Joyland Casino: Problem withdrawal request

[The Gunslinger]

Originally Posted by scrollock

on reflection the generousity of their mistake is not that great either, as i gather that the points mistake gave the shrewd player a H.A. in his favour of appox 4%, well i can go and sign upto at plenty of casinos that when the bonus is taken into account i will have a H.A. in my favour in excess of this. its hardly a cash machine spitting out money type of mistake.

the advatage for the player was 4%, this is similar to the % for some of the games, especially slots, so although some are arguing that the casino was giving money away, the fact is that if you apply the same logic to the player then he should be able to void all of his play every time he plays at a casino. the casino does not have a divine right to have the house advantage on their side. the only reason why they do have the house advantage on their side is because they provide the games, so when their games and software give a advantage to the player they should swallow it.

This is what I've been saying since the beginning of this thread.

I'll eat the house edge in Vegas with a smile on my face, because in Vegas what casinos are getting off of me on the house edge is paying for my drinks, hotel room, and laser tag in Circus Circus ( Like you've never played laser tag.) This is in Vegas.

In the online gaming world the player edge that is present in promotional situations (see 888.com's deals, 195% player edge, everyone got paid ... etc) pays for player loyality. This is not a new concept in the online gaming world. For so long as promotions have been around no one is nieve enough to think that casinos "Are just giving the player more money to gamble with." Bottom line, promotions are in place to give the player more money to win with. If I wanted to have more money to gamble with, I'd play free money all day long. Promotions represent a situation where the player has a chance to making money better than 50%, which is usually the opposite, when they'd have a chance of making money less than 50%. Why does this casino automatically use the fact that the player had an advantage as an excuse not to pay?

I don't know if this casino screwed up, or it was intentional, and I can sympathize with them not wanting to pay players on account of what could have been someone's mistake, or someone's lack of competance, but I certainly don't agree with it.

Joyland's fraudulent behavior has been well documented in this thread, and they will no doubt end up burried because of it, but I wanted to point out the precedent they are trying to set.

If a casino can retroactivly void winnings, promotional offerings (comp points,) AND essentially void play because of their error in judgement/competance/etc due to the eventual result of player success and get away with paying anything less then every cent the players deserve, it's going to set a dangerous precident.

The Gunslinger

[nublet]

I have been keeping an eye on this thread as I am also a Joyland account holder who has come out on the short end of the stick in this situation. I have recieved my deposits back, but still out $5500. This is the first time I've ever had to go through a hassle to get money out of an online casino, and i'm glad to see that i'm not alone in going up against this casino. My post has come after reading Joylands representatives post which has cleared up absolutely nothing for me and i'm sure the rest of you. This comp point scandal is the last thing I thought I'd ever have to worry about when I started playing online casinos. This is definately not a "bug in system" as I was still playing when they had changed to conversion rate to 150pts. = $1. This alone shows me that they were aware of their offering and corrected it to their liking. Not only are these casinos able to deem individual players bonus abusers, but we now must hope that we don't get emailed claiming we are comp point abusers?!? I await Joylands next explanation to this matter, I would like to see them explain what they deem as a low risk wager, explain the reasoning for altering transaction histories, and please explain why you would rather have this thread come above your own advertising within search engines rather then pay the players that put their trust into Joyland Casino and its affiliates.

[jetset]

This obervation by scrollock in what is in my opinion a thoughtful and reasonable post is worth reading again by everyone here, because it illustrates that "palpable error" was not a legitimate factor here (and in fact the casino has not used this in their explanation anyway - they probably know less about it than the players!)

QUOTE: however as the facts have begun to emerge in the thread it appears that this is definitly not the case. for example when it was realised that there was a problem with the comp points they were changed from a 100 to a $1 to 150 to a $1. if it had been a typo then surely it would have been changed to a 1000 a $.

the fact that it was changed to 150 shows not only was it not a typo, but also that the management had called the situation wrong because they had made the same mistake TWICE as the comp system still made some of the games advantageous to a shrewd player.

the fact they changed it to 150, shows that they realised they had made a mistake with the comp points, however it does indicate that the INTENTION was for them to be a 100 to the $ because the difference between 100 & 150 is not that much, its not as if we are talking factors of 10 or greater.

so its quite clear that this is no typo and that the promo manager made a bad call just like an odds compilers sometimes do.

on reflection the generousity of their mistake is not that great either, as i gather that the points mistake gave the shrewd player a H.A. in his favour of appox 4%, well i can go and sign upto at plenty of casinos that when the bonus is taken into account i will have a H.A. in my favour in excess of this. its hardly a cash machine spitting out money type of mistake. UNQUOTE

Then TeddyFSB makes the following additionally relevant post which goes to showing the bad motive of the casino here:

QUOTE: No you didn't (review the cases of all the players prejudiced in this affair). You haven't given any evidence that you reviewed any of the players. You simply took the people who won and cut their winnings. That's not called reviewing players. There are now 15 or 20 players in this thread none of whom played non-risky games. All of this is verifiable by checking playing records, which you are now erasing? UNQUOTE

Players here and elsewhere represent probably a small proportion of those affected by this winnings disqualification and transaction tampering - there are probably many more out there, making this behaviour even more disgraceful.

Another good point, made by Gunslinger:

QUOTE: If a casino can retroactivly void winnings, promotional offerings (comp points,) AND essentially void play because of their error in judgement/competance/etc due to the eventual result of player success and get away with paying anything less then every cent the players deserve, it's going to set a dangerous precident.UNQUOTE

And this one from Nublet (and btw this *mistake* went uncorrected for some time)

QUOTE:This is definately not a "bug in system" as I was still playing when they had changed to conversion rate to 150pts. = $1. This alone shows me that they were aware of their offering and corrected it to their liking. Not only are these casinos able to deem individual players bonus abusers, but we now must hope that we don't get emailed claiming we are comp point abusers?!? I would like to see them explain what they deem as a low risk wager, explain the reasoning for altering transaction histories, and please explain why you would rather have this thread come above your own advertising within search engines rather then pay the players that put their trust into Joyland Casino and its affiliates. UNQUOTE


BTW, there has been talk here of boycotting Playtech, and I should therefore exercise my right to express an opinion on this in a general sense no matter how unpopular it might be at this time and place.

I don't personally like boycotts, because they have a tendency to hurt both crooks and ordinary people alike - sort of *collateral damage* - and to me that is wrong. Playtech has decent licensees as well as arm-chancers like Joyland, and they don't deserve to be punished along with the unprofessional.

So, by all means exercise your personal right to choose where you play, but focus on those operations who have understandably angered and displeased you would be my (personal) recommendation.

[TrixSlice]

Jetset's last post is a wonderful summary of what's going on.

I too believe it's unfair to PlayTech and it's honest casino's to boycott them all. However I think boycotting any casino that's in relation to Joyland should be noted. Can anyone provide an easy list? Isn't Joyland part of Crown? Which was recenetly bought by a Poker site? Arn't a good handful of PlayTech casinos operated in the same building in Antigua (where Joyland is located)? If someone can compile a simple list of casinos that have a relationship with Joyland, we can spread that list so gambler's can have a more informed opinion of who to boycott.

[BJesus]

Prestige is linked to them Joyland gave me their phone number by mistake.

As for the boycott of Playtech I was thinking this was a player response to force them to get involved with Joyland.

Playtech suffer I know but we are suffering as well, we need to make them accountable for each other.

[thelawnet]

Originally Posted by TrixSlice

Jetset's last post is a wonderful summary of what's going on.

I too believe it's unfair to PlayTech and it's honest casino's to boycott them all. However I think boycotting any casino that's in relation to Joyland should be noted. Can anyone provide an easy list? Isn't Joyland part of Crown? Which was recenetly bought by a Poker site? Arn't a good handful of PlayTech casinos operated in the same building in Antigua (where Joyland is located)? If someone can compile a simple list of casinos that have a relationship with Joyland, we can spread that list so gambler's can have a more informed opinion of who to boycott.

here ya go









Try here www.antiguagaming.gov.ag

That list in full:

Christchurch Casino E-Gaming Investments Limited (pretends to be from New Zealand, licensed and run in Antigua, and has similarly poor standards of service to the rest of this bunch (see past threads)):
Kiwi Casino

Crown Solutions Gaming Ltd:
Club Dice
Monaco Gold
Joyland
Carnival Casino

Intercontinental Casinos (owned by Crown Solutions)
USA Casino
New York Casino

Prestige Gaming: (now owned by Crown Solutions, licensed in Curacao)
Playgate
Prestige
Diamond Club

Intercontinental Online Gaming:
Swiss Casino
Casino Las Vegas
Casino King
Magic Box

Imperial E-Club:
Casino Tropez
Casino Del Rio
Europa Casino
Racetrack casino
Vegas Red
City Club Casino

Sky International Casinos Ltd.:
Sky Kings

Sun Gaming Services Inc:
Casino Fortune
Mapau
Goldgate
Miami Beach


All Games Casinos:
Brandy Casino

Hailwood Gaming:
La Isla Bonita


My guess is that most of these groups are connected, possibly some of the last few are not.

Given this, it's VERY important to avoid the Crown Solutions casinos, as Club Dice, Monaco Gold, Carnival, Usa, New York, Playgate, Prestige and Diamond Club are every bit as culpable as Joyland. I would also avoid Kiwi as well - they have demonstrated on here in the past similar behaviour, although they did back down at the last minute. Imperial E-Club and Intercontinental Online Gaming are almost certainly linked too. Not sure about the rest of this bunch.

Reptable Playtechs?

Bet365, Totesport, Betfred, Action Online.

[The Gunslinger]

Originally Posted by BJesus

Prestige is linked to them Joyland gave me their phone number by mistake.

As for the boycott of Playtech I was thinking this was a player response to force them to get involved with Joyland.

Playtech suffer I know but we are suffering as well, we need to make them accountable for each other.

REALLY?!

Can this be substantiated? That would mean that Diamond Club, PlayGate, and Prestige were all linked to Joyland. Joyland has already been clearly linked with Carnival and Monaco Gold (I believe) and bears possible linkage to other similar Playtech Casinos such as New York and Vegas USA. If they were infact also linked to the PlayGate group of casinos that would mean that they could extend futher than I think most of us originally imagined.

I like the Playtech software, and I like the treatment that I have gotten in the past at a lot of Playtech sites, I won't lie. I've been frequently treated fairly, and given generous promotions that when the terms were followed, the bonus and winnings (if I did well) were almost always paid.

HOWEVER, with the highly ambigous lines defining who owns who and who's affiliated with who inside those Playtech casinos (espcially those all within the same licencing jurisdiction) there's really no way to tell who's who. There are obviously reputable Playtechs (such as Golden Palace, which as long as I'm not claiming a giant bonus, has never done me personally wrong-Golden Palace is licenced in Canada) but as for the rest of them where I can't really tell who owns/operates them, I'm done until this issue sees resolution. I think what is also important to note, is that Joyland screwed people essentially right out of the gate. I'm not sure Joyland hasn't been around for a long time, but it wasn't more than about a month ago that they joined the Casino Pays affiliate (I think.) A primary concern for Playtech (and if it's not, it damn well should be) is the outlook that players will have on their brand new casinos from now on. If Joyland screwed up this bad right out the gate, what's going to happen when Playtech licences UberFantastico Casino at the beginning of next year? Will anyone play there? I think not.

It's this that makes me wonder why Playtech isn't scrambling to save it's own skin. Pretty soon you're going to see all the Playtech casinos start jumping back onboard with Cytech . If I were Playtech, I'd be preparing to sue Joyland to force them to pay it's clients, or at least suspending their software and taking action to have their licencing taken away. It is this kind of swift action that would turn masses of players' heads. For the next few years players would equate Playtech as a company willing to take the hard action to support it's players. WHY DOES NO SOFTWARE COMPANY SEE THE VALUE IN BEING TRUSTED?!

I'll tell you one thing, if Playtech suspending Joyland's software, made open statements on this board and others regarding this situation, and held accountable the casino managers for taking actions that were detrimental to it's software's reputation, Playtech would quickly climb to the top of my prefered software providers' list.

The Gunslinger

[thelawnet]

Originally Posted by jetset

BTW, there has been talk here of boycotting Playtech, and I should therefore exercise my right to express an opinion on this in a general sense no matter how unpopular it might be at this time and place.

I don't personally like boycotts, because they have a tendency to hurt both crooks and ordinary people alike - sort of *collateral damage* - and to me that is wrong. Playtech has decent licensees as well as arm-chancers like Joyland, and they don't deserve to be punished along with the unprofessional.

So, by all means exercise your personal right to choose where you play, but focus on those operations who have understandably angered and displeased you would be my (personal) recommendation.

The problem is Playtech has endorsed Joyland's behaviour. They have not taken any action. Their dispute resolution mechanism has rubber stamped Joyland's mass-theft. This makes them fully culpable. This is not a Joyland issue. Playtech have a mediation channel. That mediation channel has said 'sorry, you're SOL, have a nice day'.

Even if you're playing at a reputable site, such as Totesport (which could hardly be any more reputable), you are paying off Playtech, as they obviously get substantial revenue share.

[thelawnet]

Originally Posted by The Gunslinger

REALLY?!

Can this be substantiated? That would mean that Diamond Club, PlayGate, and Prestige were all linked to Joyland. Joyland has already been clearly linked with Carnival and Monaco Gold (I believe) and bears possible linkage to other similar Playtech Casinos such as New York and Vegas USA. If they were infact also linked to the PlayGate group of casinos that would mean that they could extend futher than I think most of us originally imagined.

I like the Playtech software, and I like the treatment that I have gotten in the past at a lot of Playtech sites, I won't lie. I've been frequently treated fairly, and given generous promotions that when the terms were followed, the bonus and winnings (if I did well) were almost always paid.

HOWEVER, with the highly ambigous lines defining who owns who and who's affiliated with who inside those Playtech casinos (espcially those all within the same licencing jurisdiction) there's really no way to tell who's who. There are obviously reputable Playtechs (such as Golden Palace, which as long as I'm not claiming a giant bonus, has never done me personally wrong-Golden Palace is licenced in Canada) but as for the rest of them where I can't really tell who owns/operates them, I'm done until this issue sees resolution. I think what is also important to note, is that Joyland screwed people essentially right out of the gate. I'm not sure Joyland hasn't been around for a long time, but it wasn't more than about a month ago that they joined the Casino Pays affiliate (I think.) A primary concern for Playtech (and if it's not, it damn well should be) is the outlook that players will have on their brand new casinos from now on. If Joyland screwed up this bad right out the gate, what's going to happen when Playtech licences UberFantastico Casino at the beginning of next year? Will anyone play there? I think not.

It's this that makes me wonder why Playtech isn't scrambling to save it's own skin. Pretty soon you're going to see all the Playtech casinos start jumping back onboard with Cytech . If I were Playtech, I'd be preparing to sue Joyland to force them to pay it's clients, or at least suspending their software and taking action to have their licencing taken away. It is this kind of swift action that would turn masses of players' heads. For the next few years players would equate Playtech as a company willing to take the hard action to support it's players. WHY DOES NO SOFTWARE COMPANY SEE THE VALUE IN BEING TRUSTED?!

I'll tell you one thing, if Playtech suspending Joyland's software, made open statements on this board and others regarding this situation, and held accountable the casino managers for taking actions that were detrimental to it's software's reputation, Playtech would quickly climb to the top of my prefered software providers' list.

The Gunslinger

um, golden palace ripped off lots of people in similar circumstances.

http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/golpalstatement.html
http://www.gamemasteronline.com/inde...lacklist.shtml

They left microgaming under a cloud, ripping off players as they left.

[jetset]

I don't think I would go so far as to say that Playtech has endorsed Joyland's conduct just yet, based on my own exchanges with Playtech management so far in trying to find a solution to this.

It is true that their initial handling of this issue was an inexperienced and regrettable wave-off sending players back to an uncommunicative casino, but since then they are I believe re-examining this issue in more detail and trying to find an equitable solution.

So I for one will reserve judgement regarding their alleged support for the casino's position until I see something more concrete from them.

This question of transparency on who owns a particular online casino is a recurring problem that bedevils the online gambling industry, and I understand that one of the new UK regulatory requirements will be that this information is easily available - that would be an excellent regulation imo for a number of reasons, not least of which is that it puts a name to the conduct of a casino.

I'm a little troubled by all these casinos being construed as belonging to one group (Crown Solutions etc) From recent Empire Online press releases it is clear that Monaco Gold, Club Dice, Carnival and YouBingo, together with Noble Poker are probably one ownership, but it is not clear to me where Joyland fits into this.

It could be that Crown is perhaps a holding entity of sorts that Playtech uses as a licensing vehicle? Just a thought.