$138,000 in Commissions Voided Overnight – Viagogo Affiliate Warning

[Turi007]

Hi Affiliates,


I’ve been working with Viagogo via Partnerize for over a year, generating sales steadily. My account Turi--- had over $138,000 in commissions (confirmed + pending).


The domain I used was approved by Viagogo from the start. Recently, after a huge spike in sales, Viagogo suddenly terminated my account, citing “domain policy violation,” and voided all commissions, including over $30,000 confirmed earnings.


I have full proof — screenshots from Partnerize showing the earnings, order values, and approved domain records.


Has anyone here faced a similar issue? How did you escalate it successfully? I’m considering legal action and public exposure of such practices to protect other affiliates.


Screenshots attached for reference. Any advice from experienced affiliates or those who dealt with Viagogo would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Ariel-ActiveRevenue]

brutal situation — unfortunately, it’s not the first time I’ve heard of a network or merchant retroactively voiding commissions after a spike in performance. often they’ll cite vague “policy violations” without transparent proof, and it leaves affiliates holding the bag.

if you’re escalating, make sure you keep all Partnerize and Viagogo correspondence, screenshots, and any proof of domain approval. I’ve seen some affiliates get partial settlements when they push hard with clear documentation, especially if they involve legal counsel or public exposure in relevant industry channels.

This is also why I tend to work with setups where I have more control over tracking, reporting, and advertiser relationships — far fewer “surprise” clawbacks. If you’re open to it, dm me in private

 

[Graybeard]

Hire a local lawyer and have him threaten them with a lawsuit. Send a demand letter first. Because it is an international lawsuit it will cost you.

Because of the difficulty collecting international debts—you will have a "tough row to hoe."
Don't let someone owe you that much, cut the traffic, and get paid for the conversions FIRST before resuming the traffic. You need to approach these things as a business giving another business credit—they will owe you—not the other way around.

 

[T J Tutor]

It's always so noticeable when someone's first post here is a complaint about a vendor.

The affiliate program highlights several key aspects relevant to affiliate websites:

"Affiliates should ensure their domain names and websites are professional, relevant, functional, and do not infringe upon Viagogo's trademarks or copyrights. They should also avoid creating websites that mislead customers into thinking they are a separate ticket marketplace, as all transactions must happen on the Viagogo website. It's advisable for affiliates to consult Viagogo's official affiliate program documentation and terms for detailed and specific guidelines on domain policy and branding."

Were you and your site(s) completely compliant with all of these requirements?

 

[Graybeard]

Were you and your site(s) completely compliant with all of these requirements?

That is a very valid question

 

[Turi007]

It's always so noticeable when someone's first post here is a complaint about a vendor.

The affiliate program highlights several key aspects relevant to affiliate websites:

"Affiliates should ensure their domain names and websites are professional, relevant, functional, and do not infringe upon Viagogo's trademarks or copyrights. They should also avoid creating websites that mislead customers into thinking they are a separate ticket marketplace, as all transactions must happen on the Viagogo website. It's advisable for affiliates to consult Viagogo's official affiliate program documentation and terms for detailed and specific guidelines on domain policy and branding."

Were you and your site(s) completely compliant with all of these requirements?

yes, to the best of my knowledge we were compliant, and here’s how, point-by-point against the program terms:

• Branding / Domain use: We never used Viagogo/StubHub marks or logos, never claimed official status, and placed clear, conspicuous non-affiliation disclaimers site-wide. The disputed domain was disclosed at onboarding and used for months without objection; when flagged, I detached/retired it immediately.
• No “separate marketplace” confusion: We do not sell tickets. All CTAs deep-link to Viagogo via Partnerize tracking. Pages describe events, then redirect—no carts, no payment flow, no “official” language.
• Linking & tracking compliance (Sec. 2 & 4): All domains were listed in Partnerize; no link manipulation, no referrer masking, no cookie stuffing, pop-ups, toolbars, or extensions.
• Advertising rules: No PPC bidding on brand/trademark terms; no social ads using Viagogo marks; email (limited) was CAN-SPAM compliant.
• Disclosures & policies (Sec. 7 / FTC): Above-the-fold affiliate disclosures, updated Terms, Privacy Policy, Disclaimer, and a takedown/DMCA contact.

The only debate is the string similarity of one domain to an event name. Even if Viagogo now deems that non-compliant, the response—retroactively voiding all unpaid commissions, including ~$30k already “Confirmed,” and wiping earnings from unrelated, compliant sites—is disproportionate and amounts to unjust enrichment after they captured the sales.


I’m not here to vent; I’m seeking a fair remedy:

1. pay pre-dispute, confirmed commissions, and
2. if needed, audit/segregate earnings by property.

 

[amay123]

yes, to the best of my knowledge we were compliant, and here’s how, point-by-point against the program terms:

• Branding / Domain use: We never used Viagogo/StubHub marks or logos, never claimed official status, and placed clear, conspicuous non-affiliation disclaimers site-wide. The disputed domain was disclosed at onboarding and used for months without objection; when flagged, I detached/retired it immediately.
• No “separate marketplace” confusion: We do not sell tickets. All CTAs deep-link to Viagogo via Partnerize tracking. Pages describe events, then redirect—no carts, no payment flow, no “official” language.
• Linking & tracking compliance (Sec. 2 & 4): All domains were listed in Partnerize; no link manipulation, no referrer masking, no cookie stuffing, pop-ups, toolbars, or extensions.
• Advertising rules: No PPC bidding on brand/trademark terms; no social ads using Viagogo marks; email (limited) was CAN-SPAM compliant.
• Disclosures & policies (Sec. 7 / FTC): Above-the-fold affiliate disclosures, updated Terms, Privacy Policy, Disclaimer, and a takedown/DMCA contact.

The only debate is the string similarity of one domain to an event name. Even if Viagogo now deems that non-compliant, the response—retroactively voiding all unpaid commissions, including ~$30k already “Confirmed,” and wiping earnings from unrelated, compliant sites—is disproportionate and amounts to unjust enrichment after they captured the sales.


I’m not here to vent; I’m seeking a fair remedy:

1. pay pre-dispute, confirmed commissions, and
2. if needed, audit/segregate earnings by property. If you want to earn money just by playing games from the comfort of your home, give this a try, MwinGame

Everything you’ve described seems fully compliant on your end, and you promptly addressed the one raised concern. Withholding confirmed commissions—especially those around $ 30,000—now feels excessive.

Your fair request:

Pay all confirmed, pre-dispute commissions.

If needed, offer a transparent audit by property to resolve discrepancies.

Holding back payments now could constitute unjust enrichment—the notion that no one should benefit unfairly at another’s expense. In many legal systems, restitution corrects that imbalance.

Let me know if you'd like help drafting a concise formal appeal.