Link Programme Management for Gambling and Crypto

How the money works, first: Publisher fees are invoiced at cost with the editor's invoice attached, and our management fee sits on top — on most programmes it runs 30 to 40 percent of monthly spend. You can see what each placement cost. Agencies that bundle both into one per-link price keep the difference, and that difference is precisely where the incentive to buy cheap sites comes from. We also take no commission from publishers, because commission decides what a vendor recommends. What we take over: The target map, the anchor distribution, the pacing calendar, the compliance sign-off and the argument with your existing suppliers. You keep the budget decision and the brand veto. We do not touch on-page work, technical SEO or content on your own domain. If those are broken, links will not rescue them, and you will hear that in month one rather than month six. The target map: Money pages first, rarely only. In gambling the pages that respond are usually reviews and comparisons, and the pages needing defence are the ones already ranking that competitors are attacking. Every target is mapped to the queries it should own, then we decide which can take direct links and which need an intermediate page carrying them. A three-week-old bonus page with six editorial links pointing at it looks exactly like what it is. Anchors and pacing: Exact-match commercial anchors stay a minority of new links — in UK gambling we hold them under roughly one in ten, with brand, bare URL and descriptive anchors carrying the rest. Pacing follows your product and publishing calendar. When a month holds nothing worth pitching, we place nothing and the report says so. That conversation costs less now than a month of weak placements costs later. Suppliers you already use: We screen them rather than replace them. Most programmes we inherit run two or three vendors, one of which is fine and the others are reselling the same fifty sites to everyone in the vertical. We take no cut of what you spend with a third party and have no reason to remove someone who is working. What we insist on is site lists before payment; a supplier who refuses stops being paid, and we will put that recommendation in writing. Compliance: Each piece gets a route decision recorded before writing — CAP Code section 16 for UK gambling, the financial promotions regime for consumer-facing cryptoasset content, COBS 4 for regulated finance. The log names who approved what and when, so your compliance function or your licensing authority can read it later. Most link programmes have no answer at all when someone finally asks that question. Reported monthly: Links live and lost with the reason for each loss. Query-level movement on mapped targets from Search Console rather than a third-party average. One decision list: keep, stop, and what changed our mind this month. No dashboard screenshots, and no Domain Rating movement, which measures our suppliers' marketing rather than your rankings. We will not: Write a link quota into the contract. Buy from private blog networks, or from anyone who will not name a URL first. Take footer or sitewide links. Run two operators in the same market through one publication in a quarter. Not for: Operators without a licence in the market they are targeting. Brands whose real problem is retention rather than acquisition. Anyone needing the programme to show results inside one quarter — in these verticals it does not, and a vendor promising otherwise is building something that will need cleaning up.