Accredited Casino new rule suggestion?

[JHV]

Originally Posted by RobWin

Attacking this group? Are you serious? I promote this group! That's a bit of a cheesy statement don't you think since I am merely pointing out the fact of their weekly withdrawal max NOT being $500 as you stated in your original broad statement. Why are you trying to mix up these two into semantics?

If you had stated that their weekly withdrawal max to ewallets was $500[/U][/B] then most likely you and I would not even be trading posts at the moment..

Ah ok sorry - I thought you were attacking them. And all along you were just defending them because you promote them. Boy, do I have red on my face!

If cheque or Bank Wire doesn't suit you for various reasons, you are effectively limited to Moneybookers or NETeller - are you not? My point is that if you're allowed to deposit 100k instantly using a payment processor, 500/w as a cap using the payment processor you deposited with is very obscure limit, especially considering the wagering they'll allow.

Bank Wire is actually fine by me. And I'm telling you the whole issue is a lot more complex. But you keep pushing thinking you've found a weak point in my argument, you might push too hard, and the casinos you promote are going to not get my benefit of the doubt. So perhaps Mr. Affiliate...in your own interest...we could talk about how 500/w cap on MB/NETeller is actually a 500 cap if the other options aren't available to you - can you explain how one option having a higher cap makes the lower cap option unimportant?

Perhaps we'll make it $200 for every option except Surface Mailed cheques in the currency of....Japanese Yen. Where you can withdraw US$50,000 (equivalent) a week. What's the problem? You don't want to wait 2 months for your cheque? And you don't want the payment in Yen?

OBVIOUSLY I'm being ridiculous with this example. I'm just trying to use ludicrous extremes to point out that your argument is a fallacy. A $500/w cap is a $500/w cap, regardless of whether other methods are higher. If you can use some of those other methods, good for you. But a $500/w cap is a $500/w cap if you only wish to use the method you deposited with.

[RobWin]

Originally Posted by JHV

Ah ok sorry - I thought you were attacking them. And all along you were just defending them because you promote them. Boy, do I have red on my face!

If cheque or Bank Wire doesn't suit you for various reasons, you are effectively limited to Moneybookers or NETeller - are you not? My point is that if you're allowed to deposit 100k instantly using a payment processor, 500/w as a cap using the payment processor you deposited with is very obscure limit, especially considering the wagering they'll allow.

Bank Wire is actually fine by me. And I'm telling you the whole issue is a lot more complex. But you keep pushing thinking you've found a weak point in my argument, you might push too hard, and the casinos you promote are going to not get my benefit of the doubt. So perhaps Mr. Affiliate...in your own interest...we could talk about how 500/w cap on MB/NETeller is actually a 500 cap if the other options aren't available to you - can you explain how one option having a higher cap makes the lower cap option unimportant?

Perhaps we'll make it $200 for every option except Surface Mailed cheques in the currency of....Japanese Yen. Where you can withdraw US$50,000 (equivalent) a week. What's the problem? You don't want to wait 2 months for your cheque? And you don't want the payment in Yen?

OBVIOUSLY I'm being ridiculous with this example. I'm just trying to use ludicrous extremes to point out that your argument is a fallacy. A $500/w cap is a $500/w cap, regardless of whether other methods are higher. If you can use some of those other methods, good for you. But a $500/w cap is a $500/w cap if you only wish to use the method you deposited with.

What part of your original post statement as not being truly factual are you not getting here JHV??

Just to recap for you one more time, this was your original statement:

Originally Posted by JHV

There are Accredited List casinos currently listed who would happily accept $100,000 from me instantly, let me wager $20,000/minute...BUT they have a $500/week payout cap.

Can you not see the factual error in your broad sweeping statement there or do you just simply not want to admit to it? Personally I think it is the latter.

Focus my friend...Focus..
____
____

[NASHVEGAS]

Yes, I just love depositing $5K on a given day, having some luck, and receiving $3K per week if I am lucky once again but chutzpah (i.e. "Louise is on vacation",YES!!) usually comes into play there also. If you can not pay in full ,shut your FREAKING doors. It is the player's money and the players should not be online casinos DAMN lenders that most of the time these casinos do not have to even payoff this loan. It is not the "HOUSE'S MONEY" despite some player's inability to grasp this concept.

Yet chargebacks are criminal,nope,but that mindset exists. Who are the real fraudsters afaic???

Kinda of ironic reading the affiliate boards about delayed,short,non,etc. payments. Don't you dare casinos!!

[JHV]

Originally Posted by RobWin

What part of your original post statement as not being truly factual are you not getting here JHV??

We're going to go around in circles here Rob - so let's leave it for now. I stand by my statement. You are arguing my statement is invalid because there are other options available which aren't 500/w cap. Your position is *almost* valid except not quite. If someone is limited to their depositing option as their only suitable withdrawing option - then they have a 500/w cap. It's irrelevant whether you, or other players, are lucky enough to have that other option with the higher limit.

If you still disagree, that's fine. But I stand by my statement because it's perfectly valid. And if you keep asking me to repeat it, I'll keep repeating it. So I don't see what the point is in doing so. Therefore, let's discuss that cap amount and whether it's a valid amount to cap at. Do you think it's appropriate to accept 100k off a player using NETeller, allow him to lose it, then when he wins 50k back in a tournament, limit him to $500/w when NETeller is his only suitable option for transacting?

------

(Edit: NashVegas my friend, we are in agreeance. Just a small suggestion, this forum frowns upon emotive language [I've learned this the hard way..twice, maybe 3x ] - we are 100% in the "right" but I believe we'll make a better case arguing without emotion - just my opinion, nothing more, am not criticising you at all - I completely agree with you.)

[RobWin]

Originally Posted by JHV

If someone is limited to their depositing option as their only suitable withdrawing option - then they have a 500/w cap.

That's much better and exactly the way you should have stated it in your original post instead of the much larger sweeping, *Invalid* and *Non-Factual* statement that you made! Now you are getting it buddy..
____
____

[vinylweatherman]

Notwithstanding the other heated arguments, a cap of 500 in currency per week which is ONLY applied to Neteller, Moneybookers, and Click2Pay is inherently "unfair", since it bears NO relation to the functionality of these wallets, and I have extensive experience of the functionality of Neteller, and a little of Click2Pay. The limit should be the SAME for ALL methods of payment. We are talking here of the PLAYER'S MONEY, not the HOUSE'S. The difference between these limits is HUGE, a factor of 10 no less. A player withdrawing a win via these three wallets has to wait TEN TIMES LONGER than for any other means.

If an accredited casino has these limits, they MUST provide an EXPLANATION as to why this has proved necessary.

I have been paid £20,000 IN ONE DAY back to my Neteller by both Jackpot Factory and 32Red before, so this has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with "Neteller limits" other than my PERSONAL limits at Neteller, which casinos are NOT privvy to.

Payment back to my Neteller account is MUCH SAFER than having a cheque sent through the post. I have read MANY tales from players who were sent cheques that never arrived, and the SEVERE problems this can create with getting the cheque cancelled, and reissued; sometimes to disappear again. Payment back to my Neteller is also MUCH QUICKER, there is NO other method of payment that makes my funds available so SOON for more gambling.

[RobWin]

Originally Posted by vinylweatherman

If an accredited casino has these limits, they MUST provide an EXPLANATION as to why this has proved necessary.

That I can agree on as it may be simply due to a reason of sorts that they do not desire to pay the high fees associated with ewallet transactions on larger amounts. Maybe the EH Rep can come in here and clarify.
____
____

[JHV]

Originally Posted by RobWin

That I can agree on as it may be simply due to a reason of sorts that they do not desire to pay the high fees associated with ewallet transactions on larger amounts. Maybe the EH Rep can come in here and clarify.

There are literally innumerable incredibly valid reasons (that players shouldn't be asked to justify, explain in detail or list sequentially) that limits them to their depositing method as their only withdrawing method.

I actually have no problem at all with $500/w caps on expensive deposit methods (I don't believe MB is expensive at all though - relatively speaking) and things like that - but only if those caps are relative to players' deposit limits, table limits, etc. And if you're running tournaments with $50,000 1st place, and a customer who's only option is Moneybookers (for reasons he or she shouldn't have to justify), then paying out that prizemoney over 2 years.....that's not appropriate imo.

So two questions for you please Rob:

1. If the reason was cost of fees for these processors (reason for the tiny $500 cap on weekly w/d), do you think that amount is then justified for withdrawals whilst deposits are uncapped and potential to wager is as high as $20,000 a minute or w/e?

2. Can you explain to me how my statement $500/w cap is somehow seemingly untruthful or misleading to you when all over this forum, people talk about terms that don't apply to high rollers or VIPs etc? Do you see what I mean? Just because *some* people aren't limited to that cap, doesn't mean the cap isn't a real cap. My statement about the cap being there is 100% valid and truthful. I shouldn't have to qualify it with every caveat and exception and clause that apply to others. For some people, it's their cap! For you (and for me, fwiw), our cap is $5000/w. But what good does that do to someone for whom it's $500/w? They sit warm in the knowledge that JHV and Robwin aren't capped at those low levels? I don't think they'll find that comforting when facing a two-year payout for winning a monthly tourney.

[RobWin]

Originally Posted by JHV

There are literally innumerable incredibly valid reasons (that players shouldn't be asked to justify, explain in detail or list sequentially) that limits them to their depositing method as their only withdrawing method.

I actually have no problem at all with $500/w caps on expensive deposit methods (I don't believe MB is expensive at all though - relatively speaking) and things like that - but only if those caps are relative to players' deposit limits, table limits, etc. And if you're running tournaments with $50,000 1st place, and a customer who's only option is Moneybookers (for reasons he or she shouldn't have to justify), then paying out that prizemoney over 2 years.....that's not appropriate imo.

I agree!

So two questions for you please Rob:

1. If the reason was cost of fees for these processors (reason for the tiny $500 cap on weekly w/d), do you think that amount is then justified for withdrawals whilst deposits are uncapped and potential to wager is as high as $20,000 a minute or w/e?

Absolutely not. You see, I agree with you again..

2. Can you explain to me how my statement $500/w cap is somehow seemingly untruthful or misleading to you

We have already been over this one Ad nauseam here as you well know. Just read my post above a few more times and you will hopefully see.. http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...tml#post328547

Just because *some* people aren't limited to that cap, doesn't mean the cap isn't a real cap.

It's absolutely a real cap but on ewallets not on the "Accredited Casino" as a whole as you originally stated in your first post.

My statement about the cap being there is 100% valid and truthful.

As far as those ewallets go you are correct and I never disputed that or even disagreed with you on that fact...hell, I even stated it several times myself.

I shouldn't have to qualify it with every caveat and exception and clause that apply to others.

Yes you do, when you are making broad statements such as the one you originally made which is in fact still not true. Why do you think Bryan even questioned you on that one?

For some people, it's their cap! For you (and for me, fwiw), our cap is $5000/w.

Lets be absolutely clear here...everyone's cap is $5,000 if they choose to use the withdrawal method that the casino allows for the $5,000 and also that the player agreed to when they signed up there.
____
____

[Jasminebed]

Casinos reserve the right to pay a player by whatever means they like.

The japanese yen example is extreme...I think most terms and conditions say a player will be paid in the currency they play in.

The best casinos do their utmost to accommodate a player's preferred method of payment, or they return payments via the methods used for deposits. But we often see complaints regarding such issues, and while perhaps not ideal outcomes, it is not rogue IMO if the player is paid by a method other than their first choice.

My prepaid Mastercard cannot be paid back to. If you limit my ability to withdraw to Moneybookers to $500, you can still send it by wire to me, or by cheque. I would expect a casino to work with me to find a way to pay me their weekly cap as advertised.

I might not be thrilled with having to wait for a foreign cheque to clear, or going to a Western Union office to collect my winnings. But it would be my choice, or accept $500/week.

I think that when you discuss a casino's payment caps, that must be taken into account.

If JHV has an experience of English Harbour not honouring their $5,000 weekly payments by a METHOD OF THEIR CHOOSING, then that is a matter of a casino breaking their terms, not of having terms of only $500/week.

Please don't respond with your specifics JHV, I would hate to see your opportunity to PAB restricted by continued participating in airing dirty laundry in public.