Pharaohs Casino - new software, stupid terms

[chuchu59]

Mario, thanks for your very comprehensive reply!

However:-


a) I don't see how you can single out UK players (or any other individual country) - 'bonus abusers' in any location will play bonuses in the best possible way to try to maximise their winnings.

b) Do you not agree that it would be FAR more sensible for the casinos to get the software set up so that it is impossible for players to make 'undesirable' bets? Or if that's not practical, spell out in the T&C's exactly what is not allowed?

e.g. You could say: "In meeting the Wagering Requirements for any bonus, players are not permitted to wager more than 25% of their total bankroll on a single bet, except when their total bank is less than 50 credits (when no restrictions shall apply)."

Fortune Lounge have already included a similar type of term.

I really would appreciate a response to point 'b' at least.

Thanks.
KK

On point 'b' the T&C list will never be exhaustive as both casinos and players will face some new situations brought about by the market. Nevertheless, trying to be more precise results in a lot less squabbles.

As for the 'discrimination' issue, allalong players from various countries had different WRs imposed on them and I do believe that casinos can decide on whatever they wish as long as they dont spell out such rules after deposit and play. Maybe, for Mario adding the word 'some' before "UK players" in KK's highlighted phrase would be acceptable.

[Mario]

a) I don't see how you can single out UK players (or any other individual country) - 'bonus abusers' in any location will play bonuses in the best possible way to try to maximise their winnings.

b) Do you not agree that it would be FAR more sensible for the casinos to get the software set up so that it is impossible for players to make 'undesirable' bets? Or if that's not practical, spell out in the T&C's exactly what is not allowed?

KK

Hi there KasinoKing,

Hope you are well,

I totally agree that there will always be players, does not matter from where they are who will bend and find new ways of maximizing their game play to quickly complete the WR.

In regards to your second question yes we are in the process of implementing a rule in the system which will assist in this matter and that will be that you are not able to make an all in bet. It will just be implemented on the acquisition offer and not all other offers.

How it will work is as follow:

We are able to set a maximum bet amount on the games which will avoid or stop players from making an all in bet.

So that will surely assist in this matter.

Best regards
Mario
PlayShare Group Representative

[vinylweatherman]

Hi there KasinoKing,

Hope you are well,

I totally agree that there will always be players, does not matter from where they are who will bend and find new ways of maximizing their game play to quickly complete the WR.

In regards to your second question yes we are in the process of implementing a rule in the system which will assist in this matter and that will be that you are not able to make an all in bet. It will just be implemented on the acquisition offer and not all other offers.

How it will work is as follow:

We are able to set a maximum bet amount on the games which will avoid or stop players from making an all in bet.
So that will surely assist in this matter.

Best regards
Mario
PlayShare Group Representative

How long has this been possible for with MG then. I think the answer is 2005.
It seems odd that so many MG casinos have preferred instead to confiscate winnings rather than read the operators manual and set low limits at the offending games to prevent this strategy from the outset.

Casino Action used this to prevent the one big bet of $500 in their old bonus accounts. They set it to $100 at Blackjack in those bonus accounts, but left it at $500 in the real accounts. If they could do this in 2005, then all those MG casinos that have whined about being unable to deal with this withiut using an "F U clause" have been lying for 2 years to the player community. Casino Rewards are STILL whining and confiscating winnings rather than using this tool - I suspect some casinos prefer it this way, software implementation of rules would make it impossible to justify confiscation of winnings, and would deny them the chance to make extra by baiting for "bonus abusers" and then screwing them when they bite with a confiscation of winnings, but no refund for the 50% or so of losing attempts.

[lojo]

Some very good points and arguments all... much for me to ponder...

[AussieDave]

Hi all,

(btw remove the x's)

Looking at the bonus t&C's page:
xxxhttp://www.pharaohscasino.com/Deposit_Bonus_TC.aspx

It states "To be eligible to receive the welcome bonus a player must have NOT received a Welcome Bonus from and casino operated by Naden which are on the following list:
xxxhttp://list.playsharepartners.com/

When did (playshare) or have they always owned Pharaohs Casino?

Now I'm confused.

[Mario]

Hi all,

(btw remove the x's)

Looking at the bonus t&C's page:
xxxhttp://www.pharaohscasino.com/Deposit_Bonus_TC.aspx

It states "To be eligible to receive the welcome bonus a player must have NOT received a Welcome Bonus from and casino operated by Naden which are on the following list:
xxxhttp://list.playsharepartners.com/

When did (playshare) or have they always owned Pharaohs Casino?

Now I'm confused.

Hi Trezz,

Rather hear it from the horse’s mouth as I'm sure that allot of posters on this forum will gladly enlighten you about the whole white label scheme.

Pharaohs are part of PlayShare’s White Label program and they came onboard about just bit more than a month ago.

Pharaohs was part of the Boss operators and opted to rather be part of our White Label program which gives them a much better and more trust worthy systems and games.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,

Mario

PlayShare Group Representative