Corrupt Casino Watchdog Discussion

**amandajm** · 13th February 2006, 06:15 PM

I know Ladbrokes from the street for 15 years. Top operation. Ibas sealed.

Theoretical scenario >> I have no money. Just about to sign a 250k advert deal. Ladbrokes decide to take a stand on apparent bonus abuse over �20 on 1 random player out of 1000 and pay the rest, then move them on, to make a point.

CPA showed me the way. I listen when taught. Because I would sign the 250k deal.

Corrupted? Is Caruso right? (see below)

Question - Can a portal take advertising money and take a stand on principle for the player in EVERY situation that arises?

Originally Posted by jetset

To Caruso - I am curious about one thing. Given your previous positions on webmasters and affiliates having conflicts of interest in player disputes, have you now come to accept that it is possible for industry people to handle player issues without bias or favour even if advertising for online casinos?

Originally Posted by caruso

To Jetset - Conflict of interest is an insurmountable problem: in order to have influence you must have interests, because without the interests you will have no power - unless you are a powerful entity unto your self, as Casinomeister is after seven years in the job. The power is in those affy banners you can use to exert influence; without those, you have no power; with those, you have conflict of interest.

Question: you have a 50K media buy up: the casino steals a player's $50 bonus and $100 winnings and refunds his deposit; what do you do? If the casino just THREATENS to, then pays up, what do you do?

If you even have to CONTEMPLATE the answer, you are corrupt.

**scrollock** · 13th February 2006, 06:41 PM

the problem with affiliate banners, is that if a decision needs to be made regarding keeping a certain casinos banners, is that it requires a subjective decision, however as money is involved, then the chances of this decision being made impartially is very much reduced and much more likely to side with a persons own greed (no matter how much they deny it)

this is akin to a casino which rules on it own disputes without an outside body (such as playtech at the moment), the chances of having a fair and impartial decision is very much reduced as the companies balance sheet will decide the result and not what it is fair.

when it comes to affiliates taking down banners on the point of principle that they would rather forgo an affiliate payment than have a player ripped off, well i just simply dont buy it.

affiliates will take down the banners of rogue casinos because they dont want their site tarnished and their integrity questioned, as they know if they have a rogue casino on their site they know the informed player will simply not return to the site, thus the affiliate is thinking with his pocket

another thing is, if a casino is rogue and doesnt honour paying out winning customers, then the chances of them being honourable with their affiate deals is much reduced, so any sensible webmaster would keep away from them, again the webmaster is thinking with his own pocket.

going back to the hypothetical scenario, i dont think there is any webmaster in this virtual world who would take a stand on matter of principle over one customer and one small payment.

the only time a webmaster takes action is when his own income threatened either by a casino being so rogue it wont pay up, or a casinos reputation has become so bad that it threatens the traffic to the site.

**Casinomeister** · 13th February 2006, 07:58 PM

Speaking from experience, if there is a 250k deal or even a 50k deal going on, then it's definitely not a watchdog site.

I would suppose that webmaster - starring hard at the 250k, and on the other hand at some obnoxious bonus whore - that webmaster would probably chose the money.

If we're going to make a debate about this cash vs integrity thing, how about making the scenario a bit more realistic

**Pinababy69** · 13th February 2006, 08:06 PM

This should be interesting. And I am gonna bite my tongue as hard as I can, lol.

**Casinomeister** · 13th February 2006, 08:06 PM

How about this - you're just getting ready to accept a 2k media buy from xyz casino, and the day before the campaign is being launched, someone complains on some other portal's message board that his winnings have been confiscated. That's all the details you have. What do you do?

**Casinomeister** · 13th February 2006, 08:08 PM

Oh, and the xyzcasino is licensed in Malta, and has been in business for six months. It doesn't take US players.

**Simmo!** · 13th February 2006, 08:13 PM

I do believe some webmasters can be objective if that's your question. I believe there are some good people in the world where not everything centres around money. Probably a minority though more's the pity.

**swampwitch** · 13th February 2006, 08:51 PM

How about this - you're just getting ready to accept a 2k media buy from xyz casino, and the day before the campaign is being launched, someone complains on some other portal's message board that his winnings have been confiscated. That's all the details you have. What do you do?

PM the player in question and ask permission to look into the problem for him. Weigh both sides. If the casino is clearly at fault, or won't answer questions satisfactorily, do not accept their business and/or drop them from your site. If the player is clearly at fault, let him know that you can't go to bat for them because of this. If the dispute turns out to be a 50/50 at fault ambiguous mess, try to mediate a comfortable solution for both parties.

Now, where did I put those rose colored glasses.....

**Casinomeister** · 13th February 2006, 08:59 PM

Originally Posted by swampwitch

PM the player in question and ask permission to look into the problem for him. Weigh both sides. If the casino is clearly at fault, or won't answer questions satisfactorily, do not accept their business and/or drop them from your site. If the player is clearly at fault, let him know that you can't go to bat for them because of this. If the dispute turns out to be a 50/50 at fault ambiguous mess, try to mediate a comfortable solution for both parties.

Now, where did I put those rose colored glasses.....

But let's say you have no way to get in touch with the player. You're not a member of the other portal's message board - and you have no way to test the validity of the player's complaint.

**scrollock** · 13th February 2006, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by swampwitch

PM the player in question and ask permission to look into the problem for him. Weigh both sides. If the casino is clearly at fault, or won't answer questions satisfactorily, do not accept their business and/or drop them from your site. If the player is clearly at fault, let him know that you can't go to bat for them because of this. If the dispute turns out to be a 50/50 at fault ambiguous mess, try to mediate a comfortable solution for both parties.

Now, where did I put those rose colored glasses.....

ideal solution and an ideal world, unfortunatly both dont exist.

for the simple fact is, when faced with only one dispute the webmaster will vote with his pocket and sweep the matter under the carpet,he will only take action when there are so many compliants that he is unable to sweep them away and will only then do it then because it will affect his other income.