7 Questions Every Affiliate Manager Should Ask a Media Buying Team Before Launch

A good offer alone does not guarantee a successful test. Before launch, it is important to ensure that the selected GEOs, traffic sources, advertising materials, and promotional mechanics comply with applicable legislation, the rules of the relevant advertising platforms, and the product’s internal compliance requirements. Only then can you evaluate the test economics, budget, traffic quality, and scaling potential. After all, a team may come in with a proven traffic source, a reasonable budget, and experience in the GEO, only to discover during the test that the test cap is insufficient, both sides have different expectations regarding performance, and no one has discussed a scaling strategy in advance.

Most of these problems begin before the first launch. The team knows how much it is willing to spend and what ROI it wants to achieve. The product understands what quality of traffic it needs and which metrics it will monitor. However, if these expectations are not aligned beforehand, both sides may look at exactly the same results a week later and draw completely different conclusions.

A strong partnership does not start with offering a rate. It starts with understanding how both sides approach the test: how the team plans to run traffic, what it considers a viable result, how much it is prepared to invest, and what happens next if the test succeeds.

Yulii, Senior Affiliate Manager at PIN-UP Partners , has identified seven key questions worth discussing with a media buying team before getting started.

1. Which traffic source and approach are you planning to use?

Simply answering “We run Facebook traffic” or “We work with In-App” is usually not enough to properly plan a test. The traffic source provides only an initial understanding. What matters next is figuring out exactly how the team plans to build its user funnel: which sources and formats it intends to use, which approaches and creatives it wants to test, and which of them have already delivered results in the past.

This matters because you cannot simply give the same offer to two teams and expect identical launches.

For example, funnels may be structured differently when working with various digital sources and technical formats. The ability to test creatives, user journeys, and individual campaign elements depends on the specific source, technical solution, platform requirements, and the rules of the relevant GEO.

In In-App channels, for instance, campaign configuration also depends on the availability of the relevant applications and the requirements of the specific platform. The user journey must therefore be planned with technical limitations, platform requirements, and applicable advertising rules in mind.

At this stage, my goal is not simply to identify the source. I need to understand how the team operates. Only then can we properly discuss which funnel to build, which approaches are worth testing, and where to start with the launch.

2. What do you already know about this GEO, and how much are you willing to spend on the test?

The next thing I need to understand is the team's experience in the specific GEO and whether the selected traffic source and advertising approach can be used in accordance with the applicable market requirements.

Experience in a GEO alone does not provide the full picture. It is important to understand what results the team achieved and what exactly worked or failed at the time.

If a previous test performed poorly, I first try to understand why. It could have been expensive traffic acquisition, the wrong approach, a low CR, or the funnel itself. Poor results in the past do not necessarily mean that the GEO is unsuitable for the team. Sometimes the problem lies with a particular launch rather than the market.

If the team already has successful experience and proven approaches, the launch usually moves faster. We can take a new offer and run a split test using approaches the team already knows how to execute. If the team is entering a GEO for the first time, it makes sense to spend more time on preparation: reviewing current approaches, the budget, and the initial test together.

I also always clarify the test budget and acceptable CPA. These two figures have a major impact on what kind of launch is actually possible. They determine the cap size, GEO selection, approach, and sometimes even the funnel itself.

At PIN-UP Partners, we do not start a conversation with an offer and a rate without considering the team's economics. First, we look at the available budget, what CPA the team considers viable, and what experience it has in the GEO. Only after that can we select the right testing format.

3. How exactly will the test be structured?

Before launch, I need to understand not only the budget but also how the team plans to allocate it. How many media buyers will participate in the test? How many approaches and creatives will be used? What exactly do we want to compare, and how much time are we prepared to give each variation?

If several media buyers are involved in the test, I usually suggest separating them by sub-IDs from the beginning. The same can be done for different creatives and approaches.

This way, once the test is complete, we do not simply see an average result for the entire team. We understand exactly what worked and what dragged performance down.

It is also worth agreeing on timelines and interim performance reviews before launch. Instead of waiting until the entire cap has been exhausted to look at the numbers for the first time, we should regularly compare what is happening with traffic acquisition on the team's side and what results the product is seeing throughout the test.

This allows us to adjust the approach, creatives, or traffic delivery pace in time, rather than analysing mistakes after the budget has already been spent.

Certain initial conditions should be discussed separately before launch. For example, if the team relies on only a limited set of external analytics tools, tests a single approach, or plans to launch as quickly as possible, it is important to assess in advance whether that setup is sufficient to produce representative results.

4. How much volume is needed for the test to actually provide meaningful results?

When setting a cap, it is important to avoid both excessively small and excessively large volumes.

At PIN-UP Partners, we typically provide 50–100 FDs across all GEOs, as we work with Tier-3 markets. This benchmark is based on accumulated statistics from previous tests and an analysis of campaign results.

If one media buyer is testing one approach, 50 FDs are usually enough to collect the first meaningful data. If several buyers or multiple approaches are involved, it makes more sense to aim for 100 FDs. Otherwise, the sample size for each variation becomes too small, making it difficult to compare results.

An excessively small volume may simply fail to provide an accurate picture of the audience. On the other hand, running an overly large test with an unproven setup creates unnecessary risks for the product.

Therefore, the purpose of the cap is not simply to limit volume. It is to provide both sides with enough data to make an informed decision after the test.

There is one more point worth discussing immediately: what happens after the test cap is reached. If the results are good, it is better to understand in advance how much additional volume the team could potentially deliver.

5. What exactly will we consider a good result?

Before launch, I always try to agree with the team on what results would make the test successful from its perspective.

For some teams, ROI is the only critical metric. Others focus primarily on potential scaling volumes or the possibility of securing a higher rate.

This needs to be discussed beforehand because the team and the product evaluate the test from different perspectives, and the final decision must take both sides' economics into account.

At the same time, some metrics can be assessed almost immediately. We look at mFD, mRD, and the number of repeat deposits on the first day. These already provide an initial understanding of the audience we have acquired.

However, they are not enough to draw a final conclusion. Average deposit value, the RD-to-FD ratio, betting turnover, and margins become more informative later, once players have had enough time to engage with the product.

In practice, the numbers do not always paint a perfect picture.

For example, the team may have high acquisition costs and a low ROI, while on the product side, we see strong repeat deposits and retention.

For me, this is not a reason to stop the test immediately. On the contrary, such traffic may prove to be valuable in the long run. In this case, it makes sense to extend the cap, monitor further performance, and discuss the terms.

If the current economics of the test are unsatisfactory for either side, we can discuss possible adjustments to the commercial terms of future cooperation.

The opposite situation also occurs: acquisition costs look attractive for the team, but retention and repeat deposits on the product side fall below expectations. In that case, it is equally important to evaluate the overall economics rather than focusing solely on CPA.

At PIN-UP Partners, a good test result means that the economics work for both sides: the team achieves an acceptable return on investment, and the product acquires quality players. If the numbers do not align yet, we work together to determine whether the terms can be adjusted and the cooperation continued.

6. When is a successful test ready to scale?

After a successful test, it is worth checking three things: whether the team is satisfied with its ROI, whether it can increase volume, and whether the metrics required by the product remain stable after one or two weeks.

If all three conditions are met, the next step is to understand exactly how the team can scale the specific traffic source.

What limitations does it face? How quickly can it increase volume? And what happens to acquisition costs and traffic quality as volume grows?

After that, we can develop a plan not just for a couple of days, but for at least the next one, two, and three months.

At this stage, we look beyond the initial test results and start evaluating longer-term metrics: how players carry over into the following month, the share of VIP players, whether audience quality remains consistent, and whether the economics begin to deteriorate as volumes increase.

For me, proper scaling is not simply about generating more traffic.

It is important to preserve the same underlying logic that made the original test successful as volumes grow.

If all key metrics begin to deteriorate rapidly after the budget is increased, it means the test was scaled either too early or too aggressively.

7. How will we work together after launch?

Before getting started, it is important to agree on how we will communicate throughout the test.

Usually, the main calls take place before launch or during the scaling stage, while communication after the test cap is more often handled in chat.

The key is for both sides to exchange data regularly and be able to quickly compare results whenever questions arise during the test.

On the product side, we can provide relevant aggregated campaign metrics, such as RD dynamics on days one, three, and seven, the share of unique RDs, and other available traffic quality metrics. This information is provided to the extent necessary to analyse test results and in accordance with applicable data protection requirements.

On the team's side, we need to understand current acquisition costs, the situation with the traffic source, creatives, and volumes, as well as whether the offer is delivering the level of ROI the team considers viable.

The most valuable discussions often begin precisely when the numbers tell different stories to each side.

The team may see high acquisition costs and already want to stop, while at the same time, we see strong repeat deposits and retention. In this situation, it makes sense not to cut the test short immediately, but to monitor it a little longer and discuss the terms.

The opposite can also happen: acquisition costs look excellent, but the product data already shows that the players are underperforming and the economics will not work in the long run.

This is exactly where the affiliate manager's role comes into play after launch: bringing the team's data and the product's data together into one complete picture.

At PIN-UP Partners, we aim to evaluate the economics from both sides so that, together with the team, we can understand whether it makes sense to continue the test, what can be changed, and when both sides are ready to move on to scaling.