Bonus & WR Discussion

[Rusty]

I just thought this thread would compliment the Free kick in the balls thread and it does have a serious point with regards to bonus T&C's.

Gonad_protection.jpg

AS any Casino will tell you a bonus is there to help the player get more action for their money and as such it is reasonable that there should be WR attached to any bonus.
OK I agree but what should these WR be, what is reasonable?
Let's assume we are getting a slots only bonus of 50%
Also for the sake of argument let's assume the slots have 95%
payout(I wish)

Now what should the WR be?

Our expected loss is 5 in 100 and our bonus is 50 in 100 so if we say 10*WR on bonus
50(bonus)=10(WR)*5(loss) then we would still be giving the bonus player an advantage in that they could wager larger amounts or have more attempts at hitting a jackpot with the bonus money.

So we need to increase the WR but by how much?
If we double it then that would negate any advantage the bonus player had and put them at a small disadvantage which is reasonable because you are getting extra playtime.

But that means in my judgment a 50% slot bonus should have a 20*bonus only WR (20*50=1000) if it were not over penalising a bonus player.

Certainly 20*deposit+bonus is over penalising bonus palyers.
(20*150=3000)

and remember this is based on slots being 95% payout which is more than a little doubtful.

What are your thoughts on this (Reps to) and how do you think bonus WR should be worked out?

[tencardcharlie]

Originally Posted by Rusty

What are your thoughts on this (Reps to) and how do you think bonus WR should be worked out?

It is a complicated issue. Since you risk busting before meeting the WR the excpected value of the bonus will increase when you bet big and play high variance games (assuming no max cashout BS).

I think that with a 50% bonus the temptation to bet big in order to circumvent the WR will be low for most players. Ironically a smaller bonus might yield a larger return for the player due to busting.

For a slots signup, I think 20xB WR is reasonable deal for the casino. It will probably not interest most bonus hunters and still be interesting for the casual player.

[spearmaster]

I think the title of this thread should be changed because I believe this is an important issue for all to consider.

Don't forget to add in the comp rate - it's not much at most casinos, only 0.1%, but it still needs to be counted.

Also, if any type of jackpot is involved, no matter who funds it, a percentage of each bet goes to the jackpot, though in most cases this shouldn't be more than a few percent. In an RTG casino, a percentage of every bet goes to the random jackpot, for example.

Then don't forget that there are fees associated with deposits and withdrawals in some cases - then after that you have the normal business expenses, etc.

Basically, in the example above, 20x bonus would be a losing proposition for the casino in most if not nearly all instances. More than 20x would be a negative edge for the player but the casino still doesn't really have an edge - and if a jackpot is involved and the contribution is 3% for example, the casino really requires about 35x bonus played through before it might truly be said to have an edge on the player.

In this case, that works out to roughly 12x (deposit + bonus) playthrough - so you can work out from that why many casinos are requiring about 15x (deposit + bonus).

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by tencardcharlie

It is a complicated issue. Since you risk busting before meeting the WR the excpected value of the bonus will increase when you bet big and play high variance games (assuming no max cashout BS).

I think that with a 50% bonus the temptation to bet big in order to circumvent the WR for most players. Ironically a smaller bonus might yield a larger return for the player due to busting.

For a slots signup, I think 20xB WR is reasonable deal for the casino. It will probably not interest most bonus hunters and still be interesting for the casual player.

One thing that managers say is that they are afraid that their bonuses will be abused so they make ridiculous WR's without ever really justifying them.
The only kind of abuse they can be talking of (since all other bases are covered) is as you say by making very large bets to increase the ev.
Hardly abuse but certainly not in the spirit with which the bonus was meant
to be used.
This could be avoided by implementing a max bet rule attached to the bonus such as 2% of deposit.
$1 max bet for $50 deposit with a $50 bonus and 30*bonus WR would be very attractive to genuine slots players but useless to bonus hunters.
It can not be that hard to implement.

Just read your post Spearmaster.
Your point about comp points is a valid one but administration costs apply with or without a bonus so I do not think these should be included in the calculations.
You are right about the Jackpots as well and these do need to be considered.
I think it would be fair if Jackpots were paid as a % of any bonus taken so a 50% bonus would earn 75% of the jackpot, 100% bonus would earn 50% of the jackpot, 200% would earn 25% etc.

[tencardcharlie]

Originally Posted by Rusty

$1 max bet for $50 deposit with a $50 bonus and 30*bonus WR would be very attractive to genuine slots players but useless to bonus hunters.
It can not be that hard to implement.

That is not a bad idea at all. The drawback is that it will not be attractive to the most profitable customer type (people making crazy big bets on slots). On the other hand, they might not be so interested in bonuses anyways?

Post wager bonuses is if course always a solution, but they don't seem very popular.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by tencardcharlie

That is not a bad idea at all. The drawback is that it will not be attractive to the most profitable customer type (people making crazy big bets on slots). On the other hand, they might not be so interested in bonuses anyways?

Post wager bonuses is if course always a solution, but they don't seem very popular.

Yes the trouble with post wager bonus or cash back bonus is that the customer has to lose in order to receive it so it is a bad promotion in that repect.It is based on a negative premiss.
That is why I suggested cashback points as an alternative to comp points as they would be in the background and pay more than comps so they would be nice compensation if you lost.
Deposit $50 zero your balance without any more deposits or withdrawals and earn 5CB points worth $1 each.
make a subsequent deposit of $100 and withdraw earn no CB points but your CB balance is still 5
zero out your balance again with no withdrawal or extra deposit and have 15CB points balance.
CB points could be cashed in at any time.
Good for the Casino too as they already have your money.

[spearmaster]

Regarding admin costs, the whole point is you still have to take it into consideration.

If you are enticed into accepting a bonus, the casino eats costs that it might not have to if you had not played. There's no point in comparing bonus players and non-bonus players - the costs may well be the same - but if like Clubworld, for example, who has daily bonuses, a player could actually be depositing 7 or more times a week - whereas the average non bonus player might do 2, 3 times. Either way there has to be a fixed cost per player, per deposit.

These admin costs are of course the same no matter how much you deposit, so if you make a big deposit and claim a big bonus the admin fee is negligible by comparison - but if you make a minimum deposit of say $20 and claim a $10 bonus, it can be very expensive for a casino to absorb the fees because often there is a fixed transaction fee as well as a percentage, though some methods only charge a percentage of the total deposit.

One way or another, it has to be factored into the equation in order to determine what playthrough the casino needs to set in order to come pretty close to even on the transaction.

$1 max bet for $50 deposit with a $50 bonus and 30*bonus WR would be very attractive to genuine slots players but useless to bonus hunters.

Setting a maximum bet size is also something casinos should consider - whether the software will allow them to configure something like that is another story entirely. In a perfect world, the software should automatically tally playthrough, not allow play on restricted games (better yet, allow these games like Roulette but prohibit certain bets like Red/Black - unfortunately this may be too complicated), and state all the conditions in a window once a deposit is made (for example, offering one of three choices of bonuses which can be applied to a deposit, or allow the bonus offers to be refused) - so that there is absolutely no confusion about what bonus is being offered and what terms and conditions are applied.

Suffice it to say I would love to see that happen. Whether it will or not is another story entirely.

[Swede]

I remember taking a free kick to the royals when playing soccer some years ago. I went down for the count(duh) and didn't wake up until 10 minutes later.

I guess my TR(testicle rate) was 3x and there was no win ratio. Just agony, much like a MG session. I hurt either way.

[Mousey]

Originally Posted by tencardcharlie

......

Post wager bonuses is if course always a solution, but they don't seem very popular.

I've never seen an after wager bonus worth fooling with. Those I remember were around 10 - 15%. To a small time player like me, not worth having.

Originally Posted by spearmaster

...........
Setting a maximum bet size is also something casinos should consider - whether the software will allow them to configure something like that is another story entirely. In a perfect world, the software should automatically tally playthrough, not allow play on restricted games (better yet, allow these games like Roulette but prohibit certain bets like Red/Black - unfortunately this may be too complicated), and state all the conditions in a window once a deposit is made (for example, offering one of three choices of bonuses which can be applied to a deposit, or allow the bonus offers to be refused) - so that there is absolutely no confusion about what bonus is being offered and what terms and conditions are applied.

Suffice it to say I would love to see that happen. Whether it will or not is another story entirely.

Something I like about Rival software: When you log into the Banking software, the promos available for your particular account are listed on the right. Click each promo to see (usually very clear) terms. And then click Accept to receive a particular bonus.

I like having control over which bonuses I receive -- and, above all, the ability to not take a bonus if I so choose.

(Anyone else besides me remember being angry and aghast when the usual WR jumped from 3 or 4 x B to 8 x B+D? )

[EasyRhino]

I think MG really has the right idea with the clearpay/ezpay/whateverpay bonus system. Weight different games differently towards clearing the WR. This has the advantage of allowing the player to switch between different games easily.

However, the individual weightings need adjustment. Depending on weightings, a few games (notable french roulette in a few places) can actually be +EV to clear the bonus, while others (slots, classic blackjack) are massively massively -EV.

... actually the fanciest way would be to base the WR clearing directly on the house advantage of whatever particular bet that player is making (it would get dynamically figured with each hand/spin/die). And since the casinos are in this to make money, the casino could set this so that the expected loss from the gambling is ever so slighly more than the value of the bonus itself.

This would even allow players to do things like red/black/green roulette bets, or bizarre bets on the craps table, and everything would still work out at the end.

The ultra level fanciness would be to evaluate a player's play after each hand of a game that has a skill component (blackjack, video poker), and if the player plays like a donk, you could clear more of the WR, since they're give up more to the house anyway!