Villa Fortuna - MAFIA TERMS

[RobWin]

This is evil. Basically, you need to lose 80 credits a month on average in order to receive you own money. This is the sort of thing you expect from dodgy casinos based in Costa Rica, but Villa Fortuna is approved by ecogra and by the Maltese LGA. Perhaps someone could ask ecogra to comment on this (I would do it, but ecogra consider me the leader of the anti-ecogra forces in the world and won't talk to me.)

Yes, I was thinking the same thing. I would love to hear eCogra's response to this one!

Maybe Jet will volunteer to ask them how they feel about this term.

[Simmo!]

This is evil. Basically, you need to lose 80 credits a month on average in order to receive you own money. This is the sort of thing you expect from dodgy casinos based in Costa Rica, but Villa Fortuna is approved by ecogra and by the Maltese LGA. Perhaps someone could ask ecogra to comment on this (I would do it, but ecogra consider me the leader of the anti-ecogra forces in the world and won't talk to me.)

I mentioned it in passing to eCOGRA at ICE but nothing formal - just dropped it into a conversation and they were suitably unimpressed. Wouldn't do any harm to follow that one up.

[Simmo!]

Update: Andrew @ eCOGRA contacted me this morning to say they will have a look into it.

[thelawnet]

This is evil. Basically, you need to lose 80 credits a month on average in order to receive you own money. This is the sort of thing you expect from dodgy casinos based in Costa Rica, but Villa Fortuna is approved by ecogra and by the Maltese LGA. Perhaps someone could ask ecogra to comment on this (I would do it, but ecogra consider me the leader of the anti-ecogra forces in the world and won't talk to me.)

I'm not sure that you're right. I believe the intention is they will pay you your $10k and the rest of the money stays in the account. The $80 is just a sideshow, it seems they want you to lose all the rest as well. The $1600 WR is big enough that the kind of gambler who has >$10k may do something stupid is likely to lose a lot of money, certainly far more than $80, and hopefully for the casino the entire balance

This is a 'rip-off the whale' clause.

The big joke is that these crooks are registered in Malta, which is considered legitimate by Britain and 'safe' for British players to play and to be advertised.

So much for 'responsible gambling'.

[winbig]

What gets me is the fact that eCOGRA doesn't care if affiliates of a certified casino get the shaft, but if a certified casino has rogue T&C for the player, they immediately say they'll look into it? Before players get screwed?

[jetset]

I would have thought that a preparedness to investigate before a player was screwed was a good thing?

[RobWin]

What gets me is the fact that eCOGRA doesn't care if affiliates of a certified casino get the shaft, but if a certified casino has rogue T&C for the player, they immediately say they'll look into it? Before players get screwed?

I too think that eCOGRA should also do the same for the affiliates since most affiliates are also players too, at least the knowledgeable affiliates are or were.

[winbig]

I would have thought that a preparedness to investigate before a player was screwed was a good thing?

Sure it is; but the point I was trying to convey is that eCOGRA could care less about affiliates getting the shaft. Even when they had "signed" contracts with the casinos. Which is this case in this situation when they threw these contracts the window without warning nor reason, other than to stiff them on future payments. They breached these contracts and should be held accountable.

[GrandMaster]

I'm not sure that you're right. I believe the intention is they will pay you your $10k and the rest of the money stays in the account. The $80 is just a sideshow, it seems they want you to lose all the rest as well. The $1600 WR is big enough that the kind of gambler who has >$10k may do something stupid is likely to lose a lot of money, certainly far more than $80, and hopefully for the casino the entire balance

This is a 'rip-off the whale' clause.

The big joke is that these crooks are registered in Malta, which is considered legitimate by Britain and 'safe' for British players to play and to be advertised.

So much for 'responsible gambling'.

I am sure the casino wants to lose the player even more, but even the most responsible and disciplined player is forced to lose (on average).

What gets me is the fact that eCOGRA doesn't care if affiliates of a certified casino get the shaft, but if a certified casino has rogue T&C for the player, they immediately say they'll look into it? Before players get screwed?

I am not even terribly impressed by Andrew Beveridge promising to look into it. Things with ecogra are never immediate. What I would like to see is him getting on the phone to the casino manager and telling him that "Hey buddy, either you pull these terms, or I'l pull your ecogra certification". Or even better, ecogra actively monitoring their casinos' T&C. Maybe they should have fewer casinos and keep them under better control.

[winbig]

Maybe they should have fewer casinos and keep them under better control.

Well, I'm sure it doesn't help that they're over-extending themselves even more, with the branching out to certify bingo rooms, sportsbetting, and live gambling: http://www.recentpoker.com/news/ecogra-1834.html


Can we say "Too big for their britches?"

...or maybe they're turning into another CAP? You know, "certifying" anyone that wants to pay them?