KING NEPTUNES Is Withholding My Winnings!

[Slotster!]

In my opinion, these casinos seem to be swatting at the advantage players, but are missing and hitting their potentially most profitable recreational players right in the head.

Spot on Give the man a mars bar. (King size).

Non bonus hunter here, spend a load online (probably more than I should - I was a certain casino's "25th highest roller" one month last year) - and smashed WR's or busted out every time... I'm striking off 'places to play at' more and more every single day that passes!!!!

I'm your classic 'recreational' player that you describe, and wouldn't play at King Neptunes in a million years after this.

Were I a 'bonus hunter' I'd do exactly as you describe, following the T&C's to the letter of the law...

[lydia]

But here's the irony. Recreational players, who likely are going to be solid long term losers even with bonus claims, are the ones who get tripped up by the fine points of (or changes to) a casinos T&C.

I am a perfect example of such player - I hate to read boring T/C so much that I play without bonus oft to my disadvantage. I have such a horror and paranoia about bonuses (reading all the time disputes about bonuses and payouts) that I am even suspicious if sometimes some casinos give me an innocent 'manager bonus' or whatever it's called. But I surely could use some good bonuses! (being a low-roller).
And I would never dream to read T/C second time(on next day) after I managed to do it after all.

[Casinomeister]

Kreome's post above is dead on

I beg to differ. I'm surprised that many of you can't get beyond the bonus hunter theme. I don't believe this situation has anything to do with bonus hunting. This has everything to do with abiding by the posted terms and conditions.

Let's say KN said, "Oh, don't worry about playing on the prohibited games. You signed up the day after the terms had changed, but since you won a lot of money, and this means a lot to you, congrats - we'll honor your winnings!"

Put yourselves in the operators shoes. When would this stop? When would you say - okay we'll let this player slide, but these others not. What would the criteria be? "Okay send in a picture, if you're hot - we'll let you cash out." "Oh, you're going to donate it to charity? okay, we'll let you slide." When do you say no - sorry, you generated your winnings on the wrong game(s). Without rules, you'll have chaos. This is the issue, not bonus hunting. Lest we forget the player still has her deposit and bonus funds.

Like most well run casinos, KN has made exceptions to their policies for their regular players. Maybe some of you should enlighten me on why this player should have been treated differently. Why should they have made an exception? That's all I want to know.

[bpb]

Let's say the casino has a rule that players named Frank can't play on Wednesday between 7 and 9 PM. Frank Dingdong plays at 8:24 PM on Wednesday and wins $800. Casino says "Sorry Frank. You broke our rules. No winnings for you." The casino is perfectly within their right to do this. That doesn't make the rule intelligent, and it doesn't make the casino operators "good people". I seriously doubt CM, that you would put any casino on your accredited list if it had such an obscure and ridiculous rule.


King Neptune's exclusion of video poker from their signup is on par with the "No Franks between 7-9". It doesn't prevent advantage play ... an advantage player can use the non-restricted games of Pai Gow, 3-card, etc. The rule's effect is to trip up recreational players and get their winnings seized. I recognize that this is probably not King Neptune's intention for having and applying this rule. They probably think they are protecting themselves from advantage players ... but they aren't. You protect yourself from advantage players by restricting play to games with high house advantage and restricting maximum bet sizes. The effect of this rule, even if unintended, is screwing over recreational players. This isn't a good thing for the casino, or the industry as a whole.


I certainly recognize that King Neptune's has made a very good faith effort to keep it's new players apprised of their T&C, especially by including dates which the T&C are effective. But I think they need to think about why they have rules restricting certain games, and why they have a rule that they will revoke winnings if those restricted games are played ... when a majority of the casinos out there don't seize funds when you play on restricted games ... they just make you complete the WR on allowed games before cashing out.

[spearmaster]

Taking a break from the other thread... LOL...

I cannot believe what I am seeing here.

* Player did not read latest terms and conditions before opening account.
* Player wins on excluded game as stated in T&C.
* Casino rejects payout, restores account to deposit AND bonus.

WTF is the problem here?

* Players complain that there should be "grace period"
* Players complain that there should be "discretion"
* Players complain that the rule SCREWS players
* Players complain that the casino is screwing recreational players
* yada, yada, yada
* blah, blah, blah

What this amounts to, combined with the other thread, is this:

* Players think they are always right
* Players always think they are being screwed
* Players are too lazy to protect themselves
* Players want flexibility while demanding strict compliance from casino
* Players think that bonuses MUST be offered by the casino on THEIR terms

You know what I think about this. I won't even spell it out for you but you can smell it all over the place.

What I think casinos ought to do is KILL BONUSES FOREVER.

[Simmo!]

What I think casinos ought to do is KILL BONUSES FOREVER.

Assuming you mean "signup" bonuses, Way more trouble than they are worth IMO.

[Casinomeister]

Let's say the casino has a rule that players named Frank can't play on Wednesday between 7 and 9 PM. Frank Dingdong plays at 8:24 PM on Wednesday and wins $800. Casino says "Sorry Frank. You broke our rules. No winnings for you." The casino is perfectly within their right to do this. That doesn't make the rule intelligent, and it doesn't make the casino operators "good people". I seriously doubt CM, that you would put any casino on your accredited list if it had such an obscure and ridiculous rule..

But no one has this ridiculous rule, and this doesn't apply in this case. If this player signed up maybe a couple of hours after the rule change, I honestly don't think she would have had a problem. But she signed up a full day afterward.

And I don't see how anyone can claim that the bonus terms were unclear. They even state when they are applicable, and I'm pretty sure Trident Lounge changes them only on the 1st of the month - not in the middle. And any T&C changes are emailed to their player database. What more do you want? If you can think of anything else, please PM Micki, I'm sure she would be open to any suggestion to improve the way the terms are conveyed.

As for criticisms on the game choice, I think the operators know which games are being hammered and which aren't. These people (like Micki) have been successfully operating casinos for years, and they know the patterns of bonus play better than any sharp player. But I'm sure if you have some great advice, I'm sure they are all ears.

[Casinomeister]

* Players are too lazy to protect themselves.

And when you eff up, c'mon down to Casinomeister or WOL and slam the casino. Hey, maybe you'll get paid.

I'd like a reason why not to toss this newbie for attempted extortion.

[spearmaster]

Assuming you mean "signup" bonuses, Way more trouble than they are worth IMO.

I thought about that. But problems occur with ALL bonuses.

What they should do instead is increase loyalty or cashback payouts without wagering requirements exceeding 1x. And no restricted games, since EVERY game has a house edge.

[spearmaster]

And when you eff up, c'mon down to Casinomeister or WOL and slam the casino. Hey, maybe you'll get paid.

I'd like a reason why not to toss this newbie for attempted extortion.

I wouldn't call it extortion. Definitely a whine, and definitely I understand where the player is coming from - but rules are rules.