines;
— you confirm that even in case of an unsuccessful test, the payout will still be made.
Facebook traffic is generally considered medium or unstable in terms of quality across the market. At the same time, our performance is consistently above market benchmarks, which is confirmed not by one case, but by long-term cooperation with multiple advertisers.
And lastly — partnership is built on communication and fulfilling agreements. When one side ignores the other for months after approving a payout, this is no longer about traffic quality. It becomes a question of business reputation and responsibility for one’s own decisions. This is exactly what raises our concerns.
Thank you for your response.
We fully understand the nature of Facebook traffic and agree that results may vary significantly depending on the product, GEO, audience behavior, and acquisition approach. We have extensive experience working with social traffic ourselves, which is exactly why this cooperation was initially launched under KPI-based conditions and with the understanding that traffic quality would be carefully evaluated after the test period.
At the same time, we would like to clarify an important point: our concerns were never based solely on “low performance” or unstable Facebook traffic behavior in general.
The issue was the specific behavioral pattern of a significant portion of the delivered users:
-minimum deposits only,
-almost no gameplay activity,
-untouched balances,
-no return activity over a long period of time,
-and complete absence of engagement despite multiple retention attempts from our CRM team.
This type of behavior raised concerns internally and triggered an additional anti-fraud and quality review process from our side.
We also want to clarify that the discussed payout amount was part of ongoing internal negotiations and compromise discussions during the review process. It should not be interpreted as a final unconditional confirmation that overrides internal traffic validation procedures, especially in a KPI-based cooperation model.
We acknowledge that communication during this case could have been handled better from our side, especially regarding timing and updates, and we understand why this created frustration for you. However, the delays were directly connected to the internal investigation and review of traffic quality rather than an intention to avoid communication or obligations.
At this stage, our position remains the same:
we are open to resolving the situation professionally and transparently, based on objective traffic analysis, player quality, and the original KPI framework agreed by both sides before launch.
AskGamblers
Dear Trips Partners,
The AskGamblers Complaint Team is kindly asking you to provide a detailed explanation of the issue along with all the relevant facts and evidence that could support your accusations towards the affiliate. Please make sure to state all the relevant terms that you believe have been breached by the affiliate, if any. Please send required information to support@askgamblers.com directly.
Please note that according to the AGCCS Terms, we consider all the information presented during the course of our complaint process confidential and as such it will not be shared with third parties.
Please be in aware that in case you fail to respond and/or provide requested information within the given timeframe, the complaint will be closed as unresolved.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Dear AskGamblers,
While Trips Partners are preparing their response, we would like to further document important details regarding the case.
On 12.05, we received an email at marketing@goodtrafficmedia.com referencing our previous request sent to support@askgamblers.com.
The message came from listings@askgamblers.com. The domain appeared official, so we provided the requested information.
After that, a Telegram group was created where two accounts presented themselves as AskGamblers representatives. They asked us to add them to the communication with Trips Partners and share the full chat history, which we did.
At the same time, they claimed to be in direct contact with Trips Partners. Shortly after, we received a message from the Trips Partners team lead with apologies and explanations regarding the situation.
We were later informed that once the payment is received, the case would be considered closed and no further dissemination of information would take place.
After this, we received a transfer to our wallet — the exact amount previously approved by Trips Partners. We informed them that we intended to return the funds and proceeded to do so.
After the refund, pressure began: representatives of “AskGamblers” insisted on sending the funds to another wallet, while we have reason to believe it is connected to Trips Partners.
We also confirm that during this period we received phone calls with threats from Trips Partners representatives, applying pressure and warning about potential reputational consequences.
Following the refund, further manipulation attempts continued: fake accounts appeared, including one impersonating our project owner, which were added to the chats and used to request repeated transfers.
During our review of these fake profiles, we also identified repeated changes of names, usernames, and avatars, including images associated with Trips Casino.
We consider this a coordinated attempt of pressure and manipulation aimed at influencing a case that has been ongoing for more than 8 months.
We would like to emphasize that we are fully ready to provide all evidence — screenshots, messeges, recordings, and any supporting materials — and to cooperate fully in order to clarify every detail of this situation.
We also consider it extremely important to note that such actions are unacceptable within the industry, especially given that these brands are certified. Situations like this undermine trust.
At this stage, our key priority is not financial compensation, but transparency and fairness. We are even prepared to waive any payment if necessary, in order to ensure an objective investigation and prevent such practices in the future.
We kindly ask you to formally record this incident and take it into account when reviewing the Trips Partners case.
Dear AskGamblers Team,
Following our previous correspondence regarding the dispute involving Good Traffic Media, we would like to formally report and document an additional incident that we consider highly concerning and directly relevant to the ongoing complaint process.
After conducting an internal review, we believe the following information should be taken into consideration together with the supporting screenshots and communication records attached to this report.
Chronology of Events
1. Introduction of the Account Previously Using the Name “@theaskgamblers”
As shown in Screenshots 1 and 2, on May 12, 2026, a Telegram account later identified under the name “Michael” was added to our existing group conversation with Good Traffic Media by their representative, Mariia.
At the time of introduction, this account was using the username/name “@theaskgamblers” and presented itself as an official AskGamblers representative involved in resolving the payment dispute.
2. Creation of a Separate Payment Discussion Group
Shortly afterwards, the same account created a separate Telegram group titled:
“ASKGAMBLERS x tripscasino”
As shown in Screenshot 3, the account immediately began:
requesting urgent payment settlement;
referring to potential blacklist-related consequences;
setting extremely short deadlines;
and requesting cryptocurrency payment.
One of the statements made during the conversation was:
“We will give you an hour to settle it.”
3. Cryptocurrency Wallet Requests and Payment Pressure
As shown in Screenshot 4, cryptocurrency wallet addresses were provided during the discussion together with repeated requests for immediate payment.
The communication was focused primarily on rapid financial settlement rather than standard mediation procedures.
4. Suspicious Coordination and Identity Changes
After our team began questioning the legitimacy of the account and contacted official AskGamblers representatives directly, several unusual developments occurred.
As visible in Screenshots 5 and 6:
usernames and display names changed during the discussion;
participant identities became inconsistent;
non-corporate email addresses were provided;
and the communication appeared coordinated between several participants.
Additionally, after we involved Ilya Bosak in the discussion for clarification purposes, further account and name modifications occurred within the same communication flow.
5. Confirmation from Official AskGamblers Representatives
After independently contacting official AskGamblers representatives, we were informed that the account using “@theaskgamblers” was not affiliated with AskGamblers.
This significantly increased our concerns regarding:
unauthorized impersonation of AskGamblers;
coordinated payment pressure;
and potential misuse of the AskGamblers brand name during an active financial dispute.
We would like to emphasize that we are not making definitive legal accusations regarding ownership or control of the involved accounts. However, based on the chronology of events, participant behavior, communication structure, and supporting screenshots, we believe this incident is highly suspicious and directly relevant to the mediation process.
We considered it important to report this matter transparently due to the serious nature of unauthorized AskGamblers impersonation during active payment negotiations.
We remain fully prepared to provide all supporting evidence, screenshots, communication logs, and additional clarification if required.
Kind regards,
Trips Partners
AskGamblers
Dear all,
The AskGamblers Complaint Team is in contact with the Trips Partners Team, and the case is being handled accordingly. Updates will be provided in due course.
Thank you for understanding.
We have already provided all the evidence that the deception scheme is coming from your side.
1. The non-payment has been outstanding since September 2025. What logic is there in waiting half a year to "come up with a scheme" over 3k euros? It doesn't add up.
2. The one who ignored the requests was you. The bad service came from your side. The one who failed to keep the promises was also you. We were waiting for what we are owed.
3. We did not push for the payout — neither then nor now. We stated this directly to AskGamblers in the very first messages, and it's on record.
4. You sent the payout from one wallet. Then, in the name of AskGamblers, you asked for 2k euros "for a mailout to affiliates." We returned the money to the very same wallet it came from. The question is: if we were the ones who pulled off the scheme — why did we send the money back?
5. The fake groups and accounts on Telegram were created by you. We have the entire correspondence saved — not as screenshots, but in full. We have already provided it.
The facts point in one direction. We're attaching the rest of the evidence.
Dear AskGamblers Team,
We would like to address several statements made in the latest response regarding the reported incident and clarify the sequence of events from our side.
First of all, we would like to clearly state that we did not create the Telegram account using the “@theaskgamblers” identity, nor were we the party who introduced this account into the existing communication. The account was added into the active dispute discussion by the Good Traffic Media representative, Maria (@mariiaafit).
At the time, the account presented itself as an AskGamblers representative involved in resolving the dispute. Shortly afterwards, pressure began being applied to our team through this account, including urgent payment demands and blacklist-related threats.
To avoid escalating the conflict publicly and to close the dispute without further complaints or forum discussions, our management agreed to proceed with a compromise payment, despite still having serious concerns regarding the quality and legitimacy of the traffic. Good Traffic Media themselves proposed reducing part of the FTD count in order to reach a settlement acceptable for both sides.
After the payment agreement was reached, Maria together with the account impersonating AskGamblers provided payment details for the transfer.
Due to an internal mistake from our side, the funds were initially sent to an older USDT wallet previously used by Good Traffic Media and already saved in our finance/payment records from earlier cooperation. After the transaction was completed and the payment hash was shared, Maria informed us that this was allegedly an “old wallet” and that the payment should instead be resent to a “new” wallet address, while the original transaction would be refunded.
At that stage, the situation already appeared highly unusual to us, since the payment could simply have been accepted on the previously used wallet or internally transferred between wallets without creating additional urgency and contradictory instructions.
Because of these inconsistencies, we independently contacted our official AskGamblers manager in order to verify whether the Telegram account was legitimate. We were then informed that the account was fake and had no affiliation with AskGamblers. We were also informed that similar suspicious communications had reportedly already been received by other parties as well.
Approximately 10–15 minutes later, the funds were indeed returned to us, and we were once again asked to resend the payment to the “new” wallet address.
Only after we informed Good Traffic Media that the situation would now be handled exclusively through official AskGamblers representatives did the public complaint appear on the AskGamblers forum on May 12.
If one reviews the initial complaint itself, it becomes clear that the entire dispute was originally presented solely as a non-payment issue related to traffic commission. At that stage, there were no claims regarding fake accounts, impersonation, threats, or similar allegations.
These additional claims only began appearing publicly on May 21, after our team had already provided AskGamblers representatives with screenshots, communication logs, wallet history, timestamps, and evidence connecting Good Traffic Media representatives to the impersonation-related communication flow.
For this reason, we reject the allegation that this situation originated from our side. It would make neither logical nor commercial sense for us, as the advertiser involved in an active mediation process, to intentionally create fake AskGamblers representatives while our own reputation, business relationships, and ongoing cooperation were directly at risk.
Our intention in reporting this incident was never to escalate the situation emotionally or make unsupported accusations. We simply considered it necessary to document objectively the unusual communication flow, identity inconsistencies, wallet contradictions, and impersonation concerns that occurred during active payment negotiations.
AskGamblers
Dear all,
Following a careful review and consideration of all the information, details, and proof presented by both parties during the complaint process, the AskGamblers Complaint Team has reached the conclusion that the Trips Partners management acted in accordance with their Terms and Conditions.
Please note that the channels used to discuss these complaints are not owned or monitored by AskGamblers; the only official channel for communication regarding an ongoing complaint is via email. Furthermore, the AskGamblers Complaint Team has reasonable grounds to suspect that the submitter may have been involved in potential fraudulent activities.
The AskGamblers Complaint Team maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward submitters who attempt to abuse our complaint service or fail to use it in good faith. Consequently, we have made the decision to reject this complaint and to impose a permanent ban restricting the submitter from using our services moving forward.
