I wrote my first article about affiliate marketing back in 2009, when Romanian online stores were just discovering that you could pay a partner only when they brought you a sale. Back then I described it as a fair deal: you pay for results, not promises. Twelve years later, the idea is as good as ever. It is the world around it that has changed completely.
Along came influencers, then creators. In 2018 I wrote about the shift from celebrities to micro-influencers, and last autumn about the creator economy, where anyone can be their own TV channel. Now, in June 2021, the two worlds are colliding: affiliate marketing and creators. And the collision is a bit noisy, because tracking, meaning the way you measure who brought what, is not keeping up.
The problem: we pay for posts, not results
The most common model out there is still simple: the brand pays a flat fee for a post, a story or a video. The influencer publishes, the brand gets a screenshot with views and likes, and everyone hopes it was worth it. Sometimes it was. Sometimes it wasn’t. The problem is that nobody really knows.
The brand can’t tell how many sales came from that post. The creator can’t prove that their audience buys, not just applauds. So the negotiation runs on impressions, follower counts and gut feeling. A small creator with a very loyal audience may sell more than a big one, but without data there is no way to prove it. And a big creator with an “inflated” audience can be paid handsomely for zero sales.
Five things breaking measurement in 2021
This isn’t just about laziness or missing tools. There are some very concrete problems, and a few have got worse in the last couple of months:
- Discount codes escape into the wild. You give a creator a personal code, and a week later it shows up on a coupon site. The sale gets attributed to the creator, even though the buyer never saw them. Or the other way round: someone sees the recommendation but buys with a different code found on Google.
- The link in bio. Instagram doesn’t let you put links in posts; you get one link in your profile. People have to take an extra step, many don’t, and others come back to the site directly a few days later, leaving no trace.
- Journeys across devices. You see the product on your phone, in bed, at night. You buy it the next day from your laptop at work. For most systems, those are two different people.
- iOS 14.5 and App Tracking Transparency. Since the end of April, Apple has required apps to ask explicitly whether they may track you across other apps and websites. Most people, unsurprisingly, say no. For Facebook and Instagram ads, that means less conversion data, and marketers are already complaining that reports look worse than reality.
- Cookies are slowly dying. Safari, through ITP, and Firefox have been restricting third-party cookies for a while. Last year Google announced it would phase them out in Chrome too, with a plan aimed at 2022. Classic affiliate networks built on third-party cookies have a serious problem.
What correct tracking means
I don’t think the answer is to go back to paying per post and hoping for the best. I think the answer is to do affiliate marketing the way it should have been done from the start, adapted to the creator world. In practice, a few principles:
- A unique link and code for every creator, ideally for every campaign too. Codes can be time-limited or capped at a number of uses so they don’t end up on coupon sites.
- First-party, server-side tracking. Instead of relying on a third-party cookie the browser deletes, the store records the sale on its own server and ties it to the creator. It is sturdier and more respectful of customer data, which, after GDPR (the EU’s data protection rules), is not a small detail.
- Clear attribution windows, agreed in advance: if someone buys within 7, 14 or 30 days of the click, the sale belongs to the creator. The exact number matters less than the fact that both sides know it and accept it.
- A transparent dashboard for the creator. Creators should see clicks, sales and commissions in real time, not get a spreadsheet at the end of the month they have to trust blindly.
- Fraud protection. Fake clicks, cancelled orders, self-purchases for commission. A serious system filters them out before payment, not after the scandal.
Payment models that are fair to both sides
This is the part that interests me most, because it is really a conversation about trust. I spent years working on marketing automation for online stores, and with Retargeting, the platform I co-founded, I learned that people happily pay for a tool only when they can clearly see its effect. It is the same with creators.
Pure CPA, paying per sale or per action, is fair to the brand but can be unfair to the creator: they put work, time and reputation into a video, and if the product is weak or the site loads slowly, they earn nothing. Revenue share, a percentage of sales, works much the same way. That is why I think the healthiest model, especially at the start, is a hybrid: a smaller fixed fee for the production work, plus a commission on sales. The creator has a floor, the brand pays mostly for results, and both have a reason to do the job well.
It is the same logic I use with startups: I would rather earn from results than from a fixed fee. If I don’t deliver, I don’t get paid. To me it is the most honest arrangement there is, as long as the results are measured properly.
Why it matters for creators
For a creator, correct tracking is the difference between being paid for popularity and being paid for impact. A niche creator, say someone who does honest reviews of diving gear for a few tens of thousands of people, may sell better than a celebrity with millions of followers. Without data, they have no argument. With data, they have a business card and real negotiating power.
There is something else too: independence. A creator who knows exactly what they sell can choose the brands they work with, drop the ones that don’t convert, and build a steady income rather than one made of random campaigns.
Why it matters for brands
For brands, the benefit is obvious: you pay for results. Budget moves from creators who look good on paper to those who actually sell. You learn which messages work, which kind of content brings customers who come back, and which audiences don’t fit your product.
And, crucially in 2021, you are no longer entirely dependent on the ad platforms. If conversion data from Facebook keeps getting patchier, a network of creators you measure directly, on your own server, becomes a channel you control.
A space I’m watching closely
I’ll admit this topic excites me. It brings together three things I have always loved about the internet: commerce, measurable marketing, and people building something on their own. I believe that in the next few years we will see platforms that solve exactly the problems above, perhaps with the help of artificial intelligence, matching creators with the right brands and spotting fraud better than any hand-written rule. It is a space I’m watching very closely.
Until then, my advice to both sides is simple: stop negotiating on impressions. Ask for unique links, clear attribution windows and access to the data. Anyone with good results has no reason to fear transparency.
How do you work with creators? Do you pay per post, per sale, or have you found a hybrid model that works? And if you are a creator, do you ever get to see the real numbers behind the sales you drive?