How can Frank determine a player will not come back after winning from the SUB and withdrawing? You can only KNOW that after some time when the player never deposits again.
If the problem is down to players taking ONLY the sign-up bonuses at many casinos, well you have the SPAM to blame for that. I receive countless offers EVERY DAY for this casino or that casino, all quoting large welcome bonuses. Compare this with what you are offered for being an existing player, usually F*** all! Is is any wonder players move from casino to casino.
Players will stick around if loyalty bonuses or comps are CLEARLY better than the SUB, and there is a CLEAR progression in the quality of the offers the longer a player stays with the casino.
Sign-up bonuses need to return to what they were intended for, a chance to test the software on your machine before deciding whether to stay loyal. The only true test of a casino's quality comes after the first successful withdrawal, only then do players know whether the process is simple, or whether they are messed around, paid by check when they want eWallet, have to wait longer than stated, or even the common one where they are asked for documents and have to constantly badger CS for progress because they are messed around with "yes, we got 'em - no we didn't, yes we did, they're not clear...etc.."
Being messed around at the first withdrawal will make a player go away after just one deposit, and so will being messed around over the SUB - they will take that as a warning sign the casino has them on some kind of negative list and will not want to risk a second deposit win or lose.
A player who simply takes the SUB's as they flood uncontrollably past their spam filters but does not try to hide this by using fake names and/or details is simply a consumer getting the best deal. IF Playtech find this a problem then there needs to be a clear term limiting players to a set number of SUB offers across the entire Playtech platform, such that they can know in advance the stage at which they are no longer eligible for further routine SUB offers.
Playtech already have a diminishing reputation due to the number of problems related to Playtech casinos, which are way out of line with their counterparts on other platforms (with the exception of the
RTG rogues).
For those who still believe the casino "ran with the money", let us not forget that for many weeks Frank failed to mention that "bonus abuse" had anything to do with it, this has only recently been cited as the reason why a couple of players had not been paid. Are we to believe the operators cannot tell the difference between a "technical issue" and a player they are looking to not pay due to "bonus abuse".
What, exactly, IS this "technical issue with the processor". Processors who are in the business of making these transactions will have staff trained to fix such issues in a very short space of time and continue normal operation. I don't believe this issue was in the slightest a "technical" one. I believe it was more of a contractual or legal one. Either the processor bailed out and ran, went belly up, or was legally prohibited from carrying out their contractual duties. It is misleading to refer to such issues as merely technical, as this implies they are going to be resolved very quickly within the existing framework.
This lack of clarity and manipulation of language is what has made it look like the casino has "done a runner". Once the trust has been damaged in this way, there is nothing to make players believe that the recent statements are any more truthful and complete as the initial ones were (and not, as it turned out). The proof will be out next year. Players will either all be paid during January as indicated, or there will be yet another set of excuses in February as to why there is a further delay - and if this happens there is little chance of this casino continuing to compete in the marketplace.