More eCOGRA Seals Awarded

[jetset]

PRESS RELEASE

For immediate release 22 April 2004


MORE SEALS FROM eCOGRA

Player safety initiative gathers momentum

Following the announcement of the first 23 ultra-safe eCOGRA seal casinos only weeks ago, the player protection organisation has published a list of a further 16 successful candidates.

The board of directors of eCommerce and Online Gaming Regulation and Assurance (eCOGRA) approved the new seal-holders after extensive independent testing and inspections by professional teams from international audit group PricewaterhouseCoopers to ensure that they met the stringent requirements of the organisation regarding operational efficiency, fair gaming and player protection.

The latest casinos awarded the seal are:

Arthurian Casino
CasinoUS
Cinema Casino
Crazy Vegas Casino
777 Dragon Casino
Sun Vegas Casino
Ruby Fortune Casino
Spin Palace Casino
Roxy Palace Casino
Jackpots in a Flash
Mummy's Gold Casino
Piggs Peak Casino
Desert Dollar Casino
Diamond Casino
Havana Club Casino
Platinum Play Casino

"The current batch of seal-holders is a mix of successful first time candidates and operations which did not initially meet our eGAP requirements and have had to reorganise their systems in order to fully comply", eCOGRA CEO Andrew Beveridge reports. "We are now satisfied that all operational and business aspects are in line with our eGAP principles"

Beveridge said that a further batch of casinos was currently under examination, and that the eCOGRA initiative to present the online gambling community with a wide range of safe, honest and efficient online casino venues was steadily gathering momentum.

"The latest seal awards bring to 39 the top class casinos who have voluntarily submitted to our genuine self-imposed regulation", he said. "More casinos are currently being inspected, and interest in the eCOGRA standards and implementation is growing in the industry from players, casinos and software providers alike".

Meanwhile, business conditions at the first batch of seal casinos are looking promising. Scott Gaines, spokesman for the Trident Entertainment group which owns King Neptune's, Trident Lounge and VegasUSA casinos reports, "The Seal provides a comfort level to existing and potential players. We are seeing some improvements in visits and activity"

eCOGRA requires that approved casinos are financially stable and have adequate reserves to cover wagers. The probity of casino management is scrutinised, together with player protection measures, payout times and financial facilities, games fairness, responsive Support and general operational efficiency. Policies have to be in place for communicating with clients and dealing with player complaints, and satisfactory technical capabilities and anti money-laundering systems are critical.

The new list of seals was augmented for the first time by additional awards to Jackpot City Casino, Havana Club Casino and King Neptunes Casino, which successfully presented their foreign language sites for inspection, too.

To guarantee eCOGRA's autonomy from software providers and operators, the seals compliance committee is comprised of three independent directors who are not representative of the member software providers or casino operators. These directors are Michael Hirst OBE, former Chairman and CEO of Hilton International; Bill Galston OBE, former Chief Inspector of the Gaming Board for Great Britain; and Frank Catania, a former Assistant Attorney General in the State of New Jersey and former Director of the New Jersey Division of Gaming.


Issued by: Andrew Beveridge, CEO
Date: 22 April 2004
Telephone: +44 20 7887 1480

[dominique]

I am pleased to see this, and I do have faith in eCOGRA, but they really need to work on getting some non-microgaming casinos to pass.

[jetset]

I re-checked with eCOGRA and there are non-MGS casinos currently undergoing the rigorous inspection process, so we should see something emerging from that in the not too distant future.

They are also in discussions with several other software providers interested in getting their licensees certified and monitored, so it's early days yet.

There are one or two posters, especially on WOL who have made it their business to slam this initiative every time the name comes up. They presumably have their reasons for doing this, but it is imo a pity that they are so intent on taking a negative view that they are condemning the organisation before it has had a chance to show what it can do for the player and for the industry.

I believe most gamblers are reasonable people who will give it that opportunity.

[caruso]

I had no intention of commenting here since I've done that at WOL, but you just had to take a pot-shot, didn't you?

My only comment is to summarize my WOL comments: the organization is currently funded by the software providers it "regulates"; additionally, the software verification process is ENTIRELY uncorroborated and unverified. In this current state, it is invalid. If any of the above subsequently changes my opinion will change (and it is MY opinion; few others have been expressed). As it stands now, all good intentions notwithstanding, the exercise is invalidated by these two facts.

[dominique]

Caruso, you are a very intelligent person.

How come I don't see anything constructive here?

You spend a ton of time attacking things, but I do not see you offering any useable alternatives.

As I said elsewhere, regulation is the only way we are going to see more honest casinos. Since government regulation is still in the far future, the industry needs to selfregulate.

Shooting down every effort at doing so is shooting yourself in the foot.

Shooting these efforts down without offering a viable alternative is even worse.

The path you are heading down will lead to more crooked casinos and mediators who charge you a cut of the winnings that should be yours in the first place.

Is that what you really want?

[drkasper]

I don't claim to know too much about eCogra and I haven't seen any discussions on WOL about this. But I have a question - testing is not a new thing for casinos - both land-based and online. Alderney, Isle of Mann etc put it in their license that casino software needs to be tested and verified by independent testing companies before a license is granted and as such there are a number of online casinos that have been tested. Why is it therefore that there seems to be a 'need' for an organisation such as eCogra to exist? It is noticeable that eCogra doesn't seem to be 'independent' since its apparantly funded by the software operators themselves (I'm assuming it is funded by the software guys - I don't know). Yet I'm sure these software companies know full well independent testing companies are available.

I'm all for regulatation and 'honest' casinos. But the mechanics for this are already established with independent verification companies - I won't name them here (unless you want me too!), but if you look at any casinos licensed in Alderney, you'll find the testing company on the website.

In other words - viable alternatives already exist. They do not want a share of revenue - they simply test the software on a number of levels before a license is granted. Surely this is the direction the online gaming world should be moving in?

Unless I'm getting it all wrong! (which isn't rare!)

[dominique]

It is my understanding that eCOGRA pays these independent testing companies to conduct tests.

They approve casinos and then also provide a negotiator to players who may have issues with the approved casinos.

So far no issues - so no testing of this feature.

Someone needs to fund these tests and other activities. They are not free.

[drkasper]

Thanks for that - I just re-read the press release and they mention PWC do the testing. I understand that for a payout audit - but not necessarily for a software audit - but perhaps PWC offer this now also. I don't know.

As for someone needing to pay. Absolutely. In my opinion, since its the casino operator that applies for a license; its the casino operator that provides the service to the player; and therefore its the casino operator that should pay for the independent auditing. It shouldn't be left to the hands of the sotware provider. In an ideal world, I think the software provider should be providing their own independent audit of their software, in addition to the one the casino operator itself should have of its operations. But i guess one step at a time...

[jetset]

"There are one or two posters, especially on WOL who have made it their business to slam this initiative every time the name comes up. They presumably have their reasons for doing this, but it is imo a pity that they are so intent on taking a negative view that they are condemning the organisation before it has had a chance to show what it can do for the player and for the industry.

"I believe most gamblers are reasonable people who will give it that opportunity."
__________________
I'm repeating myself more specifically here - Caruso is one of those to whom I refer. He has started a vendetta against eCOGRA using the spoiling tactic of negative and inaccurate posts about the organisation every time the name of this genuine initiative comes up.

Government regulation and funding (through taxation) for an infrastructure that can support it internationally would be a wonderful thing, but in practical terms this is not even on the horizon.

So the player community is left with largely ineffectual, isolated licensing jurisdictions and the promise of a really good set-up in the UK (which will probably exclude US gamblers out of respect for contrary US views on whether it is better to ban or regulate)

Not a lot of protection. Of course, we have the efforts of the better portals that identify and pillory bad operations, but that is at best an informal solution complementary to a formal, organised structure of inspection and monitoring.

Enter eCOGRA into a market cynical from the adverse failure of several inferior predecessors. It's a daunting prospect.

If a player protection organisation is to do its job it needs an infrastructure and the wherewithal to pay independent third party inspectors and monitors. Where is this money going to come from, the players? Hardly likely.

Some of the more responsible software providers and casino operators, recognising that the present uncontrolled nature of the industry is unfair to players, ultimately not good for business and probably plays into anti-online gaming legislator hands decide to put their money where their mouths are and provide the funding.

Probably recognising that the likes of Caruso would be screaming "Claptrap" negativity, they insist that the organisation is set up in such a way that independent, experienced and respected executives from the land industry have control of the inspection and enforcement process and Seal awards.

"To guarantee eCOGRA's autonomy from software providers and operators, the seals compliance committee is comprised of three independent directors who are not representative of the member software providers or casino operators. These directors are Michael Hirst OBE, former Chairman and CEO of Hilton International; Bill Galston OBE, former Chief Inspector of the Gaming Board for Great Britain; and Frank Catania, a former Assistant Attorney General in the State of New Jersey and former Director of the New Jersey Division of Gaming."

The CEO is directed to report to these independent executives, and considerable money, international expertise and time is spent evolving a set of regulations to control online casinos for the benefit of the player and ultimately their own survival.

This has not cost the playing community a cent, and the system is designed to transcend international boundaries by controlling the casinos themselves so that players everywhere are covered. And that they have a direct line of complaint to eCOGRA if they need it.

Having set up these detailed regulations, eCOGRA is now faced with the problem of credibly implementing them in the many quality casinos that have already seen the value and are keen to submit themselves for inspections.

One of the most experienced international professional business services groups, Pricewaterhouse Coopers, is already widely experienced in the online gambling industry, is an independent third party and is therefore a logical choice to carry out financial probity evaluations, inspect casinos for compliance with the regulations and then monitor their operations. This costs money but eCOGRA is willing to pay to ensure that the system is independently applied.

The first casinos to apply pass the rigorous and genuine inspections and are announced.

The commitment of all these people and the significant sums of money spent are then rudely dismissed by Caruso as "Claptrap" when there is no comparable system available. And to support his argument he claims that the widely respected eCOGRA directors and PwC are not independent.

Already we are seeing top casino groups with good reputations committing to this initiative. Groups that are rarely the subject of complaint and a provider that stands behind their players if casinos fail. More casinos than Alderney or the IOM for example have thus far mustered...and I am confident that more will be coming and from different providers . Some are in inspection right now.

Caruso's dismissive and spoiling tactics of suggesting a presently unattainable regulation by government alternative every time the eCOGRA name comes up is not carrying the issue forward constructively in any way, and I do not have the time to waste on trying to convince such a closed and negative mind otherwise.

The majority of gamblers will sensibly make their own judgements based on what has been presented to them on the message boards, media and at the eCOGRA site, and how eCOGRA performs to their advantage in the years ahead.

Because regardless of the continued attempts to undermine it by Caruso and those who persist in regarding it as just another baseless "marketing" subterfuge, eCOGRA will continue to apply its practical requirements to quality casinos that want to do better business by providing superior service to the players.

[rowmare]

Of course Ecogra funded by the casinos it's testing.

You have to pay to get a driver license - to the same people who determine whether or not you deserve one. (second thought - the way some people drive you really gotta wonder........ )

The same principle applies here - who better to pay the expense that those who want the endorsement? Makes sense to me.

Well, that's my 2c worth.