THE AFFILIATE FILES | EPISODE 001 🔎
Incrementality has become the excuse some brands use to avoid paying traditional affiliates.
There. I said it.
And after 10 years in affiliate marketing, working across networks and agencies, I think it's time we had this conversation.
Because there's a double standard in this industry that nobody seems particularly keen to address.
A brand will happily spend thousands on a content partnership.
A dedicated article. A newsletter feature. Some social posts. A promise of reach and visibility.
The campaign goes live.
The report shows impressions, engagement and clicks.
Everyone's happy.
Now let a traditional affiliate publisher ask that same brand for a fixed placement fee.
Suddenly, it's a completely different conversation.
"Can you send us more case studies?"
"What percentage of those sales will be incremental?"
"How many genuinely new customers can you guarantee?"
"Why should we pay a placement fee when you're already earning CPA?"
Sorry, but where was all this scrutiny when the content budget was being approved?
Why is traffic valuable when we buy it through content, but suddenly questionable when it comes through affiliates?
Don't get me wrong.
Incrementality matters.
Not every attributed sale is incremental.
Not every publisher deserves a placement fee.
And brands absolutely should question whether they're paying for genuinely additional sales.
But not every request for incrementality is made in good faith either.
Sometimes it feels less like a genuine attempt to understand value and more like a convenient way to avoid committing budget.
And here's where the customer behaviour gets interesting.
A 2026 CouponFollow survey found that 74% of US respondents had left an online shopping cart to search for a voucher or promotional code.
Another 2026 survey found that 48% of US respondents would at least sometimes abandon a purchase when they couldn't find a discount.
Now think about that customer journey.
Someone visits your website.
Adds a product to their basket.
Gets to checkout.
Sees the promotional-code box.
Opens another tab to find a voucher.
Maybe they find one and return.
Maybe they don't, and the purchase never happens.
If a voucher publisher helps that customer complete the purchase, is that publisher simply taking credit for a sale that was guaranteed to happen anyway?
Or have they helped recover a sale that was at risk?
We can't assume either answer without proper evidence.
But we should stop pretending that arriving at checkout means a purchase is guaranteed.
And here's another interesting finding.
Awin research published by the APMA reported that 64% of voucher-code affiliate value was driven before the last-click stage.
So perhaps the old narrative that voucher publishers only appear at the very end of the journey needs a more serious examination.
This is what frustrates me about the incrementality debate.
We talk about affiliate marketing as though every publisher is doing the same job.
They're not.
A content publisher introducing a customer to a brand isn't doing the same job as a voucher publisher helping someone make a purchase decision.
A comparison site isn't doing the same job as a cashback platform.
And a publisher delivering awareness shouldn't automatically be judged by the same metrics as one contracted to drive immediate sales.
Different roles. Different value. Different ways to measure success.
Yet somehow, when it's time to discuss fixed fees, everything gets reduced to one question:
"But is it incremental?"
Here's what I think brands need to stop pretending.
Not every customer who visits your website was going to buy.
Not every affiliate who appears near checkout is stealing a sale.
Not every marketing activity can be fairly judged on last-click CPA.
And not every brand demanding proof of incrementality is applying that same standard to the rest of its marketing budget.
If you're happy to pay a content partner for visibility, audience access and engagement, why can't an affiliate partner be paid for delivering comparable value?
If you're demanding incremental revenue, define what incremental means and agree how you're going to measure it.
And if you expect a publisher to invest their own resources, audience and promotional inventory into growing your business, don't automatically assume CPA alone makes that a fair commercial arrangement.
I'm not saying brands should throw money at publishers.
I'm saying we need consistency, transparency and a little less selective scepticism.
Because incrementality should be a measurement tool.
Not a weapon to negotiate down the value of affiliate partnerships.
Let's have an honest conversation about affiliate marketing.
Whether you're a brand questioning the value of your affiliate programme or a publisher struggling to demonstrate the value you bring, the industry needs more transparency, fairer partnerships and better conversations about performance.
At Femspire, we help businesses take a fresh look at their affiliate marketing strategies, identify missed opportunities, strengthen publisher relationships and build programmes that deliver meaningful results.
With over 10 years of hands-on affiliate marketing experience across networks, agencies and brands, we understand the challenges from different sides of the industry.
Not sure whether your affiliate programme is delivering its full potential?
Perhaps you're struggling with publisher recruitment, questioning your commission structure, reviewing incrementality or simply looking for experienced support to grow your programme.
We'd love to hear from you.
Let's talk about what's working, what's not, and what we can do differently.
Get in touch at hello@femspire.co.uk or visit www.femspire.co.uk to discuss your affiliate programme and how we can support your business.